Engineering Ethics Seminar

1
Engineering Ethics Seminar

• Richard O. Mines, Jr., Ph.D., P.E.
• Hodge Jenkins, Ph.D., P.E.
• February 2005
• Mercer University
• School of Engineering

2
Outline

• Definitions
• Engineering Decision Making
• Personal and Professional Ethics
• Attributes of Professional
• 4-Criteria for Safe Designs
• NSPE Canons
• Examples of Technology Gone Astray
• Case Studies
• NSPE Test

3
Definitions

• Ethics the discipline dealing with what is good
  and bad and with moral duty and obligation the
  principles of conduct governing an individual or
  a group.
• Morals principles, teachings, or conduct.
  Guidelines for determining right or wrong
  actions.

4
Definitions

• Right correct in accordance to moral law.
• Wrong not morally right or just, unfair,
  improper.
• Legal Can be morally right or wrong.

5
Engineering Decision Making

1. Economic Analysis
2. Risk Analysis
3. Ethical Analysis

6
Engineering Ethics

• Rules and standards governing the conduct of
  engineers.
• Applies to situations involving engineers in
  their professional lives.

7
Personal Ethics?
How we treat others in our day-to-day lives.
Professional Ethics?
Involves choices on an organizational
level. Relationships between two corporations,
company government, company individuals,
society.
8
Attributes of a Professional

1. Membership in profession requires formal
   education.
2. Work requires sophisticated skills, use of
   judgment, exercise discretion.
3. Societies or organizations establish standards
   for admission to profession and standards of
   conduct.
4. Significant good results from the profession.

9
4-Criteria for Safe Designs

1. Design must comply with applicable laws.
2. An acceptable design must meet the standard of
   acceptable engineering practice.
3. Alternative designs that are potentially safer
   must be evaluated.
4. The engineer must foresee potential misuses of
   the product by the client and must design to
   avoid these problems.

10
NSPE Fundamental Canons

• 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. Honest.
• Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly,
  ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the
  honor, reputation, and usefulness of the
  profession.

11
NSPE Rules of Practice

•  1. Engineers shall hold paramount the safety,
  health,
• and welfare of the public.
• 2. Engineers shall perform services only in the
  areas
• of their competence.
• 3. Engineers shall issue public statements only
  in
• an objective and truthful manner.
• 4. Engineers shall act for each employer or
  client
• as faithful agents or trustees.
• 5. Engineers shall avoid deceptive acts.

12
Examples of Ethics in Technology Gone Astray

• Hyatt Regency Walkways Collapse
• Challenger Explosion
• 3-Mile Island
• Pinto Automobile
• Ford/Firestone Tire Controversy
• Bridges that Collapse
• Gas Pipeline Explosion
• Personal examples

13
Reconciling Case Studies-1
Engineer A prepares a set of drawings for a
client for the design and construction of a
building. Owner contracts with Contractor X, not
an engineer, for construction, but does not
retain Engineer A for construction phase
services. Engineer A is paid in full for his
work. Engineer A's drawings are filed with town
code officials and a building permit is issued.
Contractor X builds the building, but does not
follow Engineer A's design, relying upon
Contractor X's own experience in construction.
Following construction, Contractor X, with the
assistance of Engineer C, prepares a set of
record "as built" drawings based upon the actual
construction of the building as reported by
Contractor X. Because the design and the
construction drawings are not reconciled, the
building official refuses to issue an occupancy
permit to the Owner. Owner asks Engineer A to
"reconcile" the original design and the record
drawings. Engineer A, not wanting to perform
additional studies, agrees to perform the
"reconciliation."
14
Questions-1?
1. Was it ethical for Engineer A to perform the
design reconciliation? 2. Was it ethical for
Engineer C to prepare a set of record drawings
based on the construction without notifying
Engineer A?
15
Conclusions-1
1. It was not ethical for Engineer A to
reconcile his original documents without
extensive investigation to assure that all
original design intent was followed. 2. The
Owner is the ultimate client, therefore, it
was not ethical for Engineer C to prepare a set
of record drawings based on the construction
without notifying Engineer A. There is the
possibility that Engineer C was aiding and
abetting the unlicensed practice of engineering.
16
Discussion-1b
An engineers firm was retained by a fuel company
to perform site investigations. The site visits
were conducted by engineering technicians under
direct supervision of Engineer A. No
professional engineer was present during the site
visits. All pertinent information was presented
to Engineer A who would certify the evaluations.
They concluded it was ethical for Engineer A to
certify the evaluations were performed in
accordance to engineering principles.
17
Discussion-1c
A chief engineer in a large consulting firm
routinely affixed his seal to plans prepared by
licensed engineers working under his general
direction who did not affix their seals to the
plans. At times, the chief engineer affixed his
seal to plans prepared by unlicensed graduate
engineers even though the plans were not checked
in detail. The BOR concluded that it was not
ethical for the chief engineer to seal plans that
have not been prepared by him or which he had not
checked and reviewed in detail. Today, the BOR
would conclude that it was not unethical for the
chief engineer to seal the plans as long as those
plans were checked and reviewed in some detail by
the chief engineer.
18
Providing Design Clients Competitor-2
Engineer A is hired by Developer X to perform
design and construction-phase services for a
subdivision for Developer X. Per the agreement
with Developer X, Engineer A is paid 30 of his
fee by Developer X. Engineer A submits the design
drawings and plans to the county authorities and
permits are issued for the benefit of Developer
X. Developer X cannot get financing for the
project, and Developer X tells Engineer A that
Engineer A should not disclose the contents of
the drawings and plans to any unauthorized third
party. Developer Y, a client of Engineer A and
also a business competitor of Developer X, is
interested in the subdivision project. Developer
Y has secured financing for the project and
approaches Engineer A, requesting that he perform
the design on the project and requests that
Engineer A provide the design documents for
Developer Ys review. Since Engineer A was not
paid his entire fee for his completed project
design by Developer X, Engineer A agrees to
provide the design drawings and plans to
Developer Y and agrees to charge Developer Y only
for the changes to the original subdivision
design drawings and plans.
19
Questions-2?
1. Was it ethical for Engineer A to provide a
copy of the design drawings and plans to
Developer Y? 2. Was it ethical for Engineer
A to charge Developer Y for the changes to the
original subdivision design drawings and plans?
20
Discussion-2

• Conflict between the obligations of an engineer
  not to disclose information that is considered
  confidential by the client and the right to be
  properly compensated.
• Engineer A should not share the plans with
  another client.
• The Code is silent about the failure of a client
  to provide agreed compensation and how that would
  effect their status as clients.

21
Conclusions-2
1. It was not ethical for Engineer A to provide
a copy of the design drawings and plans to
Developer Y. 2. It was not ethical for Engineer
A to charge Developer Y for the changes to the
original subdivision drawings and plans. Had
Engineer A successfully negotiated an agree- ment
with Developer X on the questions of
ownership and possession of the design drawings,
it would have been ethical for Engineer A to
charge Developer Y for changes to the original
subdivision design drawings and plans.
22
Public Criticism of Bridge Safety-3
23
Question-3?
1. Was it ethical for Engineer A to agree to
perform an investigation for the newspaper in
the manner stated?
24
Discussion-3
Engineers should render a professional opinion 1)
based upon adequate knowledge of facts 2) the
engineer clearly possesses the expertise to
render such an opinion It was not unethical for
an engineer to criticize a town engineer and
consultant with respect to a report on a sanitary
landfill for their town.
25
Conclusions-3
It was not unethical for Engineer A to agree to
perform an investigation for the newspaper.
Engineer A did have the obligation to require the
newspaper to state in the article that he had
been retained for a fee by the newspaper to
provide his professional opinion concerning the
safety of the bridge.
26
Public Welfare Duty of Government Engineer-4
27
Question-4?
1. Would it have been ethical for Engineer A to
withdraw from further work in this
case? 2. Would it have been ethical for
Engineer A to issue the permit? 3. Was it
ethical for Engineer A to refuse to issue the
permit?
28
Discussion-4
Engineers have a fundamental obligation to hold
paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
public in the performance of their professional
duties. Board believes that it would not be
ethical for Engineer A to withdraw from further
work on the project because Engineer A has
an obligation to stand by his position to
protect the public, health, and safety to refuse
the permit.
29
Conclusions-4
1. It would not have been ethical for Engineer A
to withdraw from further work on the
project. 2. It would not have been ethical for
Engineer A to issue the permit. 3. It was
ethical for Engineer A to refuse to issue the
permit.
30
NSPE TEST