Presentation on theme: "1 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering A Brief Introduction to Ethics and Ethical Behavior in the Engineering and Computer Science Professions."— Presentation transcript:
1 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering A Brief Introduction to Ethics and Ethical Behavior in the Engineering and Computer Science Professions
2 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering and that We Act in an Ethical Manner Society Expects Us to Act and Make Decisions in a Way to Protect the Public People Generally Think of Engineering and Computer Scientists as Ethical Professions
3 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering So, If: We are to be Professionals We are to be Ethical We are to Protect Society Then We Should be able to: Define Profession, Professional and Professionalism Define Ethics and Ethical Codes Relate Our Professional Actions to Our Ethical Responsibilities to Society
4 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering 1) An occupation or vocation requiring advanced study in a specialized field. 2) The body of qualified persons of one specific field. American Heritage Dictionary Term comes from Latin professio meaning to confess or declare. Professionals declare themselves to the public as experts in a field of study, such as law, medicine, accounting, computer science and engineering What is a Profession ? What do you think?
5 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Engineers and other Professionals have: a special responsibility to the public to use their skills and knowledge to insure safety and increase the public “good”. Professionalism is the performance of that responsibility in a manner that the public can trust and rely on.
6 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering The study of the general nature of morals and the specific moral choices to be made by the individual in his relationship with others; i.e., the philosophy of morals. The rules or standards governing the conduct of members of a profession. Any set of moral principles or values. The moral quality of a course of action. What are Ethics? What do you think?
7 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Of or concerned with the judgement of the goodness or badness of human action and character; pertaining to the discernment of good and evil. Designed to teach goodness or correctness of character and behavior. Instructive of good and bad. Being or acting in accordance with standards and precepts of goodness or with established codes of behavior. Rules of conduct…. with reference to standards of right or wrong. Who Makes Those Rules? Society Then, What are Morals? What do you think?
8 So Professionals Use Ethics to Define How To Protect The Public Good Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering
9 Ethical Philosophers Describe Three Basic Doctrines of Ethics: Objective Ethics Subjective Ethics Imperative Ethics
10 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Objective Ethics (or Absolute Ethics) - The “Eternal Truths” - The “Shalts” and “Shalt Nots” - The Moral Principles that are “Self-Evident” and “Invariant” Thou Shalt Not Kill Thou Shalt Not Steal True in Most Societies
11 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Subjective Ethics The Ethics of the Individual The “Instinctive Knowledge of what Constitutes Ethical Behavior” without the Rules The Ethics of the Situation or “Situational Ethics” - Doing What is Right Here and Now - The Action may be different in a different Time and Place, i.e., a Different Situation May Include Civil Disobedience - Running a Red Light when A Runaway Truck may hit you. - The “Sit-Ins” for Racial Equality - Breaking the Law for the Greater Good
12 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Imperative Ethics (or Legalism) Society’s Definitions of Good and Bad The Systems of Laws The type of Behavior adhered to because “human beings want these rules and want other persons to follow these same rules” (Hans Reichenbach)
13 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Canon of Ethics A Statement of Ethical Beliefs and Behaviors agreed to by a Body of People. Guides against which Ethical Behavior will be judged. Guides against which a person can make ethical decisions.
14 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Code of Ethics for Engineers Each of the Engineering Societies have developed Codes of Ethics. Most of these are based on a model code developed by the Engineering Council for Professional Development (ECPD) in Code of Ethics for Association for Computing Machinery ACM developed a Code of Ethics in The Code states: “Commitment to ethical professional conduct is expected of every member (voting members, associate members, and student members) of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).” Both the NSPE and the ACM Codes of Ethics are at the end of this section
15 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Code of Ethics for Engineers We will look at the Code of Ethics developed by the National Society of Professional Engineers as an example. It has four parts: Preamble I. The Fundamental Canons II. The Rules of Practice, and III. Professional Obligations (http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html)http://www.nspe.org/Ethics/CodeofEthics/index.html
16 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers Preamble Engineering is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, engineers are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honesty, impartiality, fairness, and equity, and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.
17 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers I. Fundamental Canons Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall: 1. Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. 2. Perform services only in areas of their competence. 3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner. 4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees. 5. Avoid deceptive acts. 6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.
18 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers II. Rules of Practice 1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public. (Canon 1) a. If engineers' judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate. b. Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents that are in conformity with applicable standards. c. Engineers shall not reveal facts, data, or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or this Code. d. Engineers shall not permit the use of their name or associate in business ventures with any person or firm that they believe are engaged in fraudulent or dishonest enterprise. e. Engineers shall not aid or abet the unlawful practice of engineering by a person or firm. f. Engineers having knowledge of any alleged violation of this Code shall report thereon to appropriate professional bodies and, when relevant, also to public authorities, and cooperate with the proper authorities in furnishing such information or assistance as may be required. (Similar Rules Are Associated with the other Fundamental Canons)
19 Ethics, Professionalism and Engineering Code of Ethics Case Studies 1.Split into four groups and each group review one of the cases. 2.Select the Canon that you believe to be most appropriate for the question(s) asked. 3.Then find the corresponding “Rule of Practice” and read the clauses. 4.Be ready to briefly describe the case and what “Rules” you believe are significant. 5.These examples are from the NSPE Magazine.
20 Case Study #1 FACTS: B. Wright is hired to investigate a former dump site to form a wetlands and city park. City indicates there could be some problems with hazardous wastes. As part of the contract, the city imposes a confidentiality clause. Wright finds the dump not closed according to regulation and is potentially hazardous, but contract prevents disclosure. The city terminates the contract and plans to move the wetlands and park without remediating the site. QUESTIONS: Question 1: Is B. Wright bound by the NSPE Code of Ethics to inform the appropriate regulatory agencies of his findings and the potential dangers to the public health and the environment? Question 2: Did B. Wright behave ethically in signing the confidentiality clause restricting him from revealing information concerning dangers to the public health and the environment, after being informed by the city that there was a possibility that the site could contain hazardous and toxic wastes?
21 Case Study #1 REFERENCES (NSPE Code of Ethics): I.1. - Code of Ethics: Hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. II.1. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. II.1.a. - Code of Ethics: If engineers’ judgment is overruled under circumstances that endanger life or property, they shall notify their employer or client and such other authority as may be appropriate. II.1.b. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents which are in conformity with applicable standards. II.1.c. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall not reveal facts, data or information without the prior consent of the client or employer except as authorized or required by law or this Code. III.4. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall not disclose, without consent, confidential information concerning the business affairs or technical processes of any present or former client or employer, or public body on which they serve.
22 Case Study #1 Discussion: The responsibility of engineers for the protection of the public health and safety is generally considered the most fundamental ethical principal related to the practice of engineering. CONCLUSIONS: Question 1: B. Wright is bound by the NSPE Code of Ethics to inform the appropriate regulatory agencies of the engineer’s findings and the potential dangers to the public health and the environment. Question 2: B. Wright was not ethical in signing the confidentiality clause, restricting him from revealing information concerning dangers to the public health and the environment, after being informed by the city that there was a possibility that the site could contain hazardous and toxic wastes.
23 Case Study #2 FACTS: Engineer A is involved with Buildings and Grounds at an Army base. He has been asked to certify that certain storage rooms and arms storage racks are in compliance with extensive Army regulations. Question: Would it be appropriate for Engineer A to certify as a qualified engineer the arms storage rooms and storage racks as requested by the Army?
24 Case Study #2 References: Section II.1. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. Section II.2.a. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall undertake assignments only when qualified by education or experience in the specific technical fields involved. Section II.2.b. - Code of Ethics: Engineers shall not affix their signatures to any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control.
25 Case Study #2 Discussion: 1) “… Licensed engineers must make all efforts to perform professional services solely within their area of competence and not be unduly influenced either by employer or by client pressures that could cause grave danger to the public health and safety.” 2) ”… even if Engineer A had the ethical competency to perform the services required, it would not have been ethically proper for Engineer A to “certify” compliance with the military regulations as requested. “ Conclusion: It would not be ethical for Engineer A to certify as a qualified engineer the arms storage rooms and arms storage racks as requested by the Army official.
26 Case Study #3 FACTS: A structural engineer is hired by a newspaper to visit a bridge site which has had a series of serious delays and cost increases. The engineer performs a one-day visual inspection. She reports some potential problems and proposes some additional testing. The paper writes a series of articles alleging major safety problems which will delay the bridge opening. She responds that her report was not specific and discussed only potential problems with the bridge. Question: Was it ethical for Ms. Goode to agree to perform an investigation for the newspaper in the manner stated?
27 Case Study #3 References: Code of Ethics Section II.3.a. "Engineers shall be objective and truthful in professional reports, statements or testimony. They shall include all relevant and pertinent information in such reports, statements or testimony." Section II.3.b. "Engineers may express publicly a professional opinion on technical subjects only when that opinion is founded upon adequate knowledge of the facts and competence in the subject matter." Section II.3.c. "Engineers shall issue no statements, criticisms or arguments on technical matters which are inspired or paid for by interested parties, unless they have prefaced their comments by explicitly identifying the interested parties on whose behalf they are speaking, and by revealing the existence of any interest the engineers may have in the matters."
28 Case Study #3 Discussion: Engineers should “become active and involved in matters concerning the well-being of the public. Moreover, the NSPE Code of Ethics makes clear that engineers should "seek opportunities to be of constructive service in civic affairs and work for the advancement of the safety, health and well-being of their community." (Section III.2.a.) “ “…the engineer has an obligation to the public as well as to the profession to protect the integrity of her professional opinions and the manner in which those opinions are disseminated to the public.” Conclusion: It was not unethical for Engineer A to agree to perform an investigation for the newspaper in the manner stated but Engineer A has an obligation to require the newspaper to state in the article that Engineer A had been retained for a fee by the newspaper to provide her professional opinion concerning the safety of the bridge.
29 Case Study #4 FACTS: Engineer LeVard performs a traffic study for a client (HighYield Enterprises) and charges the client for a complete study. Later, the client learns that part of the work had been performed for another client which had already been billed for the work. Question: Was it ethical for LeVard to charge HighYield for the complete traffic study?
30 Case Study #4 Discussion: This case relates to the direct obligations of truth and honesty that all engineers owe to their clients in the performance of their services. Under the facts presented in the case, LeVard was performing the same basic service for two separate clients and billing HighYield for data that LeVard had already developed and billed ProfitTech. LeVard's intellectual property, expertise, knowledge, and professional judgment are contained in the report, and LeVard had the ethical right to be fully compensated for such services. However, it would have been appropriate for LeVard to inform HighYield that a similar study had been done for another client. Conclusion: It was ethical for LeVard to charge HighYield for a complete traffic study. It was unethical for LeVard not to disclose the use of propriety data developed for another client.