1. Morality refers to standards of right and wrong that individuals or groups use to guide their behavior.
2. The case study describes an engineer, Kermit Vandivier, who was asked to falsify test results for an aircraft brake in order to qualify for a lucrative military contract.
3. Vandivier had to decide whether to participate in writing the false report or resign, risking financial stability for his family, but maintaining his ethical principles. He ultimately agreed to write the false report.
1. Morality refers to standards of right and wrong that individuals or groups use to guide their behavior.
2. The case study describes an engineer, Kermit Vandivier, who was asked to falsify test results for an aircraft brake in order to qualify for a lucrative military contract.
3. Vandivier had to decide whether to participate in writing the false report or resign, risking financial stability for his family, but maintaining his ethical principles. He ultimately agreed to write the false report.
1. Morality refers to standards of right and wrong that individuals or groups use to guide their behavior.
2. The case study describes an engineer, Kermit Vandivier, who was asked to falsify test results for an aircraft brake in order to qualify for a lucrative military contract.
3. Vandivier had to decide whether to participate in writing the false report or resign, risking financial stability for his family, but maintaining his ethical principles. He ultimately agreed to write the false report.
that an individual or a group has about what is right and wrong, or good and evil. To clarify what this means, let us consider a concrete case. Several years ago, B.F. Goodrich, a manufacturer of vehicle parts, won a military contract to design, test, and manufacture aircraft brakes for the A7D, a new airplane the Air Force was designing. To conserve weight, Goodrich guaranteed that its compact brake would weigh no more than 106 pounds, contain no more than four small braking disks or rotors, and stop the aircraft within a certain distance. The contract was potentially quite lucrative for the company and so manager were anxious to deliver a brake that qualified by successfully passing tests showing it could stop the aircraft as required. Kermit Vandivier, a Goodrich employee, was given the job of working with Goodrich engineers to write up the report of the tests run on the brake, which the government was unlikely to question and even less likely to repeat. Unfortunately, Vandivier later wrote, when the small brake was tested, the brake linings on the rotors repeatedly disintegrated because these simply was not enough surface area on the disks to stop the aircraft without generating the excessive heat that caused the linings to fail. His superiors, however, told him that, Regardless of what the brake does on test, were going to qualify it. After several tests were run, Vandivier was told to write up a report stating that the brake had passed the tests. Vandivier explained to his superior that, the only way such a report could be written was to falsify test data, to which his superior replied that he was well aware of what was required, but that he had been ordered to get a report written regardless of how or what had to be done. Therefore, Vandivier had to decide whether he would participate in writing up the false report. He later stated: My job paid well, it was pleasant and challenging, and the future looked reasonably bright. My wife and I had bought a home.If I refused to take part in the A7D fraud, I would have to either resign or be fired. The report would be written by someone anyway, but I would have the satisfaction of knowing I had had no part in the matter. But bills arent paid with personal satisfaction, nor house payments with ethical principles. I made my decision. The next morning I telephoned my superior and told him I was ready to begin the qualification report. As he worked on the report, Vandivier said, he talked with the senior executive assigned to the project and asked him if his conscience would hurt him if such a thing caused the death of a pilot, and this is when he replied that I was worrying about too many things that did not concern me and advised me to do what youre told.
B F Goodrich a7d Goodrich 106 4
Kermit Goodrich Goodrich
a7d
Characteristic to state of moral standard.
1. Moral standard dead couth matters that we think can seriously injure or seriously benefit human being. 2. Moral standard are not established or changed by the decisions of partswlar authoritative bodies. 3. Perhaps most striking, we feel that moral something should be preferred to other ruler including self-interrest this case should chosen the moral value of keeping his well-paid pleasant & challenging . 4. Moral standard based on impartial consideration-will benefit from a lie and that I will be harmed irrelevant to whether lying is wrong morally. 5. Moral something are associated with special emotion and a special vocabulary.
Understanding and Negotiating Construction Contracts A Contractors and Subcontractors Guide To Protecting Company Assets 2Nd Edition Kit Werremeyer Ebook Full Chapter