Ethical Dimensions of
Engineering Practice
Efstathios E. (Stathis) Michaelides, Ph.D., P.E.
Professor and Chair
Mechanical Engineering
UTSA
[email protected]
210-458-5580
Summary
•
•
•
•
•
•
Need and origins of professional ethics.
Professional codes, principles and canons.
Complexity of ethical issues.
The process of analysis/investigation.
A practical method – “draw the line.”
A case to consider.
Ethical Cases in Engineering
Practice
•
•
•
•
O-rings in the Challenger disaster.
Heat-shield tiles in the Columbia disaster.
NASA units debacle.
Steel re-enforcement of collapsed buildings in the
Istanbul earthquake.
• Piotr Palchinski and Stalin’s “Magnetogorsk” project
– The ghost of the executed Engineer.
• Project management and sound engineering
judgment are often in conflict.
• Even though most of today's engineers are not
faced with monumental ethical decisions, they often
encounter ethical concerns.
Origins of Professional Ethics
• Survival of human society → Laws
• Survival of Trade → contracts (Tort)
• Survival of a professional class → implicit
trust of clients → ethical principles.
• Most of the current professional codes are
evolutions of medieval guild ethics, which
were very stringent and strictly enforced.
Cultural and ethnic issues
Professor: What time is it?
Researcher/student: What time would you
like it to be?
• Ethical norms in many cultures and
countries are different than ours.
ASME – Fundamental Principles
Engineers must uphold and advance the integrity,
honor and dignity of the Engineering
profession by:
• Using their knowledge and skills for the
enhancement of human welfare;
• Being honest and impartial and serving with
fidelity the public, their employers and clients;
and
• Striving to increase the competence and
prestige of the engineering profession.
ASME – Principal Canons
Very Important:
The Law does not have
any exceptions. A Canon
has exceptions.
This calls for the
interpretation of the Canons
and, perhaps, seeking
allowable exceptions.
Framing of the Problem/case
Main considerations for the analysis of a case:
1. What are the relevant facts.
2. What are the relevant ethical considerations.
Most often the two are interconnected and cannot
be answered independently.
One absolute rule: “If it is illegal,
it is also unethical.”
The Process of Moral Thinking
Feedback
•Experience
•Personal
morality
•Common
morality
•Code of
Ethics
•Professional
training
Case /
scenario
Ethical
problems
Analysis /
investigation
Most of the steps in this process are subjective – Trouble:
Engineers are trained to deal objectively and solve
problems using a well defined objective, quantitative
process → need for a “method.”
Solution
The line drawing method
A.
Identify the ethical issue(s) – e.g. bribery, defamation,
client deceit.
B. Identify the main characteristics/features – e.g. size of
gift, timing, personal gain, subtle implications,
responsibility of decision, quality of
deliverable/product, cost of deliverable/product, etc.
C. Identify the range for all features from part B – e.g.
very small to very large gift, on a horizontal scale.
Identify on one side one outcome – e.g. bribery – and
on the other the opposite outcome – not bribery.
D. On the range of every feature, score with an X the
place for this case.
E. Draw a vertical line and see where most of the X’s lie.
F. Draw your (subjective) conclusions.
A simple application
John and Tom were classmates in Upstate Polytechnic (both
class of 1995). Although they work in similar and often
competing corporations (John works for Bigmouth
Enterprises and Tom for Sleek-street Inc.) they kept in touch
during the years and they often meet during the annual
ASCE meeting, where they both serve in a technical
committee. In the 2009 meeting, while having dinner
together, John confided to Tom that he is one of the
principals of the bid process of Bigmouth Enterprises for the
bridge-to-nowhere project. He actually boasts that, because
of his excellent management skills the final bid will not
exceed $423 M.
Tom goes back to Sleek-street Inc. and alerts the owner, Mr.
Daddybucks, about the $423 M bid. With the vigorous
intervention of Mr. Daddybucks, their final bid is reduced to
$419 M and Sleek-street Inc. wins the contract. Tom is
given a big promotion and a good Christmas bonus.
Did Tom act unethically?
The line-drawing method
Subject is Tom
Feature
unethical
Company gain
Personal gain
Expectation of gain
Timing of gain
Coercion
Quid pro quo
Expectation of qpq
Responsibility
Repeatability
large X
large
yes
before
a lot
yes
yes
sole
often
ethical
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
small
small
no
after
none
no
no
shared
never
A less simple application
John and Tom were classmates in Upstate Polytechnic (both class of 1995). Although
they work in similar and often competing corporations (John works for Bigmouth
Enterprises and Tom for Sleek-street Inc.) they kept in touch during the years and
they often meet during the annual ASCE meeting, where they both serve in a
technical committee. During the 2009 meeting, John confided to Tom that he is
not happy at Bigmouth Enterprises, where lay-offs are expected, and he is “looking
around...” Tom knows that John is in the team that prepares the bid of Bigmouth
Enterprises for the bridge-to-nowhere project, for which Sleek-street Inc. is bidding
too. Tom suggests that they both have dinner the next day with Mr. Daddybucks,
the owner of the Sleek-street Inc. who happens to be in the ASCE meeting too.
Tom immediately tells Daddybucks about John and the bid.
The dinner is wonderful: Mr. Daddybucks, a wine connoisseur, is very graceful, opens
two bottles of Chateau Petrus (1975) and orders afterwards a 50-year old
Armagnac. During dinner, Tom exalts the virtues of his company and confides to
John, that if Sleek-street Inc. wins the bridge-to-nowhere contract, the company
will immediately need an experienced manager, like John, and will hire several
other engineers and project managers. During the conversation, he winks a
couple of times to add emphasis.
After dinner Mr. Daddybucks whispers Tom that he should try hard to “…land this fish”
and, if he succeeds “…there will be a lot of caviar and champagne” for him.
Three days later, Tom receives short call (at home) from John, telling him that the bid
of Bigmouth Enterprizes for the bridge is slightly over $423 M. With Tom’s help,
John passes more inside information. Sleek-street Inc. submits a bid for $419 M
and wins the contract. Tom is given a big promotion and a $250,000 bonus.
Did Tom act unethically?
The line-drawing method
Feature
unethical
Company gain
Personal gain
Expectation of gain
Timing of gain
Coercion
Quid pro quo
Expectation of qpq
Responsibility
Repeatability
large X
large X
yes
X
before
a lot
X
yes
X
yes
X
sole
X
often
ethical
small
small
no
X
after
none
no
no
shared
X never
Summary
•
•
•
•
•
•
Need and origins of professional ethics.
Professional codes, principles and canons.
Complexity of ethical issues.
The process of analysis/investigation.
A practical method – “draw the line.”
A case to consider.