Computing is Socio-Technical or: Why Stakeholder Listing is Inadequate for Thoughtful Ethical Analysis Chuck Huff St. Olaf College For NSF Computer Ethics Workshop, 2002 Some informal musings and a request for feedback on the topic:

Beginnings Much case analysis begins with a listing of stakeholders, not a bad idea But how do we know we have the right set of stakeholders? There is no easy rule for completion

Components of an STS Socio-Technical systems include: –Hardware: Mainframes, Workstations, Peripheral, connecting networks –Software: operating systems, utilities, application programs, specialized code –Physical surroundings –People: Individuals, groups, roles (support, training, management, line personnel, engineer), agencies –Institutions: corporations, associations, government agencies etc. –Procedures, both official and actual: Management models, Reporting relationships, Documentation requirements, Data flow, Rules & norms –Laws and regulations –Data and Data Structures

An STS Is Not Static or Value-Neutral An STS will change over time, and this change has a trajectory. –An STS is configurable in all its elements, and this allows for change over time –Individual components of the STS have their own trajectories. –Trajectories are most influenced by and usually support those with social power They are not value neutral – their use creates winners and losers

An Example: Therac 25

The Therac 25 STS Hardware: Therac 20 w/ PDP-11, Therac 25 & PDP-11, the console Software: real-time control software, interface Physical surroundings:the shielded room, emergency shutoffs, cameras, hospital setting People: Patients, Operators, Medical physicists, AECL, Programmer, Doctors, Hospital Administrators, Maintenance personnel, Therac User groups Institutions: Atomic Energy Canada LTD, Canadian Radiation Protection Board, US FDA, Hospitals Procedures, both official and actual: Support agreements, Machine Setup, Reporting Procedures (AECL and FDA), Scheduling procedures Laws and regulations: FDA regulations Data and Data Structures: counters, data on machine state, data on console state, data on patients

Gosh!  Certainly a complex system with many technical aspects and social actors  The trajectory was influenced by the lowly (medical physicist) and the mighty (FDA).  The design was flawed, but many social procedures were flawed too.  An actor aware of the system can act with more effectiveness  A designer unaware of the system can be in grave danger  A Social Impact Statement (coming Thursday) is a useful ethical tool  There are more stakeholders than are dreamt of in your philosophy

What Next?  How to control this complexity …  Avoiding paralysis of analysis  How to teach using these ideas?