Pe Unit Wise Notes PDF

www.Vidyarthiplus.
com
Sub Code / Name : GE 6075-Professional Ethics in Engineering

Class : V Semester (Sec A / B)
GE 6075- PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING
UNIT I – HUMAN VALUES
The Story of a Carpent er
An elderly c arpenter was ready to retir e. He told his employer-contractor of his plans
to leave the house- building bus iness and live a more leisurely life w ith his wife
enjoy ing his extended family.
He would miss his paycheck, but he needed to retir e. They could get by. The
contractor was sorry to see his good worker go and asked if he could build just one
more house as a personal fav or.
The carpenter said yes, but in time it was easy to see that his heart was not in his
work. He resorted to shoddy workmanship and used infer ior materials. It was an
unfortunate way to end his career.
W hen the carpenter finished his work and t he builder came to inspect the house, the
contractor handed over the house key to the carpenter. “This is your house,” he
said, “it is my parting gift to you. ”
W hat a shock! What a Shame! If only he had known he was building his own house,
he would have done it all so diff erently. Now he had to live in the home he built none
too well.
(Modified from LIVING WITH HONOUR by SH IV KH ERA)
Do we find ourselv es in s imilar s ituations as the c arpenter?
Moving thr ough our work hours fast pac ed, driven to “get the job done”, without
much thought to mor al values.
How do we regain our focus as individuals and organizations?
This is the challenge f or the employee and the employer.
Ethics are fundament al standards of c onduct by which we work as a professional.
GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

www.Vidyarthiplus.com
VALUES
 Values are individual in natur e.

 Values are compris ed of personal conc epts of resp onsibilit y, entitlement and
respect.
 Values are shaped by personal experienc e, may change over the span of a
lif etime and may be influenc ed by less ons learned.
 Values may vary according to an individual‟s cultural, ethnic and/ or f aith-
bas ed background.
“Never change your core values.”

In spite of all the change ar ound you, decide upon what you will never change: your
core values.
Take your tim e to decide what they are but once you do, do not compr omise on them
for any reason.
Integrity is one such value.
MORALS
 Morals are guiding principles that every citizen should hold.

 Mor als are foundational c onc epts defined on both an individual and societal
level.
 At the most basic level, mor als are the knowledge of the differ ence between
right and wrong.
PERSONAL ETHICS
 Simply put, all individuals are mor ally autonomous beings with the power and
right to choose their values, but it does not f ollow that all choices and all value
syst ems have an equal claim to be called ethic al.
 Acti ons and beliefs inc onsistent with the Six Pillars of Charact er -
trustworthiness, respect, responsibilit y, f airness, caring and citizens hip - are
simply not ethic al.
PERSONAL ETHICS - everyday examples
• Software piracy
• Expense account padding
• Copying of homework or tests
• Inc ome taxes
• “Borrowing” nuts and bolts, office supplies from employer
• Copying of Videos or CD‟s
• Plagiarism
• Using the copy machine at work
RELIGION AND ETHICS
• T he “Golden Rule” is a basic tenet in almost all religions: Christian, Hindu,

Jewish, C onfucian, Buddhist, Muslim.

• “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”
• “Treat others as you would like them to treat you” (Christian).
• “Hurt not others with that which pains you” (Buddhist)
• “W hat is hateful to yours elf do not do to your f ellow m en”
(Judaism)
• “No man is a true believer unless he desires for his br other that
which he desires for hims elf” (Islam)
M ORALITY AND ETHICS
• C oncerns the goodness of voluntary human c onduct that affects the s elf or
other living things
• Morality (Latin m ores) usually ref ers to any aspect of human action
• Ethics (Gr eek ethos) comm only ref ers only to professional behavior
• Ethics c onsist of the applicat ion of fundamental moral princ iples and ref lect
our dedic ation to f air treatment of each other, and of society as a whole.
• An individual‟s own values c an result in accept ance or rejection of society‟s
ethic al standards bec ause even thoughtfully developed ethic al rules can
conflict with individual values.
ASPECTS OF ET HICS
There are two aspects to ethics:

 The f irst involves the ability to disc ern right from wrong, good from evil and
pr opriety fr om impr opriety.
 T he sec ond involves the commitment to do what is right, good and proper.
Ethics entails action.
An ALGEBRA c ourse will teach you ALGEBRA.

A HISTORY c ourse will teach you HISTORY.
A MANAGEMENT c ourse will teach you principles of MANAGEMENT.
But, W ill an ETHICS c ourse teach you to be ETHICAL?

Think !

UNIT II - ENGINEERING ETHICS
“Technology can have no legitim acy unless it inf licts no harm”-Adm.H.G. Rickover,
father of the US nuclear navy.
– What does Adm. Rickover mean by this?

– Should engineers avoid technology that has the potential for inflicting
harm on a soc iety or its members?
• Engineers have an ethic al and s ocial responsibility to themselves, their clients

and society.
• Practic ally ( although there is much debate about this), engineering ethics is
about balancing cost, schedule, and risk.
ENGINEERING ETHICS is:
• the study of mor al issues and decisi ons c onfronting individuals and
organizations involved in engineering and
• the study of related questions about mor al ideals, character, policies and
relations hips of people and organizations involved in technologic al activity.
TRAINING IN PREVENTIVE ETHICS
• Stimulating the moral imagination

• Recognizing et hic al issues
• Developing analytic al skills
• Eliciting a sense of res ponsibility
• Tolerating dis agreem ent and ambiguity
IMPEDIM ENTS TO RESPONSIBILITY
• S elf-interest.
• F ear .
• S elf-deception.
• Ignor ance.
• Egoc entric tendencies.
• Microsc opic vision.
• Groupthink.
QUESTIONABLE ENGINEERING PRACTICES
• Trimming – “smoothing of ir r egular ities to make data look extremely accurate

and precise”
• C ooking – “retaining only those res ults that f it the theory and discarding
others”.
• For ging – “inventing some or all of the research dat a…”
• Plagiarism – mis appropriating intellectual property.
• C onf licts of interest (such as acc epting gifts.)
– actual
– potential

– apparent
CLEARLY WR ONG ENGINEERING PRACTICES
• Lying
• Deliberate dec eption
• Withholding information
• Failing to adequately promote the diss emination of information
• Failure to s eek out the truth
• Revealing c onfidential or proprietary inf ormation
• Allowing one‟s judgment to be c orrupt ed.
SENSES OF EXPRESSION OF ENGG. ET HICS
 Ethics is an activity and ar ea of inquir y. It is the activity of understanding

moral values, resolving mor al issues and the ar ea of study res ulting f rom that
activity.
 W hen we speak of ethic al problems, issues and c ontroversies, we mean to
distinguish them from non moral problems.
 Ethics is us ed to ref er to the particular s et of beliefs, attitudes and habits that
a pers on or group displays c oncerning mor alities.
 Ethics and its gramm atic al variants c an be used as synonyms for „morally
correct‟.
VARIETIES or APPR OAC HES OF MORAL ISSUES
MICRO-ETHICS emphasizes typic ally everyday problems that can take on

significant proportions in an engineer‟s life or entire engineering of f ice.
MACRO-ETHICS addresses societ al pr oblems that are oft en shunt ed aside and are
not addressed until they unexpectedly res urface on a regional or national scale.
M ORAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING

(SOME EXAMPLES)
4.1. An inspect or disc overed f aulty c onstruction equipment and applied a violation
tag, pr eventing its us e. The super vis or, a c onstruction manager viewed the case as a
minor abrasion of the safety regulations and order ed the removal of the tag to speed
up the project. W hen the inspect or object ed to t his, he was thr eatened with
disciplinary action.
4.2. An electric ut ilit y company applied for a permit to operate a nuclear power plant.
The lic ensing agency was interest ed in knowing what emergency measures had
been est ablished for humans safety in case of r eactor m alf unctioning. The utility
engineers described the alarm system and arrangements with local hos pit als for
treatment. They did not emphasize that this measures applied to plant pers onnel
only and that they had no plans f or the sur r ounding population. W hen enquir ed about
their omission, they said it was not their responsibility.
4.3. A chemical plant dumped wast es in a landfill. Hazardous substances f ound their
way into the undergr ound water table. The plant‟s engineers were aware of the
situation but did not change the method of dispos al bec ause their competit ors did it
the s ame c heap way, and no law explicitly f orbade the practice.
4.4. Electronics Company ABC gear ed up f or pr oduction of its own version of a

popular new item. The product was not yet r eady f or sale, but even so, pictures and
impressive specifications appeared in adver tisem ents. Prospective cust omers were
led to believe that it was available of f the shelf and were drawn away f rom c ompeting
lines.
TYPES OF INQUIRIES
1. NORMATIVE INQUIRY
These are about „what ought to be‟ and „what is good‟. These questions identify and
also justify the morally desirable norms or standards.
Some of the questions are:

A. How f ar engineers are obligat ed to protect public safety in given
situations?
B. W hen should engineers st art whistle blowing on danger ous practices of
their employers?
C. W hose values are primary in taking a mor al decision, employee, public
or govt?
D. W hy are engineers obligated to protect public safety?
E. W hen is govt justif ied in int erfering on such issues and why?
2. C ONCEPT UAL INQUIRY:
These questions should lead to clarific ations on c oncepts, principles and issues in
ethics. Examples are:
A) W hat is „SA FETY‟ and how is it relat ed t o „RISK‟

B) „Protect the safet y, health and welfare of public‟-W hat does this
statement mean?
C) W hat is a bribe?
D) W hat is a „profession‟ and who ar e „professionals‟?
3. FACT UAL ( DES CRIPTIVE) I NQUIRI ES
These are inquiries us ed to uncover information using scientific tec hniques. These
inquiries get to information about business r eal ities, history of engineering
prof ession, procedures us ed in ass ess ment of risks and engineers psychology.
Why st udy ENGINEERING ETHICS
ENGINEERING ETHICS is a m eans to incr ease the ability of c oncerned engineers,

managers, citizens and others to responsibly c onfr ont mor al issues r ais ed by
technologic al activities.
MORAL DILEMMMA

There are three types of complexities.
 VAGUENESS: This complexity arises due to the fact that it is not clear to
individuals as to which mor al c onsiderations or principles apply to their
situation.
 CONFLICTING REASON S: E ven when it is perfectly clear as to which moral

principle is applicable to one‟s situation, there could develop a situation where
in two or more clearly applicable moral principles c ome into c onflict.
 DISAGREE MENT: Individuals and gr oups may dis agree how to interpret,
apply and balance moral reasons in particular situations.
Steps in confronting MORAL DILEMMAS:

i) Identify the relevant moral f actors and reasons.
ii) Gather all available facts that are pertinent to the moral fact ors
involved.
iii) Rank the moral c onsider ations in the order of their import ance as they
apply to the situation.
iv) Consider alt ernative c ourse of action, tracing the full implications of
each, as ways of solving dilemma.
v) Talk with c olleagues, s eeking the suggestions and perspectives of the
d i l e mma .
vi) Arrive at a caref ully r easoned judgm ent by weighing all the relevant
moral fact ors and r eas ons in light of facts.
All the above st eps are distinct, even though they are inter-
relat ed and c an oft en be taken jointly
M ORAL AUT ONOMY
• This is viewed as the skill and habit of thinking r ationally about ethical
iss ues on the basis of mor al c onc erns independently or by self -
determination.
• Autonomous individuals think f or themselves and do not assum e that
customs are always right.
• They s eek to r eas on and live by gener al principles.
• Their motivation is to do what is morally r easonable f or its own sake,
maintaining integrit y, s elf-respect, and respect f or others.
“One who br eaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and wit h a willingness to
acc ept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells
him is unjust and willingly acc epts the penalt y… is in r eality expressing the highest
respect f or the law.” Rev. Mart in Luther King, Jr. in Letter f rom a Birmingham J ail,
1963.
A person becomes morally autonomous by impr oving various prac tical skills listed
b e l o w:
i) Proficiency is rec ognizing mor al pr oblems and issues in engineering.

ii) Skill in c omprehending, clarif ying and critically assessing argum ents

on opposing sides of moral issues.
iii) The ability to form c onsist ent and c omprehensive viewpoints based
upon c onsideration of relevant facts.
iv) Awareness of alt ernate responses to issues and cr eative s olutions for
practic al diff iculties.
v) S ensitivity to genuine difficulties and subtleties
vi) Incr eas ed precision in the use of a common et hic al language
necessary to express and also def end one‟s views adequately.
vii) Appreciation of possibilities of using rational dialogue in resolving moral
conf licts and the need f or toler ance of differ ences in perspective
among or ally r easonable people.
viii) A s ense of import ance of int egr ating one‟s professional life and
personal convictions i. e. m aintaining one‟s mor al integrity.
KOHLBERG’S THEORY
STAGES OF MORAL DEV ELOP MENT
• Pre-convent ional Level

W hatever benef its ones elf or avoids punishment . This is the level of
development of all young children. -Avoid punishment & Gain R eward
• Conventional Level
Uncritic al acc ept ance of one‟s f amily, group or society are acc ept ed as f inal
standard of morality. Most adults do not mature beyond this stage. -1.Gain
Approval & A void Disappr oval & 2. Duty & Guilt
• Post-conventional Level
Motivation to do what is mor ally r easonable for its own sake, rather than
solely fr om ulterior motives, with also a desire to maintain their moral integrit y,
self-respect and the respect of other autonom ous individuals. They are
„Mor ally autonomous‟ people. -1. Agr eed upon rights & 2. P ersonal mor al
standards
GILLIGAN’S THEORY
• Pre-convent ional Level

This is the same as K ohlberg‟s f irst level in that the pers on is pr eoccupied
with s elf centered r easoning, c aring for the needs and desires of s elf.
• Conventional
Here the thinking is opposite in that, one is pr eoccupied with not hurting
others and a willingness to sacrifice one‟s own interests in order to help or
nurture others (or retain friendship).
• Post-conventional Level
Achieved through context-oriented reas oning, rather than by applying abstract
rules r anked in a hier archy of import anc e. Here the individual becomes able to
strike a r easoned balance between caring about other people and pursuing
one‟s own s elf-interest while exercising one‟s rights.

Differences between the TWO THEOR IES
KOHLBERG GILLIGAN
I. Ethics of rules and rights Ethics of care
II. Studies based on well educ ated, Studies included females and colored
white male‟s only, tending male bias. peoples
III. Application of abstract rules ranked Application of c ontext-oriented reasoning.
in the order of importance
IV. Studies were hypothesized for both Study was conducted on both genders
the genders even though the study was and it was found, men based the ir
conducted mostly on males reasoning on „justice‟ and women based
theirs on „c are‟
HEINZ ’S DILEMMA
The fam ous example us ed by Kohlberg was c alled “Heinz‟s dilemma”. A woman
living in Europe would die of c anc er unless she was given an expensive drug. Her
husband, Heinz, c ould not afford it. B ut the local pharmacist, who had invented the
drug at only one t enth of the sale price refus ed to sell it to Heinz who could only r aise
half the required money from borrowings. Desperation drives Heinz to br eak into the
pharmacy and steal the drug to s ave his wife.
W hen respondents were ask ed whether and why Heinz should or should not st eal a
drug to save his wife from a life-thr eatening illness. The responses of the individuals
were compar ed with a protot ypic al response of individuals at particular stages of
mor al r easoning. Kohlberg noted that irrespective of the level of the individual the
response could be same, but the r eas oning could be dif f ere nt.
For example, if a child r eas oning at a „preconventional‟ level might say that it is not
right to st eal bec ause it is against law and som eone might s ee you.
At a „conventional‟ level, an individual might argue that it is not right to st eal bec ause
it is against law and laws are nec essary for s ociety to function.
At a „postconventional‟ level, one may argue that stealing is wrong bec ause is
against law and it is immor al.
CONSENSUS AND CONTROVERSY
CONTROVERSY:
• All individuals will not arrive at same ver dict during their exercising their moral
autonomy.
• Aristotle not ed long ago that morality is not as precise and clear-cut as
arithmetic.
• Aim of t eaching engg ethics is not to get unanimous confor mity of outlook by
indoctrination, authorit arian and dogmatic t eaching, hypnotism or any other
technique but to improve promotion of toler ance in the exercise of moral
autonomy.

CONS E NS US:
The conduct or of a music orchestra has authority over the musicians and his
authority is respect ed by them by c onsensus as other wise the music perform ance
will suf f er. Hence the authority and autonomy are c ompatible.
On the other hand, tension arises between the needs f or autonomy and the need for
concerns about authorit y. The differ ence between the t wo should be discussed
openly to resolve the issue to the common good.
PR OFESSIONS AND PR OFESSIONALISM
Engineers normally imagine that they are ser vants to organizations rather than a
public guardian. Respons ibility to the public is essential for a prof essional.
W ho is a professional?
• Obviously a member of a profession.
W hat is a profession?
„JOB‟ or „OCCUPATION‟ that m eets the f ollowing criteria fr om which a pers on ear ns
his living.
• Knowledge – E xercise of s kills, knowledge, judgment and discr etion requiring
extensive form al crit eria.
• Organization - special bodies by members of the profession to set standard
codes of et hics,
• Public good-The occupation ser ves some important public good indicat ed by
a code of et hics.
W ho is a professional engineer?
• Has a bachelor‟s degree in engineering from an accredited school

• P erforms engineering work
• Is a register ed and lic ens ed Professional Engineer
• Acts in a morally responsible way while practicing engineering
Differing views on Prof essionals
“Only c ons ulting engineers who are basically independent and have f reedom from
coercion c an be called as professionals.” -Robert L.W hitelaw
“Professionals have to m eet the expectations of clients and em ployers. Prof essional
restr aints are to be impos ed by only laws and government r egulations and not by
personal c onscience.” -Samuel Florman
“Engineers are professionals when they 1) attain standards of achievement in

educ ation, job perf ormance or cr eativity in engineering and 2) accept the most basic
moral responsibilities to the public as well as employers, clients, colleagues and
subordinates.” -Mike Martin & Roland Schinzinger

MOTIVES FOR PROFESSIONALISM
• A desire f or interesting and challenging work and the pleasure in the act of
changing the world.
• The joy of cr eative eff orts. W here a scientist‟s interest is in disc overing new
technology, engineers interest is derived fr om cr eatively solving practical
problems.
• The engineer shares the scientist‟s job in underst anding the laws and riddles
of the universe.
• The sheer magnitude of the nature – oc eans, rivers, mount ains and pr airies –
leads engineers to build engineering mar vels like ships, bridges, tunnels, etc.,
which appeal to human passion.
• The pleasure of being in the pres ence of machines gener ating a comf orting
and absorbing sense of a manageable, c ontrolled and ordered world.
• Str ong s ense of helping, of directing eff orts towards easing the lot of one‟s
fellows.
M ODELS OF PR OFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
1. SAVIOR: The r epres ent ative engineer is a s avior who will redeem
society from poverty, inefficienc y, waste and the drudgery of manual labour.
2. GUARDIAN: Engineers know, the directions in which and pace at
which, technology should develop.
3. BUREAUCRATIC SERVANT: The engineer as the loyal organization
pers on uses special skills to solve problems.
4. SOCIAL SERVANT: Engineers, in co-oper ation with management,
have the task of receiving society‟s directives and s atisfying society‟s desires.
5. SOCIAL ENAB LER AND CATALYST: Engineers play a vital role
beyond mere c ompliance with orders. They help management and society
understand their own needs and to make informed decisions.
6. GAME PLA YER: Engineers are neither ser vants nor mast ers of
anyone. They play by the economic game rules that happen to be in ef f ect at a
given time.
TYPES OF ET HICAL THEORIES
S.NO T YPES BASED ON
1 Virtue et hics Virtues and vices
2 Utilitarianism Most good f or most people
3 Duty ethics Duties to res pect pers ons
4 Rights ethics Human Rights

VIRTUE ETHICS
• “The unexamined life is not wo rth living.”

(Socrates, 470-399 B.C.)
• “The happy life is thought to be v irtuous; now a v irtuous life requires exertion
and does not consist in amusement.” (Aristotle, 384-322 B.C.)
The Four Main V irtues
• Prudence (mind): to think about a moral problem clearly and c ompletely

• Temperance (emotions): control attraction to positive emotions
• Fortitude (emotions): control aversion f or negative em otions
• Justice (will): choose according to truth and f airness.
Virtue Ethics
• Focuses on the type of person we should strive to be
• Actions which reflect good c haracter tr aits ( virtues) are inherently r ight
• Actions which reflect bad character traits (vices) are inherently wrong
• Virtue et hics are tied more to individual behavior than to that of an
organization (e.g. business, government)
ARISTOTLE s ays that mor al virtues are tendencies, acquired thr ough habit
formation, to r each a proper balance between extremes in conduct, em otion, desire
and att itude i.e. virtues are tendencies to find the Golden Mean between the
extremes of t oo much and t oo little.
Some of the virtues are defined using exam ples her e:
Virtue Too much Too less

(Golden mean between extremes)
Courage Foolhardiness Cowardice
Truthfulness Revealing all in violation of Being sec retive or

tact and conf identiality lacking in candor
Generosity Wasting one‟s resources Being miserly
Friendliness Being annoyingly effusive Sulky or surly
PR OFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
• Being mor ally responsible as a professional.

• Most bas ic and c omprehensive prof essional virtue.
• Cr eation of usef ul and safe technologic al products while respecting the

autonomy of clients and public, especially in matters of risk taking.
This encompasses a wide variety of the more specific virtues grouped as follows:
1. SELF DIRECTION VIRTUES:

Fundament al virtues in exercising our mor al autonomy and responsibilit y. e.g.
self understanding, humilit y, good mor al judgment, c ourage, s elf discipline,
persever anc e, commitments, s elf-respect and dignity
2. PUBLIC SPIRITED VIRTUES:
Focusing on the good of the clients and public af f ect ed by the engineers‟ work by
. not directly and int ent ionally harming others i.e. „nonmaleficence‟.
B enific enc e, s ense of community, generosity are other virtues f alling in this
category.
3. TEAMW ORK VIRTUES:
Enables professionals to work succ essfully with oth ers. E.g. collegiality,
cooper ativeness, the ability to communicate, respect f or authorit y, loyalty to
employers and leadership qualities.
4. PROFICIENCY VIRTUES:
Mastery of one‟s craft that characterize good engin eeri ng practice e.g.
competence, diligenc e, creativity, s elf-renewal through c ontinuous education.
M ORAL INTEGRITY
Moral integrity is the unity of character on the basis of mor al c oncern, and especially
on the basis of honest y. The unity is consist ency among our attitudes, emotions and
conduct in relation to justified moral values.
SELF-RESPECT
• Valuing ones elf in mor ally appr opriate ways.

• Int egr al to f inding meaning in one‟s life and work
• A pre-requisite f or purs uing other moral ideals and virtues.
• S elf-respect is a mor al c oncept of properly valuing ones elf but s elf-esteem is
a psychological conc ept of positive attitude towards ones elf.
Self-respect takes two forms.
1. Recognition self-respect is properly valuing ones elf bec ause of one‟s inher ent
moral wor th, the same worth that every other human being has.
2. Appraisal self-respect is properly valuing ourselves according to how well we

meet mor al st andards and our personal ideals.
VARIOUS SENSES OF RESPONSIBILITY
Responsibility ascribed by i) virtue, ii) obligations, iii) gener al mor al capacities of

people, iv) liabilities and acc ountability f or actions and v) blameworthiness or
praiseworthiness.
1. By virtue: A pers on is s aid to be a responsible pers on when we ascribe a

mor al virtue to the person. W e expect that the pers on is r egularly concerned to
do the right thing, is c onscientious and diligent in meeting obligations. In this
sens e, professional responsibility is the c entral virtue of engineers.
2. By obligation: Mor al responsibilities c an be thought of as obligations or duties

to perform morally right acts.

3. By gener al mor al capacit y: W hen we view a pers on as a whole rather than

one with respect to a specific ar ea, we are actually thinking about the active
capacity of the pers on f or knowing how to act in morally appropriate ways e.g.
the capacity of childr en grow as they mature and learn.
4. By acc ountabilit y: Responsibility also m eans being acc o untable, answerable

or liable to meet particular obligations. The virtue of professional responsibility
implies a willingness to be acc ountable for one‟s conduct.
5. By being blameworthy: W hen acc ountability f or a wr ongdoing is at issue,

responsible becomes a synonym f or blameworthy. W hen right c onduct is the
issue, the c ontext is prais eworthiness.
CAUSAL AND LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Causal R esponsibility: c onsists simply in being a c ause of some event. E .g. lightning
as being responsible f or a house c atching fire.
Legal Responsibility: c onsists simply in being a c ause f or harm that was so unlikely
and also unforeseeable that no moral responsibility is involved.
UTILIT ARIANISM
• That which pr oduces the m aximum benef it f or the gr eatest number of people
( e.g. Democracy)
• Tries to achieve a balance between the good and bad c onsequences of an
action
• Tries to m aximize the well-being of society and em phasizes what will pr ovide
the most benef its to the largest gr oup of people
• This method is f undamental to many types of engineering analysis, including
risk-benef it analysis and c ost-benefit analysis
Dr awbacks:
• Sometimes what is best f or the c ommunity as a whole is bad f or c ert ain

individuals in the c ommunity
• It is of t en im possible to know in advance which decision will lead to the
most good
Organiz ing Principles to Resolv ing Ethical Issues
• Utilitarian thinking
– a st andard that promotes those individual actions or rules that pr oduce the
greatest total amount of utility to those aff ected.
– A code that enjoins engineers to promote the safet y, health, and welfare of
the public.
– W hat is ut ilit y, though? H appiness?
• Preference utilitarianism
– promote those conditions that allow each individual to pursue happiness as he

or she c onceives it.
– Two c onditions necessary f or this: fr eedom and well-being.
– Practically, for engineers, this advocates c ost/benefit analys es.
Problems with Utilitarianism
• Difficult to quantify benefits for ALL those affect ed.

• “Gr eatest good” dif f icult to apply to an all-inclusive population.
• Som eone gets “shaft ed” – appr oach justifies perpetr ating injustice on
individuals, i.e., s omeone gets left out.
• Thr ee appr oaches :
1. Cost/benef it – quantif iable appr oach. Maximize posit ive utilities (benef its)
against negative utilities (c osts).
2. Act utilitarian – “W ill the c ourse of action pr oduce more good than any
alt ernative c ourse of action that I c ould take”?
3. Rule utilit arian – “W ould utility be maximized if ever yone did the same
thing in the s ame circumstances”? Adoption of c ommonly acc epted rules.
1. C OST-BENE FIT ANALYSIS:

• Assess the available options
• Assess the costs and benef its of each option f or the entire audience affected
• Make the decision that is likely to result in the gr eatest benef it relative to cost.
2. ACT-UTILITARIANISM:
(professed by J ohn Stuart Mills)
• Focus es on individual actions, rather than general rules.
• An act is right if it is likely to pr oduce the most good f or the most people
involved in the particular situation.
• Rules may be broken whenever doing so will produce the most good in a
specific situation.
• Happiness is the only „intrinsic‟ good and all others are „instrument al‟ goods
that ser ve as the means of happiness.
3. RULE-UTILITARI ANISM:
(professed by Richard Br andt)
• This regards mor al values as primar y.
• W e should follow the rules and avoid bribes, even when those acts do not
have the best c onsequences in a par ticular situation, bec ause the general

practice of following rules and not bribing pr oduce the most over all good
• Rules should be c onsidered in s ets called „moral codes ‟. A mor al code is
justified when followed, would maximize the public good more than alternative
codes would.
DUTY ETHICS (Immanuel Kant’s view)
Contends that certain acts ( or duties) should be perform ed because they are
inher ently ethic al such as:
• be honest,
• k eep promises,
• do not inf lict sufferings on other people,
• be f air,
• make reparation when you have been unf air,
• how gratitude for kindness extended by others
• seek to impr ove own int elligence and charact er,
• develop one‟s talents,
• don‟t comm it suicide.
• Duties, r ather than good c onsequences, is f undament al.
• Individuals who recognize their ethical duties will choose ethic ally c orrect
moral actions
These duties should meet K ant‟s 3 conditions i. e.
1. It should express respect f or pers ons,

• P eople deser ve respect bec ause they have capacity to be autonomous
and for exercis ing goodwill.
• Goodwill is the conscientious and honest effort to do what is right
according to univers al principles of duties.
• Mor al motives and intentions play a prominent role in duty et hics rather
than utilitarianism.
2. It is an univers al principle
• Duties are binding on us only if they are applic able to ever yone. They
must be univers alisable.
3.It expresses comm and for autonom ous mor al agents. Duties prescribe c ertain
actions categorically, without qualifications or c onditi ons attac hed. V alid
principles of duties are Categorical Imperatives. They c ontrast with non-moral
commands c alled Hypothetical Imperatives which are conditional.
The above ▬► „RESPECT f or PERSONS‟
Drawback of K ant‟s duty ethics: It has f ailed to be s ensitive to how principles of duty
can conflict with each other thereby creating Moral dilemmas.
Rawls Development on K ant’s Duty Ethics
Rawls argues that all rational people would agr ee to abide by two basic mor al
principles:

1. Each person is ent itled to the most ext ensive amount of liberty c ompatible with an
equal amount f or others and
2. Dif f er ences in social power and economic benef its are justified only when they are
likely to benefit everyone, including members of most disadvantaged groups.
RIGHTS ET HICS (JOHN LOCKE – 1632-1704)
• Everyone has inherent moral rights

• E ver yone has rights that arise fr om EX ISTING (i. e. right to Lif e, maximum
individual Libert y, and human Dignity are Fundament al Rights).
• Other rights arise as a Consequence.
• Duties arise because people have rights, not vice versa.
• Any act that violates an individual‟s moral rights is ethically unaccept able.
• Rights ethics was highly individualistic.
• Rights are primarily entitlements that prevent other people fr om meddling in
one‟s lif e. These are refer r ed to as Liberty Rights or Negative Rights that plac e
duties on other people not to int erfere with one‟s life.
e.g. Individuals do not have rights to life bec ause others have duties not to kill
them. Inst ead, possessing the right to life is the r eas on why others ought not to
kill them.
Drawbac k s
• H ow do we priorit ize the rights of dif f er ent individuals?

• Rights ethics of t en promote the rights of individuals at the expense of large
gr oups/society
A.I.Melden‟s version of Rights Ethics
• Human rights are intim ately relat ed to communities of people.

• This version is known as POSITIVE W ELFARE RIGHTS and is defined as
rights to c ommunity benefits f or living a minimally decent human lif e.
EVALUATION OF ETHICAL THEORIES
W e are basically not interest ed in which of the ethic al theories is the best. It is
believed that there are ar eas in which each theory complements others by how they
differ.
Proc edure for General Evaluation:
1. The theory must be clear and formulat ed with c oncepts that are coher ent and
applicable.
2. It must be internally c onsist ent in that none of its tenets contr adicts any other.
3. Neither the theory nor its def ense c an rely upon false information.
4. It must be sufficiently comprehensive to provide guidance in specific situations
of interest to us.
5. It must be com patible with our most carefully c onsider ed moral convictions

about c oncrete situations.
SELF-INTEREST AND ETHIC AL EG OISM
Psychological Egoism
All of our actions can be reduced to s elf-interest

• W e always do what we most want to do. e.g., a man who helps others has
chosen to do s o, so he s ees doing it, is in his self-interest
• W e do what makes us f eel good. e.g., a man who helps others must get
pleasure fr om doing it – hence it is in his self-interest
The Problem of Counter Examples
W hat about char ity and pity?

These require the egoist to distinguish s elfish and uns elfish acts fr om s elfish and
uns elfish motives
• Charity – I enjoy showing my power
• Pity – I worry that it might happen to me
So again, doing thes e, we act f rom self-interest
Confusion over s elf-interest and s elfishness

• Not all actions are done from selfishness
• Brushing my t eeth (s elf-interested but not s elfish)
Also c onfusion over s elf-interest and pleasure
• N ot all actions are done fr om s elf-interest

• Smoking cigar ettes (pleasurable but not s elf-interested)
• Self-interest = any int erest the self has
W hat do all major Et hic al Theories s ay about this?
All major theories acknowledge the importance of S elf Interest.

• Utilitarians take into account one‟s own good as well as others.
• Duty ethics emphasizes duties to ourselves.
• Right ethicists talk about our rights to pursue our own good.
• Virtue ethicists emphasize the importance of s elf-respect.
But all these theories also emphasize that the purs uit of s elf interest must be
balanced with our moral responsibilities to others.
Ethical Egoism
• A differ ent view, which talks of mor alit y as only the pursuit of s elf interest
• S elf interest is a „r ational c onc ern‟ r equiring c onsideration of one‟s long-term
interests.
E.g., t aking bribe m ay appear to ser ve one‟s self interest but it does not ser ve the
long-term interest of s elf. Hence taking bribe is not accept able since it would not
do any good on a long-term. This was profess ed by Thomas Hobbes (1588-
1679) and Ayn Rand (1905-1982).
 Ayn R and – with only one life to live, the individual is of utmost import ance
 It is in one‟s s elf-interest to adopt the Mor al Point of View (Hobbes‟ Social
C ontract)
CUSTOMS and ETHICAL RELATIVISM
Relativism:
• Distinction between “mor als” (“tr eatment of others”) and “mores” (“harmless
customs”)
Cultural (Descriptive) Relativism:
• Factual Claims: “x is c onsider ed right in society y at time t” and “is consider ed

wrong in society z at t im e t”
• Empiric al Conc lusion: Moralities are relative
• This is either true or f alse ( anthropology –a study of mankind , its customs,
beliefs, etc.can f igure it out)
Normative (Ethical) R elativism:
• N ormative Claim: “W hat is consider ed right in society x at time t is right for

that soc iety”
• A particular culture c annot be judged fr om outside of that cultur e.
• „Ethic al Relativism‟ s ays that actions are morally right when they are appr oved
by law and cust om.
• They are wrong when they violate laws and custom.
• Ethic al egoism tries to reduce mor al r eas ons to matt ers of self interest,
„ethical relativism‟ attempts to r educe moral values to laws, conventions and
customs of particular s ocieties.
Consequences of Normative Relativism
• W e cannot s ay other “mor als” are inf erior to our own society‟s
• W e decide the value of our actions bas ed only on what our particular society
thinks
• W e should show a lot of toler ance f or dif f er ent cust oms and outlooks in a
society in which we live in. It means that cust oms c an have mor al signific ance in
deciding how we should ac t. This view is called „et hic al pluralism‟.
Reasons f or Accept ance Of Ethical R elativism
The r eas ons profess ed f or acc ept ance of ethical relativism is thr eefold.
1. Laws s eem so tangible and clear-cut. They provide a public way ending

seemingly endless disputes about rights and wr ongs. But many times, moral
r eas ons s eem to be at variance with laws e.g. apartheid laws.
2. Moral standards vary dramatically from one culture to another. The only kind of
objectivity possible is limit ed to a given s et of laws in a given society.
Acknowledging this relativit y of morality enc ourages the virtue of toler ance of
differences among societies.

3. Mor al judgm ents should be made in relation to fact ors that fr om case to cas e,
usually making it im possible to formulate rules which are simple. Cust oms and
laws are usually morally relevant f actors that should be taken into account.
RELIGION and DIVINE COM M AND ET HICS
Ethics and Religion:
Moral issues and religious belief are related in s everal positive ways.
• First, they are shaped over time from the c entral moral values of major world
r eligions.
• Sec ond, religious views often support mor al responsibility by pr oviding
additional m otivation f or being moral.
• Third, sometimes religions set a higher moral standard than is conventional.
• Societies of t en benefit f rom a variety of religions that make pr ominent
particular virtues, inspiring their members to pursue them beyond what is
ordinarily s een as morally obligatory.
Divine Command Ethic:
• This s ays that an act which is right is commanded by god and the one which
is wrong is f orbidden by God.
• The dif f iculty in t his is to know precisely what G od‟s comm ands are and in
knowing whether God exists.
W e can view that mor al r eas ons are not reducible to r eligious m att ers, although
religious belief may provide an added ins piration for responding to them.
Uses Of Ethical Theories
1. Ethic al theories aid in identif ying the moral c onsider ations or reasons that
constitute a dilemma.
2. They pr ovide a precise s ense of what kinds of inf ormation are relevant to
solving moral development.
3. They sometimes, of f er ways to rank the relevant mor al consider ations in order
of importance and provide a rough guidance in solving moral problems.
4. The theories help us identify the f ull mor al ramifications of alt ernative c ourses
of action, urging a wide perspective on the mor al implic ations of the options
and providing a s ystematic framework of comparing alternatives.
5. The theories augment the precision with which we use mor al terms and they
pr ovide frame works for mor al r easoning when discussing mor al issues with
colleagues.
6. By pr oviding frame works f or development of moral arguments, the theories
strengthen our ability to r each balanc ed and insightful judgments.

UNIT III - ENGINEERING AS SOCIAL EXPERIM ENTATION
To undertake a gr eat work and especially a work of novel type means, carrying
out an experiment. It means t aki ng up a struggle with the forces of nature
wit hout the assurance of emerging as a vi ctor after the first attack.
Louis Marie Henri Navier (1785 - 1836) - Founder of Structural Analysis
ENGINEERING AS EXPERIMENTATION
• Experimentation (Pr eliminary tests or Simulations) plays a vital r ole in the

design of a product or process.
• In all stages of converting a new engineering c oncept into a design like,
 f irst rough c ut design,
 usage of dif f erent types of materials and processes,
 detailed design,
 f urther stages of work design and
 the f inished product,
Experiments and tests are conduct ed to evaluate the pr oduct. Modific ations are
made based on the outcome of these experiments.
• The normal design process is t hus iter ative (modific ations being made on the
basis of f eedback information ac quir ed fr om the tests).
E ven though various tests and experim ents are c onduct ed at various stages, the
engineering project as a whole in its totality can be viewed as an ex periment.
SIMILARITIES TO STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
1. Any project is c arried out in partial ignor ance due to

• The unc ertainties in the abstract model us ed f or the design c alculations,
• The unc ertainties in the precise characteristics of the materials purchased,
• The unc ertainties c aus ed by variations in processing and f abrication of
materials and
• The unc ertainties about the nature of stresses the finished pr oduct will
encounter.
Indeed, Engineer‟s success lies in the ability to accomplish tasks with only a partial
knowledge of scientific laws about nature and society.
2. The final outcome of engineering projects, like those of experiments, is gener ally
uncert ain. Very oft en, possible outcomes are not even known and gr eat risks may
be pres ented which c ould never be thought of.

3. Effective Engineering relies upon knowledge gained about pr oducts both before
and after they leave the factory- knowledge needed f or improving curr ent
pr oducts and cr eating bett er ones. That is, ongoing success in engineering
depends upon gaining new knowledge.
LEARNING FROM THE PAST
Engineers should learn not only f rom their own earlier design and oper ating res ults,
but also fr om other engineers.
Engineers repeat the past mistakes of others due to the following reasons.
• Lack of established channels of communic ation.

• Misplac ed pride in not asking f or information
• Embarrass ment at failure or f ear of litigation (legal problems).
• Negligence.
Examples:
1. T he Titanic lacked sufficient number of life boats resulting in the death of 1522
out of 2227 (life boat capacity available was only 825), a f ew decades lat er Arctic
perished due to the same problem.
2. In June 1966, a section of the Milf ord Haven Bridge in W ales collapsed during
c ons truc t i on. A bridge of similar design, erected by the same br idge- builder in
Melbourne, Austr alia, also partially c ollaps ed in the month of October, same year.
During this incident 33 people were killed and many were injured.
3. Malf unctions occurred at nuclear r eact ors at various loc ations and the
information reports were with Babcock and W ilcox, the reactor manufacturer. In spite
of thes e, no attention was paid leading to a pressure relief valve giving rise to the
Three Mile Island nuclear accident on March 28, 1979.
CONTRASTS WITH STANDARD EXPERIMENTS
1. EXPERIM ENTAL C ONTROL: In st andard experiments, members are in two

dif f er ent gr oups. Members of one group receive special experim ental tr eatment. The
other gr oup members, called „control group‟ do not receive special tr eatment, though
they are from the s ame environment in all other respects.
But this is not true in engineering, s ince most of the experiments are not conducted
in laboratories. The subjects of experiments are human beings who are outside the
experiment er‟s c ontr ol.
Thus it is not possible to study the effects of changes in variable on differ ent groups.
Hence only historic al and r etrospective data available about various t arget groups

has to be us ed f or evaluation. Hence engineering as a social experiment ation s eems

to be an extended usage of the c oncept of experiment ation.
2. INFORM ED CONSENT: has two elements, k nowledge and voluntariness. The

subjects (human beings) should be given all the inf ormation needed to make a
reas onable decision. Next, they must get into the exper im ent without being subjected
to f orce, fraud or deception. Supplying complete inform ation is neither necessary nor
in most cas es possible. B ut all relev ant information needed f or making a r easonable
decision on whether to participate should be conveyed. Gener ally, we all pref er to be
the subject of our own experiments rather than those of somebody else.
Conditions defining Informed or Valid Consent
a. The c ons ent is given volunt arily

b. The c ons ent is bas ed on inform ation a r ational pers on would want,
together with any other information request ed and present ed to them in
understandable form.
c. The c onsenter was competent to process the information and mak e
rational dec isions.
d. Inf ormation has been widely diss eminated.
e. The subject‟s c ons ent is offer ed by proxy by a group that collectively
r epresents many subjects like interests, c onc erns and exposure to risk.
„Engineering experim ents are not conduct ed to gain new knowledge unlike scientific
experiments‟. Is this distinction nec essary?
This distinction is not vital bec ause we are c onc erned about t he manner in which the
experiment is conducted, such as valid consent of human subjects being s ought,
safety measures taken and m eans exist f or terminating the experiment at any time
and pr oviding all participants a s afe exit.
Features of morally responsible engineers in social experimentation
Conscientiousness: A primary obligation to protect the safety of human subjects and

respect their right of c onsent.
Relevant informat ion: A c onst ant awareness of the experimental nature of any
project, im aginative forecasting of its possible side effects and a reasonable eff ort t o
m onit or them.
Moral autonomy: Autonomous, personal involvement in all steps of the project.
Accountability: Acc epting acc ount ability f or the res ults of the project.
CONSCIENTIOUSNESS:
 C onscientious moral commitment means s ensitivity to the fu ll range of

relevant mor al values.
 S ensitivity to responsibilities that is relevant.

 W illingness to develop the skill and expend the eff ort needed to r each the
best balance possible among these c onsiderations.
 C onscientiousness m eans c onsciousness bec ause mere intent is not
sufficient.
Conceiving engineering as social experimentation restores the vision of engineers as

guardians of the public interest in that they are duty bound to guard the welfare and
safety of those aff ected by engg projects.
RELEVANT INFORMATION:
Conscient iousness is blind without relevant factual information. Mor al c onc ern
involves a commitment to obtain and assess all available pertinent information.
Another dimension to factual inf ormation is the c ons equences of what one does.
W hile regarding engg as social experiment ation points out the import ance of cont ext,
it also urges the engineer to view his or her specialized activities in a project as part
of a larger whole having a social impact that may involve a variety of unint ended
effects. It may be better to practice „defensive engg‟ (Chauncy Star r) or „preventive
engg‟ (Ruth D avis).
M ORAL AUT ONOMY
 P eople are mor ally autonomous when their mor al conduct and principles of
action are their own.
 Mor al beliefs and at titudes must be a critic al reflection and not a passive
adoption of the particular conventions of one‟s societ y, r eligion or profession.
 Moral beliefs and attitudes cannot be agreed to formally and adhered to
merely verbally.
 They must be int egrated into the core of one‟s p ersonality and should lead to
committed action.
 It is wrong to think that as an employee when one performs „acts‟ ser ving
company‟s interests, one is no longer morally and personally identified with
one‟s actions.
 Viewing engg as a social exp eriment ation helps to overcome this f lawed
thought and restores a s ense of autonom ous participation in one‟s work.
 As an experiment er, an engineer is exercising the specialized tr aining
that forms the core of one‟s identity as a professional.
 A social experiment that c an result in unknown c onsequences should
help inspire a cr itic al and questioning at titude about the adequacy of
current economic and safety standards.
 In turn, t his leads to better personal involvement with work.

ACC OUNT ABILITY:

 Responsible people accept mor al responsibility f or their actions.
 Accountability is the willingness to submit one‟s actions to mor al scr utiny and
be open and responsive to the assessment of others.
 It should be underst ood as being culpable and blameworthy f or misdeeds.
Submission to an employer‟s authority cr eates in many people a narrow s ense of

acc ountability f or the c ons equenc es of their action. This is bec ause of
i) Only a small c ontribution is made by one individual, when large scale

engineering work is f ragment ed. The final product which is f ar away fr om one‟s
immediate workplac e, does not give a proper understanding of the c ons equences
of one‟s action.
ii) Due to the fr agment ation of work, a vast diff usion of acc ountability takes
plac e. The ar ea of personal acc ountability is delimit ed to the portion of work
being c arried out by one.
iii) The pressure to move on to another new project does not allow one to
complete the obser vations long enough. This makes people account able only for
m eeting schedules and not f or the c ons equences of action.
iv) To avoid getting into legal issues, engineers tend to c onc entrate more on
legal liabilities than the c ontainment of the potential risks involved in their ar ea of
work.
Viewing engineering as a social experiment ation makes one overcome these

difficulties and s ee the problem in whole rather than as part.
ENGINEERING C ODES OF ET HICS
Engineering Codes of Et hics have evolved over time
EARLY CODES
•Codes of personal behavior

•Codes for honesty in business dealings and f air business practic es
•Employee/employer relations
NEWER C ODES
• Emphas ize c ommitments to safety, public health and environmental protection

• Express the rights, duties and obligations of members of the Prof ession
• Do not express new ethic al pr inciples, but coherently restate existing standar ds
of responsible engineering practice
• Create an environment within the Profession where ethical behavior is the norm
• N ot legally binding; an engineer cannot be arrested f or violating an ethical code
(but m ay be exp elled from or c ensured by the engineering society)

Are Engineering Codes Needed? NO:
–Engineers are capable of fending for themselves

–Common law is available to defend in ethic al disputes
–Offended public can s eek redress through c ourts
Are Engineering Codes Needed? YES:
–Engineers have f ew or no res ources to defend themselves in an ethic al dispute

–Common law is available in reality only with great diff iculty
–Conversely, the public has similar problems in s eeking redress through legal
channels
Objections to Existing Engineering Codes of Ethics:
–Relatively f ew engineers are members of engineering societies.

–Non-members don‟t necessarily f ollow the ethical codes.
–Many engineers either don‟t know that the codes exist, or have not read them.
W hich ethic al codes apply?
–Depending upon your discipline and organizational affiliations, you may be bound
by one, two or even more et hic al codes:
•Discipline related (ASME, IEEE, ASCE, IIE etc.)
•N ational Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE)
•Employee c odes (corporation, university, etc.)
•Union Codes
Engineering Et hics
Our engineering et hics codes are derived from a W estern cultural tradition
–Ancient Greeks
–Judeo-Christian religions
–Philos ophers and thinkers (e.g. Locke, Kant, Mills)
The Hammurabi C ode
If a builder has built a house f or a man and has not made his work sound, and the
house he has built has f allen down and so c aus ed the death of the householder, that
builder shall be put to deat h. If it causes the death of the householder‟s son, they
shall put the builder‟s s on to death….
(Hammurabi, King of Babylon, 1758 B.C.)

Code of Ethics for Engineers
Accreditation B oard f or Engineering and Technology
(ABET)
The Fundamental Principles
Engineers shall uphold and advance t he integr ity, honor, and dignity of the
engineering profess ion by:
• using their knowledge and skill for the enhancement of the human race;
• being honest and impartial and serving w ith fidelity the public, their employers, and
clients;
• striving to increase the competence and prestige of the engineering profession.
• supporting the professional and tec hnic al societies of their discipline.
The Fundament al C annons
Engineers shall
• hold paramount the saf ety, health, and welfare of t he public in the performance of
their professional duties;
• per form s ervice only in ar eas of their competence;
• issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner;
• act in professional matt ers for each employer or client as fait hful agents or trust ees,
and shall avoid conf licts of interest;
• build their professional reputations on the merits of the ir services and shall not
compete unfairly w ith others
• act in such manner as to uphold and enhance the honor, integrity and dignity of the
profess ion;
• continue their professional development throughout their careers, and shall provide
opportunit ies f or the professional development of those engineers under their
s upervision.
CODES OF ETHICS - ROLES OR FUNCTIONS
1. Inspiration and Guidance:

 Codes pr ovide positive stimulus f or ethic al c onduct and helpf ul guidance by
using positive language.
 Codes should be brief to be effective and hence such codes of f er only general
guid ance.
 Supplementary statements or guidelines to give specific directions are added
by a number of societies or professional bodies.
2. S upport:
 Codes give positive support to those s eeking to act ethic ally.
 An engineer under pressure to act unethically c an use one of the publicly
proclaimed codes to get support for his stand on specific moral issues.
 Codes also ser ve as legal support f or engineers.

3. Deterrence and discipline:
 Codes can be us ed as a basis f or conducting investigations on unethic al
conduct.
 They also provide a det errent f or engineers to act immor ally.
 Engineers who are punished by professional societies f or pr oven unethical
behaviour by revoking the rights to prac tice as engineers are also subjected to
public ridicule and loss of respect fr om c olleagues and loc al community.
 This helps to pr oduce ethic al conduct even though this c an be viewed as a
negative way of motivation.
4. Education and mutual under standing:

The codes c an be us ed f or discussion and reflection on mor al issues and thereby
improve the understanding of mor al responsibilities among all engineers, clients,
public and good organizations.
5. Co ntributi ng to the profession’s pu blic image:

Codes pres ent the engineering profession as an et hic ally committed society in t he
eyes of the public thus enhancing their image.
6. Protecting status quo:

Codes establish et hic al conventions, which c an help promote an agr eed upon
minimum level of ethic al c onduct.
7. Promoting business interests:

Codes c an place unwarranted restraints of c ommerce on business dealings.
Relative importance of the various functions of codes of ethics
 The perspective of engg as social experim entation clearly emphasizes the

primary role „supporti ve f unction‟ of the codes of et hics. This is so bec ause,
only this support enables engineers, speak out clearly and openly their views,
to those affected by engg projec ts.
 The, „inspiration and guidance‟ and „educ ative‟ f unctions are also im portant in
prom oting mutual understanding and in motivating engineers to act with
higher moral standards.
 The „disciplinary‟ f unction in engg codes is of sec ondary importanc e. Those
with unethic al c onduct when expos ed are subject to law. Developing
elaborate paralegal procedures within professional societies duplicates a
f unction which c an be done bett er by legal system. At best, codes should try
to discipline engineers in ar eas which are not cover ed by law.
 The worst abuse of codes has been to restrict honest mor al effort in the nam e
of „preserving profession‟s public mage‟ and „protecting status quo‟. The best
way to incr ease trust is by enc ouraging and aiding engineers to speak fr eely
and res ponsibly about public safety.

Limitations of Codes of Ethics
1. Codes are res trict ed to general and vague wording. They c annot be straightaway
applied to all situations. It is impossible to fores ee the full range of moral problems
that can arise in a c omplex prof ession like engg.
2. It is easy f or dif f erent clauses of codes to come into c onf lict with each other.
Usually codes pr ovide no guidance as to which clause should have priority in those
cases, cr eating mor al dilemmas.
3. They c annot ser ve as the final mor al authority f or professional conduct. If the code
of a professional society is taken as the last wor d, it means that we are getting into a
particular s et of conventions i.e. ethic al c onventionalism.
4. Andrew Oldenquist and Edward S lowt er pointed out how the exist ence of separate
codes for different professional soc iet ies can give members the feeling that ethical
conduct is more relative than it is and that it c an c onvey to the public the v iew that
none is „really right‟. The current codes are by no means perfect but are definitely
steps in the right direction.
The pro blems of law in engineering
1. The gr eatest pr oblem of law in engg is of „minim al compliance‟. Engineers and

employers c an s earch for loop holes in the law to barely keep to its letter while
violating its s pir it. Engineers will tend to ref er to standard r eadymade specific ations
r ather than come up with innovative ideas. Minimal compliance led to the tragedy of
the „Titanic‟.
2. C ontinually updating laws and regulations may be c ounter-pr oductive and will
make law always lag behind technology. This also ov erburdens the rules and
regulators.
3. Many laws are „non-laws‟ i.e. laws without enf orc eable s anctions. These merely
ser ve as window dressing, fr equently gives a f alse s ense of security to the public.
4. The opponents of the law may burden it int entionally with many unr easonable
pr ovisions that a repeal will not be f ar of f .
5. Highly powerful organizations, like the government c an violate the laws when they
think they c an get away with it by inviting would be challengers, to face them in
lengthy and costly c ourt proc eedings. This also cr eates f rustration with the law.
Role of law in engineering
 It is wrong to write of f rule-making and rule following as futile. G ood laws,

eff ectively enf orced, clearly produce benef its.
 R easonable minimum st andards are ensur ed of professional conduct.
 It also pr ovides a s elf-interest ed motive f or most people and c orpor ations to
c omply.

 They also ser ve as powerf ul support and def ense f or those who wish to act
ethic ally in situations where ethical conduct might not be welc ome.
 Viewing engineering as social experimentation pr ovides engineers with a
better perspective on laws and regulations.
 Precise rules and enf orc eable s anctions are appropriate in cases of et hical
misc onduct that involve violations of well established and regularly
r eexamined procedures that have as their purpose the safety of public.
 In ar eas of experiment ation, rules must not att empt to c over all possible
outcomes of an experim ent, nor must they f orce the engineer to adopt a
rigidly specif ied course of action. Here the regulations should be br oad based
guidelines but should hold the engineer accountable f or his or her decisions.
UNIT IV – SAFETY, RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS
SAFETY AND R ISK
Imagine you are a fresh graduate.
You get a job as an engineer in a large at omic power plant.
 W ould you take it or not?

 Under what conditions would you take it?
 Under what conditions would you not?
 W hy?
People as Consumers:
 Active Consumers: directly involve themselves e. g., mowing the lawn,

washing clothes or t oas ting br ead.
 Passive Consumers: have less choice and less c ontr ol e.g., W ater, Electricit y,
P etr ol,
 Bystanders: e. g., exposed to P ollution from unk nown s ources
.W hat is safe to E ntrepreneurs, may not be so to Engineers. e.g., Pilots: "Indian

Airports are not safe; Low Vision in Fog“
W hat is safe to Engineers, may not be so to Public. e.g ., T op loading W ashing

Machine
Typic ally s everal groups of people are involved in safety m att ers but have their own
interests at stak e. Each group m ay differ in what is safe and what is not.
Concept of Safety
1. “A ship in harbor is saf e, but that is not what ships are built f or” – John A.
Shedd
2. „A thing is safe if its risks are judged to be accept able‟ - W illiam W . Lawr ence

 W e buy an ill-designed Ir on box in a sale-> Underestimating risk

 W e judge fluoride in water can k ill lots of people -> O verestim ating risk
 W e hire a t axi, without thinking about its safety -> Not estimating risk
 H ow does a judge pass a judgement on safety in these 3 cases?
….So, this definit ion won't do in real life.
Then, what is acc eptable also depends upon the individual or group‟s value
jud g m ent. Hence a better, working definition of conc ept of saf ety c ould be,
“A thing is safe (to a c ertain degr ee) with respect to a given pers on or group at a
given time if, were they f ully aware of its risks and expressing their most s ettled
values, they would judge those risks to be acc eptable (to that c ert ain degree).” -
Mike Mart in and Roland Schinzinger
A thing is NOT SA FE if it exposes us to unacc eptable danger or hazard
RISK is the potential that som ething unwanted and harmf ul may occur.
a. W e take a risk when we undertake something or use a product that is
not safe.
Risk in technology could include dangers of
b. bodily har m,
c. economic loss, or
d. environmental degradation.
 Some m ay assume that “safety” is a c oncrete c onc ept, while “ris k” is a vague,
hypothetic al c onc ept
 In fact, its the other way ar ound
 Risks always exist. But true safety never exists, exc ept in hypothetical
situations
 S o, risk is rea lity, safety is f antasy
W hat degr ee of risk is acceptable?
Safety is a matt er of how people would f ind risks accept able or unacc eptable, if
they knew the risks, and are basing their judgm ents on their most settled value
perspective.
S o, to this ext ent, it is objective.
Perspectives differ.
To this extent, it is subjective.
S o, Safety is 'acceptable risk'.
Accept able Risk
„A risk is accept able when those affect ed are generally no longer ( or not)
apprehensive about it.‟

Apprehens ion (i.e. anxiety) depends largely on fact ors such as

 whether the risk is assumed volunt arily.
 how the probabilities of harm ( or benefit) is perceived.
 job-related or other pressures that c auses people to be aware of or to
overlook risks.
 whether the defects of a risk y activity or s ituation are immediately notic eable
or close at hand .
 whether the pot ential victims are identifiable beforehand.
Voluntary risk and Control
A person is s aid to take „VOLUNTARY RISK‟

-when he is subjected to risk by either his own actions or acti on taken by others and
-volunt eers to take that risk without any apprehension.
-For example, J ohn and Ann Smith enjoy riding mot orcycles over rough gr ound for
amusement. They take voluntary risk, part of being engaged in such a potentially
dangerous sport.
Connect ed to this notion of voluntarism is the matt er of Control. In the example cit ed,
the Smiths are aware of the high probability of accident figures in such a spor t, but
they display characteristic ally unrealistic confidence of most people when they
believe the dangers to be under their control. In terms of engineering as social
experimentation, people are more w illing to be the subjects of their own ex perime nts
than of som eone else‟s (whether social experim ent or not).
Chaunc ey St arr informs us that individuals are more r eady to assume voluntary risks
than involuntary risks, even when voluntary risks are 1000 times more likely to
produce a fatality than the involuntary ones.
 A DISASTER = A s eriously disr uptive event + A state of unprepared ness.

 e.g., Titanic collision with an iceber g, at night: Emergency
 Fewer lifeboats, inadequate training and warnings of icebergs
unheeded -> Disast er.
Effect of information on risk assessments
The manner in which information necessary f or decisi on making is pres ent ed can
greatly influence how risks are perceived. Consider this example:
In a particular case of disaster management, the only options available are pr ovided
in 2 different ways to the public f or one to be chos en (where lives of 600 people are
at stake).

Alternate 1
If pr ogram A is followed, 200 people will be s aved. If Pr ogram B is followed, 1/3
probability is 600 people will be s aved and 2/3 probability that nobody will be s aved.
Response
72% of the t arget gr oup chose option A and 28% option B
Alternate 2
If pr ogr am A is f ollowed, 400 people will die. If Pr ogr am B is f ollowed, 1/3 probability
is that nobody will die and 2/3 probability that 600 people will die.
Response
This tim e only 22% of the target gr oup chose option A and 78% option B
Conclusion:
1. The option perceived as yielding f irm gain will tend to be pref err ed over those
from which gains are perc eived as risky or only probable.
2. Option emphasizing firm losses will tend to be avoided in f avour of those
whose chances of success are perceived as probable.
Secondary Costs of Products
Cost of products is High, if designed unsafely

 R eturns and W arr anty Expenses
 Loss of Customer G oodwill
 Cost of litigation
 Loss of Customers due to injuries in using it
 Cost of rewor k, lost time in attending to design problems
Manufacturer‟s understanding of the risk in a pr oduct is necessary:

 To help r educe sec ondary costs
 To know the possible risk f or purposes of pricing, disclaimers, legal t erms and
conditions, etc.
 To know the cost of reducing the risks
 To take a decision before finalizing the design.
Buyer‟s underst anding of the risk in a product is necessary:

 To judge whether he/she wants to take the risks
 To judge whether the „risk vs. costs‟ justifies taking the risk.
‘JOB RELATED RISK S’
 Many work ers are tak ing risks in their jobs in their stride like being exposed to
asbestos.
 Exposure to risks on a job is in one s ense of voluntary nat ure since one can
always refuse to submit to the work or m ay have c ontr ol over how the job is
done.

 But gener ally workers have no choice other than what they are told to do
since they want to stick to the only job available to them.
 But they are not generally inf ormed about the exposure to toxic subst ances
and other dangers which are not readily s een, smelt, heard or other wise
sensed.
 Occupational health and safety r egulations and unions can have a better say
in c orrecting these situations but still things are f ar below expect ed safety
standards.
 Engineers while designing work stations must take into account the casual
attitude of workers on safety (esp. when they are paid on piece rat e).
Problems faced by engineers about public concept of safety
The optimistic attitude that things that are familiar, that have not caused harm before
and over which we have some contr ol present no risks.
The s erious shock people f eel when an accident kills or m aims people in large
numbers or harms t hose we k now, even though statistically speaking such accidents
might occur infrequently.
‘Saf ety in a commodity comes with a price’ – Explain.
Absolute safety is never possible to attain and safety can be improved in an

engineering product only with an increase in c ost.
On the other hand, unsafe products inc ur secondary costs to the produc er beyond
the prim ary (pr oduction) costs, like warr anty costs loss of goodwill, loss of
customers, litigation costs, downtime costs in manufacturing, etc.
Figure indicates that P- Primary costs are high for a highly safe (low risk) pr oduct
and S- Secondary costs are high for a highly risky (low safe) product.
If we draw a cur ve T=P +S as shown, there is a point at which costs are minimum
below which the cost c annot be r educ ed.
If the risk at Minimum Tot al Cost Point is not acceptable, then the pr oduc er has to
choose a lower acceptable risk value in which case the total cost will be higher than
M and the product designed acc ordingly.
It should now be clear that „safety comes with a price‟ only

.
Knowl edge of risk for better saf ety
 Robert St ephens on writes that all the accidents, the harms c aus ed and the
means us ed to repair the damage should be recorded f or the benef it of the
younger Members of Prof ession.
 A f aithful acc ount of those accidents and the damage c ont ainment was r eally
more valuable than the description of successf ul work.
 Hence it is imper ative that knowledge of risks will def initely help to attain
better saf ety.
 But it should be borne in mind, that st ill gaps remain, bec ause
i)there are some industries where information is not freely shared and
ii)there are always new applications of old technology that render the
available inf ormation less useful.
Uncertainties encountered in design process
 A decision on m aximising profit or maximising the r eturn on investm ent.

 Unc ertainties about applic ations lik e dynamic loading inst ead of static
loading, vibr ations, wind speeds.
 Uncertainties regarding materials and skills required in the manufacturing.
 Changing economic r ealities.
 Unfamiliar envir onment al c onditions like very low temperature.
 The available st andard data on it ems like steel, resist ors, insulat ors,
optical glass, etc are bas ed on statistic al averages only.
 Due to the inher ent nature of processes, all c ompts have a tolerance in
design leading to the probability st atistics by which ass emblies‟ capabilit y
is assess ed.
Testing strategies for safety
Some commonly used t esting methods:

 Using the past experience in checking the design and perf orm ance.
 Prototype testing. Here the one pr oduct test ed may not be r epresentative of
the population of products.
 Tests simulated under approximately actual conditions to know the
performance flaws on saf ety.
 R outine quality assur ance tests on production runs.
The above testing procedures are not always c arried out properly. Hence we c annot
trust the testing procedures uncritically. Some tests are also destructive and
obviously it is impossible to do destructive testing and improve safety.
In such cases, a simulation that traces hypothetic al risky outcomes c ould be applied.
 Scenario Analysis (Event -> C onsequences)
 Failure Modes & Effects Analysis (Failure modes of each component)

 Fault Tree Analys is (System Failure -> Possible Caus es at c omponent level)
 W hat if there is a combination of factors?
 All Analysis pre-suppose a thorough understanding of the physical
system
Failure modes and effect analysis (FM EA) :
This appr oach systematic ally examines the failure modes of each component ,
without however, focusing on relationships am ong the elements of a c omplex
system.
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) :
A syst em f ailure is propos ed and then events are traced back to possible c auses at
the c omponent level. The reverse of the f ault-tr ee analysis is „event – tree analysis‟.
This method most eff ectively illustrates the disciplined appr oach requir ed to c apture
as much as possible of everything that af f ects proper functioning and safety of a
complex system.
Risk Benef it Analysis
Ethic al Implications
 W hen is someone entitled to im p ose a risk on another in view of a suppos ed
benef it to others?
 C onsider the worst case scenarios of pers ons expos ed to maximum risks
while they are r eaping only minimum benef its. Are their rights vio lated?
 Are they pr ovided s afer alt ernatives?
 Engineers should k eep in mind that risks to k nown persons are perceived
differ ently from statistic al risks
 Engineers may have no c ontrol over grievance redress al.
Concept ual difficulties in Risk-Benefit Analy sis
Both risks and benef its lie in future

 H eavy discounting of f uture bec ause the very low pres ent values of
cost/benef its do not give a true picture of f uture sufferings.
 Both have related unc ertainties but difficult to arrive at expected values
 W hat if benef its accrue to one party and risks to anot her?
 C an we express risks & benef its in a common set of units?
 e.g. Risks can be express ed in one set of units (deaths on the
high way) and benefits in another (speed of travel)?
Many projects, which are highly beneficial to the public, have to be safe also.
Hence these projects c an be justified using RISK-BENEFIT analysis. In these

studies, one should find out

i) W hat are the risks involved?

ii) W hat are the benef its that would accrue?
iii) W hen would benef its be derived and when risks have to be faced?
iv) W ho are the ones to be benefit ed and who are the ones subjected to risk-are they
the same s et of people or different.
The issue here is not, s ay, cost-effective design but it is only cost of risk taking Vs
benefit analysis. Engineers should f irst recomm end the project feasibility based on
risk-benef it analysis and once it is justif ied, th en they m ay get into cost-effectiveness
without incr easing the risk visualized.
In all this, engineers should ask themselves t his ethic al question: „Under what
conditions, is someone in society ent itled to impose a risk on someone else on
behalf of a supposed benef it to others.‟
Difficulties in assessing Personal Risks
• Individuals are r eady to assume voluntary risks than involuntary risks.
• The dif f iculty here is gener ally in assessing personal risks which are
involuntary.
• The problem of quantification of risk rais es innumerable problems.
• For example, how to assign a rupee value to one‟s life. There is no over the
counter trade in lives.
• E ven for a sale, it has to be clear under what conditions the sale is to take
place.
• If one buys a kg of rice it matt ers whether it is just one additional purchase
one makes regularly or it is the f irst rice purchase aft er quite sometime.
• E ven when compensations are made to people expos ed to involuntary risk,

the basis on which it is made or even the intensit y of risk c ould be different for
different people.
• As of now, the one suggestion c ould be to employ an open procedure,

overs een by trained ar bit ers, in each cas e, where risk to individuals is to be
studied and remedied.
Public Risk and Public Acceptance
 Risks and benef its to public are more easily determined than to individuals
 N ational Highway Traffic Safety Administr ation (NHTSA)- proposed a value
f or life bas ed on:
 loss of f uture income
 other costs associated with the accident

 estimate of quantifiable losses in social welfare resulting fr om a fat ality

 NOT a proper basis f or det ermining the optim al expenditure allocated
to s aving lives
Accounting publicly for benefits and risks
Engineers should acc ount publicly f or benefits and risks in the f ollowing manner:
 Engineers must rem ain as objective as hum anly pos s ible in their
investigations and c onclusions.
 They must also s tate openly any personal biases that they may have about
the project being investigated.
 Engineers, even if they are ack nowledged experts, m ay not have complete
k now ledge of the issues at hand.
 They should, if necessar y, adm it their lack of knowledge, in any particular
ar ea publicly.
 A willingness to admit uncertainty and also to reveal methodology and
sourc es particularly when numeric al data is presented.
 The way st atistic al information is pres ented c an cr eate misc onc eptions in the
public mind. Hence it should be presented in a way to improve realistic
interpretations.
 They must consider the v iews of the parties affected by the project under
study bef ore coming to c onclusions.
 The type of action taken should be mor ally evaluated regardless of its
consequences. If it is wrong to violate c ertain rights, then f iguring out the
benefit of the c onsequenc es of doing so is irrelevant.
Difficulties in establishing Saf eguards
 Inc omplete knowledge of the engineering subject

 Refus al to face hard questions c aus ed by lack of knowledge
 False s ense of security
 e.g. Nuclear waste dispos al problem
 C aut ion in st ating probabilities of rare events
 Varying understanding of risk bas ed on pres entation of f acts
 Risk ass ess ments bas ed on incorrect/unacceptable assumptions/data
 Only a few pers ons/groups participate in the exercise
Some of the ways by which engineers m ay try to reduce risks.
 In all the ar eas of works, engineers should give top priority f or pr oduct safety.
 They should believe that accidents are c aus ed by danger ous c onditions that
can be c orrect ed. Negligence and operator errors are not the principal c auses
of accidents.
 If a product is made saf e, the initial costs need not be high if safety is built
into a pr oduct f rom the beginning. It is the design changes done at a later

date that are costly. E ven then life cycle costs c an be made lower f or the
redes igned or retrofitted product (for safety).
 If safety is not built into the or iginal design, people c an be hurt during testing
stage its elf.
 They should get out of the thinking that warnings about hazards are adequate
and that insur ance coverage is cheap er than planning f or safety.
 All it takes to make a product safe is to have dif f erent perspective on the
design problem with emphasis on safety.
E xamples of Improved Safety

 Magnetic door c atch intr oduc ed on refrigerat ors
 Pr event death by asphyxiation of children accident ally tr apped inside
 The c atch now permits the door to opened from inside easily
 Cheaper than older types of latches
 D ead-man Handle f or Drivers in trains
 Semaphore signaling
 Volks wagen's car safety belt
 Attachm ent on the door so that belt automatic ally goes in place on
entry
L i a bilit y
Earlylogic and s ocial philosophy: (Richard C . Vaughan)

 „Caveat Empt or‟: buyer beware
 E xamine what you want before you buy
 If he is negligent, he suff ers the bad bargain.
 Law will not aid those who are negligent
 „Privity of Contract‟: Us er, if he is not a party to the c ontract, has no rights for
any claim ( us er buys fr om the retailer and not fr om the manufacturer).
Gradually....
Manufacturer was made liable f or injuries resulting fr om negligence in the
design/manufacture
 T he new law: c onc ept of Strict Liabilit y was established in the case „Green
man vs. Yuba Power Products‟ in California.
 If the product s old is def ective, the manufactur er is liable
f or any harm that results to us ers
Implications to Engineer s:
 Engineers must weigh chances of defect caus ing injury against cost of
minimiz ing defects
 Minimal compliance is ins ufficient – adhering to accepted practices &

standards not enough
 St andards are mere checklists - use them cr eatively and judgm entally

 Engineers can be sued personally even when acting according to guidelines

set by employers
 e.g. One county highway engineer was sued f or failure to repair r oads -- had to
pay $2 million
 Some Cos. protect their engineers and allow themselves to be sued f or such
money damages
 Independent engineers c an write liability limits into their c ontracts
 Good knowledge of liability is necessary f or engineers
‘S AFE EXIT’
It is almost impossible to build a completely safe pr oduct or one that will never fail.
W hen there is a f ailure of t he product SA FE E X IT should be pr ovided.
Safe exit is to assure that
i) when a product fails, it will fail safely,

ii) that the pr oduct c an be abandoned safely and iii) that the us er can safely escape
the product.
More than the questions of who will build, install, maint ain and pay f or a safe exit, the
most import ant question is who will recognize the need for a safe exit. This
responsibility should be an integral part of the experiment al proc edure.
Some examples of pr oviding „S AFE E XIT‟:
• Ships need lifeboats with sufficient spaces f or all passengers and crew
members.
• Buildings need usable fire escapes
• Oper ation of nuclear power plants calls f or r ealistic m eans of evacuating
nearby communities
• Pr ovisions are needed f or safe dispos al of danger ous mat erials and pr oducts.
Colleagiality & Its Elements
„Collegiality is a kind of connect edness gr ounded in respect f or professional

expertise and in a commitment to the goals and values of the pr ofess ion and as
such, collegiality includes a dispos ition to support and co-oper ate with one‟s
c olleagues‟.
- Craig Ihara

The c entral elements of collegiality are respect, commitment, connec tedness and co-
operation.
Res pect: Acknowledge the worth of other engineers engaged in producing socially
useful and safe products.
Commitment: Share a devotion to the mor al ideals inher ent in the practice of
engineering.
Connectedness: Aware of being part of a co-operative undertaking cr eated by
shared commitments and expertise.
Collegiality, like most virtues, c an be misus ed and dist orted.
It should not be reduced to „group interest‟ but should be a shared devot ion f or
public good.
It is not defaming colleagues, but it does not c lose the eyes to unethical
practices of the co-professionals, either.
Classifications of Loyalty
 Agency-Loyalty
o Fulfill one‟s c ontractual duties to an employer.

o Duties are particular tasks for which one is paid
o Co-operating with c olleagues
o Following legitimate aut hor ity within the organization.
 Identification-Loyalty :
o It has to do with at titudes, emotions and a s ense of personal identity.

o S eeks to m eet one‟s mor al duties with personal attachment and affirmation.
o It is against detesting their employers and c ompanies, and do work
reluctantly and horribly (this is c onstrued as dis loyalty)
This means
o A void c onf licts of interest,
o Inf orm employers of any poss ible c onf licts of int er est,
o Protect c onfidential inf ormation,
o Be honest in making estimates,
o Admit one‟s err ors, etc.
Loyalty - O bligati on of E ngineers
Agency-Loy alty
o Engineers are h ired to do their duties.

o H ence obligated to employers within proper limits
Identification-Loyalty
Obligatory on two conditions;

1. W hen some important goals are met by and through a group in which the
engineers participate
2. W hen employees are tr eat ed fairly, receiving the share of benef its and
burd ens.
But clearly, identific ation-loyalty is a v irtue and not strictly an obligation.
Relationship - Professionalism and Loyalty
1. Acting on professional c ommitme nts to the public is more ef fective to ser ve a

company than just following c ompany orders.
2. Loyalty to employers m ay not m ean obey ing one‟s immediate supervisor.
3. Professional obligations to both an employer and to the public might

strengthen rather than contradict each other.
Need for Authority
Authority is needed since

a) Allowing ever yone to exercise uncontrolled indiv idual discretion creates chaos
(c onfusi on).
b) Clear lines of authority identif ies areas of personal responsibility and
acc ounta b ility.
Institutional Authority and Expert Aut hority
Institutional authority
„The institutional right given to a pers on to exercise power bas ed on the res ources of
the instit ution‟.
o It is ac quired, exercis ed and defined within institutions.

o It is given to individuals to perf orm their institutional duties assigned within the
organisation. There is not always a perfect m atch between the authority
gr anted and the qualifications needed to exercise it.
Expert authority
„The possession of special knowledge, skill or c ompet ence to perform some task or
to give sound advice‟.
Engineers may have expert authority but their institutional authorit y, may only be, to
provide management with analysis of possible ways to perform a tec hnic al tas k, af t er
which they are restricted to following management‟s directive about which option to

pursue. In large companies, engineers, advisors and c onsult ants in staff f unction
carry expert authority, while institutional aut hor ity is vested only with line managers.
Authority Vs Power
Ineffective persons, even if vest ed with authority by their institution, may not be able
to summon the power their position allows them to exercis e. On the other hand,
people who are effective m ay be able to wield greater power that goes beyond the
authority attached to the pos itions they hold. Highly respect ed engineers of pr oven
int egrity belong to this class.
Aut hor ity - Morally justified
Observations on authority.
o An emp loyer who has institutional authority may direct engineers to do

som ething that is not morally justified.
o Engineers may f eel that they have an inst itutional duty to obey a directive that
is morally unjustified, b ut their moral d uty, all things c onsider ed, is not to obey.
o To decide whether a specific act of exercis ing institutional aut hor ity is morally
justified, we need to know whether the institutional goals are themselves
morally permissible or desirable and whether that act violates basic moral
duties.
‘Z one Of Acceptance’ of Authority
„A subordinate is said to accept authority whenever he permits his behaviour to be

guided by the decision of a superior, without independently examining the m erits of
that decision‟
- Herbert Sim on
o Simon notes that all employees tend to have a „zone of acceptance‟ in which
they are willing to acc ept their employer‟s authority.
o Within that zone, an individual, relaxing his own critical faculties, perm its the
decision of the employer to guide him.
o Employees gener ally do not make an issue of questionable incidents on

moralit y, out of a sense of responsibility to give their em ployer leeway within
which to operate and oft en not to risk their jobs.
o The problem increases when employees slowly expand the boundaries of

tolerance and rationalize it.
This only shows that engineers should nev er stop critically rev iewing the employer‟s
directives especially on moral issues.

‘Faithful Agent Argument’
National Society of Prof essional Engineers (N SPE) Code states,
“The engineer ………will act in professional matt ers f or client, or employer as a

faithful agent or trustee…… ………He will not actively participate in strikes, picket
lines or other coercive act ion”
m eaning that when one is a f aithful trust ee of one‟s em ployer he cannot actively
participate in any collective f orc ible action.
Board of Ethical Rev iew argued that engineers have a higher standard than s elf
interest and that their ethic al duty is to act for their employer as a f aithf ul agent or
trustee.
Collective bargaining is inconsistent with loyalty to employers bec ause it

o is against the desires of the employer
o uses f orce or c oercion against the employer and
o involves c ollective and organized opposition.
But every instance of such c onduct need not be unethical.
An example:
Thr ee engineers sincerely f eel that they are underpaid. Af t er their r epres entations to
their bosses are in vain, they thr eat en their employer, politely, that they would s eek
employment elsewher e. Her e, even though, t hey act against the desires of their
employer and have act ed c ollectively, they have not acted unethically or violated
their duty.
Conclusion: „Faithful agency ‟ only concerns with per forming one‟s duty but does not
mean that safet y, salary and other economic al benef its cannot be negot iated fr om a
position of strengt h. Employee‟s duty to employer does not mean unlimited sacrifice
of s elf-interest.
„Public Servic e Argument‟- Collective bargaining.
o „Public Ser vice Argument‟ is an argument against c ollective bargaining.

o The paramount duty of engineers is to serve the public.
o Unions, by definition, promo te the int erests of their members and whenever
there is a clash of interests, the interest of the gener al public is ignor ed by
them. Though the argument is a valid one, it looks at the worst possible
scenarios with un i ons and decides that engineering un ions act only
irresponsibly.
o A body of engineers c an promote engineers‟ interest within limits set by
professional concern f or the public good.
Benefits of Collective B argaining.
a) Unions have cr eated healthy salar ies and high standard of liv ing of
employees.

b) They give a s ense of participation in c ompany decision mak ing.

c) They are a good balance to the power of employers to fire employees at will.
d) They pr ovide an effective gr ievance redressal proc edure f or employee
c ompl aints.
Harms Caused by Collective Bargai ning.
a) Unions are devastat ing the economy of a c ountr y, being a main source of
inf lation
b) W ith unions, there is no congenial (friendly), c ooperative decis ion making.
c) Unions does not promote quality performance by making job pr omot ion and
retention based on seniority.
d) They enc ourage unrest and strained relations bet ween employees and
employers.
‘Confidentiality or confidential information’
o Inf ormation c onsider ed desir able to be kept secr et.

o Any information that the employer or client would lik e to have k ept secr et in
order to compete effectively against business rivals.
o This information includes how bus iness is run, its products, and suppliers,
which directly affects the ability of the com pany to compete in the market place
o He lps the c ompetitor to gain adv antage or c atch up
Privileged inf ormation, Propriet ary inf ormation and Patent s.
o Priv ileged informat ion:

 „Inform ation available only on the basis of special priv ilege‟ such as
granted to an employee working on a special assignment.
o Proprietary information:
 Inf ormation that a c ompany owns or is the propr iet or of.
 This is prim arily us ed in legal sense.
 Also called Trade Secret. A trade secr et c an be virtually any type of
information that has not become public and which an employer has taken
steps to keep secret.
o Pat ents:
 Differ from trade secrets.
 Legally protect specific products f rom being manufactur ed and sold by
competitors without the express permiss ion of the patent holder.
 They have the draw back of being public and c ompetitors may eas ily work
around them by cr eating alt ernate designs.
Obligation of Confidentiality

1. Bas ed on ordinary mor al c onsiderations:
I. Respect for autonomy:

o Recogniz ing the legitimate control over private inf ormation (individuals or
corporations).
o This control is required to maintain their privacy and protect their self-
interest.
II. Respect for Promise:

o Respecting pr omises in t erms of employment contracts not to divulge
certain information c onsidered sens itive by the employer
III. Regard for public well being:

o Only when there is a confidence that the physician will not reveal
information, the patient will have the trust to confide in him.
o Similarly only when companies maintain some degr ee of conf identiality
concerning their products, the benef its of competitiveness within a f ree
market are promoted.
2. Bas ed on Major Ethic al Theories:

oAll theories profess that employers have moral and inst itut ional rights to
decide what information about their organization should be released
publicly.
oThey acquire these rights as part of their responsibility to protect the
interest of the organization.
oAll the theories, rights et hics, duty ethics and utilitarianism justify this
confidentiality but in dif f er ent ways.
Effect of Change of Job on C onfidentiality
o Employees are obliged to protect c onfidential inform ation regarding former

employment, aft er a change of job.
o The conf identia lity trust between employer and employee continues beyond
the period of employment.
o But, the employee cannot be forc ed not to seek a change of job.
o The employer‟s right to keep the trade secr ets c onfidential by a f ormer
employee should be accept ed at the same time, the employee‟s right to s eek
career advanc ement cannot also be denied.
Conflict of Inter est
Conflict of Interest arises when two c onditions are met:
1. The professional is in a relationship or a role that r equires exercising good

judgment on behalf of the interests of an employer or client and

2. The professional has some additional or side interest that c ould thr eaten
good judgment in ser ving the interests of the em ployee or client. E.g. W hen an
engineer is paid based on a percentage of t he cost of the design and there is
no incentive for him to cut costs- The distrust c aus ed by this situation
compromis es the engineers‟ abilit y to cut costs and calls into question his
judgement.
„An act of gift‟ and „An act of bribe‟
„A gift is a bribe if you c an‟t eat, dr ink or smoke it in a day‟.
„If you think that your off er of acc ept ance of a par ticular gift would have grave or
merely embarrass ing c onsequences for your company if made public , then the gift
should be c onsider ed a bribe‟.
„Br ibe c an be said to be a substantial amount of money or goods of f er ed beyond a

stat ed business c ontract with the aim of w inning an advantage in gaining or k eeping
the contract‟.
Here „substantial‟ m eans that which is suf f ic ient to distort the judgment of a t ypical
person.
Conflict of Interest created by Int erest in other companies
 W hen one works actually for the compet itor or subc ontract or as an
employee or cons ultant.
 Having partial ownership or substantial stock holdings in the
competit or‟s business.
 It may not arise by merely having a spouse work ing for sub-
contractor to one‟s company, but it will arise if one‟s job also includes granting
c ontracts to that s ubc ontractor.
 Tempting customers away f rom their current employer, while still
working f or them to form their own competing bus iness.
 M oonlighting usually cr eates conflicts when working f or com petit ors,
suppliers or customers but does not conflict when working for others without
affecting the pres ent employer‟s business.
„Moonlight ing‟ means work ing in one‟s spare time for another employer.
Conflicts of Int erest created by Insider inf ormation
o Using inside information to set-up a business opportunity f or oneself or

family or friends .
o Buying stock in the company f or which one works is not objectionable
but it should be bas ed on the s ame information available to the pub lic.
o The use of any c ompany sec rets by employee to secure a personal gain
threatens the interest of the c ompany.

Avoi ding Confli cts Of I nterests
o Taking guidance from Company Policy

o In the abs ence of such a policy taking a second opinion from a coworker or
manager. This gives an impression that there no intension on the part of the
engineer to hide anything.
o In the abs ence of either of these options, to examine ones own motives and
use the ethical problem s olving techniques.
o One can look carefully into the professional codes of et hics which uniformly
forbid c onf licts of int erest. Some of these codes have very explicit statements
that can help determine whether or not the situation c onstitutes conf lict of
interest .
Types Of Crime
 Domestic crime
Non-acc idental crime committed by members
of the family
 Professional Crime
W hen crime is pursued as a profess ion or day
to day occupation
 Blue collar cr ime (or) Street cr ime
Crime against person, property (thef t, assault
on a pers on, rape)
 Victimless crime
P ers on who commits the crim e is the vict im of
the crim e. E.g. Drug addiction
 Hate cr ime
Crime done on the banner of religion,
community, linguistics
Occupational Crime
 Occupational crimes are illegal acts made possible through one‟s

lawful employ ment.
 It is the secretive violation of laws regulating work activities.
 W hen c omm itt ed by office work ers or professionals, occupational
crime is c alled „white collar cr ime‟.
People Committing Occupational Crimes
 Usually have high standard of education

 Fr om a non-criminal family background
 Middle class male ar ound 27 years of age (70% of the tim e) with no prev ious
history

 No involvement in drug or alcohol abuse

 Those who had troublesome life experience in the childhood (Blum)
 P eople w ithout firm pr inciples (Spenc er)
 Firms with declining profitability (Coleman, 1994)
 Firms in highly regulated areas and volat ile market -pharmac eutic al,
petroleum industry.(Albanes e, 1995)
Price Fixing
An act was pass ed, which forbade (pr event ed) c ompanies fr om jointly setting prices
in ways that restrain fr ee competit ion and trade. Unfortunately, many s enior people,
well respected and pos itioned were of the opinion that „pric e fixing‟ was good f or their
organizations and the public.
Employees Endangering Lives of Employees
Employers indulge in exposing their employees to safety hazards. They escape

criminal action against them, by paying nominal compensations even if their crimes
are pr oved in c our t. And even t his happens only when the victim sues company for
damages under civil law.
Engineers’ M oral Rights
Engineers‟ mor al rights f all into categories of human, employee, contractual and
profess ional rights.
Professional rights:
The right to f orm and express one‟s pr ofess ional judgment freely
The right to refuse to c arry out illegal and unethical activ ity
The right to talk publicly about one‟s work within bounds s et by c onfidentiality
obligation
The right to engage in the activities of professional soc iet ies
The right to protect the clients and the public from t he dangers that might arise from
one‟s work
The right to prof essional recognition of one‟s services.
Right of Professional Conscience
o There is one basic and generic professional right of engineers, the moral r ight
to exercise responsible professional judgment in pursuing professional
responsibilities.
o Pursuing these responsibilities invol ves ex ercising both technical judgment
and reasoned moral convictions.
o This basic right c an be ref erred to as the right of professional conscience.
Right of C onscientious R efusal

The right of Conscientious refusal is the right to r efuse to engage in unethical

behav iour and to refuse to do so solely because one views it as unethical.
Two situations to be c onsidered.
1. W here there is widely shar ed agreement in profession as to w hether an act is

unethical
Here, prof essionals have a moral right to refuse to participate in such activities.
2. W here there is room f or disagreement among reasonable people over whether an

act is unethical.
Here, it is possible that there c ould be different ethical v iew points fr om the
prof essional and the employer.
In such cases the engineers can have a limited right to turn down assignments that
violates their personal c onscience only in matt ers of gr eat importance such as
threats to human life.
This right also depends on the ability of the employer to r eass ign the engineer to
alt ernate projects without serious economic hardships to the orgn.
The r ight of pr ofess ional consc ience does not extend to the r ight to be paid for not
working.
Right to Recognition
Right to Recognition involves two parts.
The right to r easonable remuneration gives the mor al right f or f ighting against
corporations making good prof its while engineers are being paid poorly. Also is the
case where pat ents are not being rewarded properly by the c orpor ations benefiting
from such patents.
The other right to recognit ion is non-monetary part of rec ognition to the work of
engineers.
But what is reasonable remuneration or reas onab le recognition is a difficult question

and should be resolved by discussions between employees and employers only.
Professional Rights & Ethical Theories
1. Rights Ethics:
o The most basic human right, which needs no justification, as per A. I.Meldon,
is to pursue one‟s legitimate (those that do not violate others‟ rights) interests.
o The right to pursue legitimate interests gives a pers on right to pursue
prof essional moral obligations.

o This may be viewed as a hum an right of c onscience directly derived f rom the
basic human right.
2. D uty Ethics:
o I have a right to somet hing only bec ause others have duties or obligations to
allow me ( and not int erfer e) to do so.
o If we derive the meaning of „others‟ as em ployers, then the basic professional
right is justified by refer ence to others‟ duties to support or not interfere with the
work related exercise of c onscience by professionals.
3. Util itarianism:
o Public good c an be ser ved by allowing professionals to meet their obligations

to the public.
o These obligations arise due to the professional‟s role in promoting public
good.
o The basic goal of producing the most good f or the gr eatest number of people
is enough to justify the right of professional c onscience.
Whistle-blowing and Its Featur es
Whistle blowing is an act of convey ing informat ion about a s ignificant moral problem
by a present or for mer employee, outside approved channels (or against str ong
pressur e) to someone, in a position to take action on the pr oblem.
The features of Whistle blowing are:

• Act of Disclosur e: Intentionally convey ing inf ormation outs ide approved
organizational channels when t he pers on is under pressure not to do so from
higher-ups.
• Topic: The infor mation is believed to conc ern a significant moral problem for
the organization.
• Agent: The person disc losing the inf ormation is an employ ee or former
em p loyee.
• Recipient: The informat ion is c onveyed to a person or organizat ion who can
act on it.
Types of Whistle Blowing
External Whistle blowing: The act of passing on information outside the organisation.
Internal Whistle blow ing: The act of passing on information to someone within the
organization but outside the approved channels.
E ither type is likely to be consider ed as dis loyalty, but the second one is often seen
as less serious than t he latter. From cor porations‟ point of view both are ser ious
because it leads to dist rust, disharmony, and inability of the employ ees to work
together.

Open Whistle blow ing: Individuals openly r evealing their identity as they convey the
information.
Anonymous Whist le blow ing: Individual conveying the inform ation conc eals his/her
identity.
Procedures to be followed before Whistle Blowing
• Except f or extreme em erg enc ies, always try working through normal
organizational channels.
• Be prompt in expressing objections.
• Proc eed in a tactf ul manner with due cons ideration to the feelings of others
involved.
• As much as possible, keep supervisors informed of your actions, both
inform ally and f ormally.
• Be accurate in observations and claims and keep all for mal records
documenting relevant events.
• Consult c olleagues f or advice and also to avoid isolation.
• Consult the ethics committee of your professional society before going outside
the organization.
• Consult a lawyer regarding potential legal liabilities.
A great deal of introspection and ref lection are requir ed before WB. Motive
should neither be for revenge upon fellow employee, supervisor or company nor
in the hope of fut ure gains like book cont racts or speak ing tours etc.
Conditions to be satisfied before Whistle Blowi ng
Richard T. De George suggests the following:
1. The harm that will be done by the pr oduct to the public is ser ious and
considerable.
2. The individual makes his/her c onc ern known to his/her superiors

.
3. If one does not get any proper response fr om immediate superiors, then one
should exhaust the channels that are available w ithin the organizat ion
including the board of directors.
4. One must have doc umented ev idence that would c onv ince a r easonable and
im partial observer that one‟s view of the situation is c orrect and the company
policy is wrong.
5. There must be strong evidence that m aking the inf ormation public will in fact
prevent the threatened serious harm.
Prevention of Whistle Blowing
The f ollowing actions will prevent/reduce whistle blowing:

1. Giving direct access to higher levels of management by announcing „ open

door‟ policies with guar ant ee that t here won‟t be retaliation. Instead such
employees should be rewarded for fostering ethical behav ior in the company.
2. This gives gr eat er fr eedom and promotes open communication within the
organizati on.
3. Cr eation of an Et hics Review Committee with freedom to investigate
complaints and make independent recommendations to top management.
4. Top priority should be given to promote ethical conduct in the organization by
top management.
5. Engineers should be allow ed to discuss in confidence, their mor al concerns
with the ethics c ommittee of their prof essional s ocieties.
6. W hen there are differ ences on et hic al issues between engineers and
management, ethics committee members of the professional societies should
be allowed to ent er into these discussions.
7. Changes and updations in law must be explor ed by engineers, organizations,

prof essional s ocieties and government organizations on a continuous basis.
Employee Rights
Employ ee rights are any rights, mor al or legal, that involve the status of being an
employee.
Employee rights are:
 There should be no discrimination against an employee for criticizing ethic al,

moral or legal policies and prac tices of the organization.
 The organization will not also discriminate against an employee f or enga g ing
in outs ide activit ies or f or objecting to an organizat ion directive that violates
common norms of morality.
 The employee will not be deprived of any enjoyment of r easonable privacy in

his/her workplace.
 No personal informat ion about employees will be collected or kept other than
what is necessary to manage the organization ef f iciently and to meet the legal
requirements.
 No employee who alleges that her/ his rights have been violated will be
disc harged or penalized without a fair hearing by the employer organization.
Some c lear examples: fals ifying data, avoidance on t he s afety of a product

Discrimination
o Discrimination gener ally means pref erence on the grounds of sex, race, skin
colour, age or religious out look.
o In everyday speech, it has come to m ean morally unjustified treatment of
people on arbitrary or irrelevant grounds.
o Therefore to call something „Discrimination” is to condemn it.
o But when the question of justification arises, we will c all it „Pr eferential
Treatment‟.
Intellectual Property Rights
 Int ellectual Property is a pr oduct of the human intellect that has commercial
value
 Many of the rights of the ownership common to r eal and pers onal property are
also common to Intellectual Property
 Int ellectual Property c an be bought, sold, and licensed
 Similarly it c an be protected against theft and infr ingement by others
Patent, Desi gn & Trademark together w it h Copyri ght form TOTAL

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Patent
1. D erived fr om the Latin word „LITTERAE PATENTES‟ which means „Open

Letters‟ or „Open Documents‟ to c onf er rights and privileges.
2. A c ontract between an Inventor and the Government
3. An exclusive privilege monopoly right gr anted by the Governm ent to the
Inventor
4. Invention may be of an Industrial pr oduct or process of manufacture
5. Invention should be new, non-obvious, usef ul and patentable as per Pat ents
Act
6. The right to the inventor is f or limit ed period of time and valid only within the
t erritorial limits of a c ountry of grant.
Examples: a drug compound, a tool, maybe

software effects
DESIGN
 Meant f or beautifying an industrial product to attract the c onsumer public

 Shaping, C onfigur ation or Ornam entation of a vendible Industrial product
 Exclusive „Design Rights‟ to the originat or for a limit ed term

 Patents & design embrace the production stage of an industrial activity
TRADE M ARK
 Trade Mark is a name or sym bol adopt ed f or identifying goods

 Public c an identify fr om the Trade Mark fr om whom the product is emanating
 Trade Marks protection is given f or an industrial product by the G overnment
Examples: Channel No.5‟s smell, Jacque V illeneuve‟s face!
COPY RIGHTS
 The right to original literary and ar tistic works
• Literary, written material

• Dramatic, music al or artistic wor ks
• Films and audio- visual mat erials
• Sound rec ordings
• Computer Programmes/software
• SOME databases
Example: Picasso‟s G uernica, Micros oft code, Lord of the Rings
Need For A Patent System
 Enc ourages an invent or to disclose his invention

 Enc ourages R & D activities as the indust r ies can make use of the technology,
& avoids redunt ant research
 Provides reas onable assurance for c ommercialis ation.
 Pr ovides an inducement to invest capit al in the new lines of pr oduction and t hus
, help f or tec hnical development and upgradation.
 One may get a very good r eturn of income thr ough Patent Right on the
investment made in R & D.
Effect of Patent
 A patent ee gets the exclusive monopoly right against the public at large to
us e,s ell or manufacture his patented device.
 A patent ee c an enf orce his monopoly right against any inf ringement in the c ourt
of law f or suitable damages or profit of account.
 The Governm ent ensures f ull disclosure of the invention to the public for
exchange of exclusive monopoly pat ent right to the invent or.

UNIT V - GLOBAL ISSUES

1. Give an account of Bhopal Gas Tragedy.
On December 3, 1984, Union Carbide's pestic ide-manufacturing plant in Bhopal,

India leak ed 40 t ons of t he deadly gas, methyl isocyanate into a sleeping,
impoverished community - killing 2,500 w ithin a few days, 10000 permanently
disabled and injuring 100,000 people. Ten years later, it increas ed to 4000 to 7000
deaths and injur ies to 600,000.
Risks taken:
• Storage tank of Methyl Isoc yanate gas was filled to more than 75% capacity as
against Union Carbide‟s spec. that it should nev er be more than 60% f ull.
• The c ompany‟s W est Virginia plant was c ontrolling the safety systems and
detected leakages t hro‟ computers but the Bhopal plant only used manual labour
for control and leak detection.
• The Methyl Isoc yanate gas, being highly c oncentrated, burns parts of body with
which it comes into c ontact, even blinding eyes and destroying lungs.
Causal Factors:
• Thr ee protective systems out of service
• Plant was understaffed due to costs.
• Very high invent ory of MIC, an extremely toxic material.
• The accident occurr ed in the early morning.
• Most of the people k illed lived in a shanty (poorly built) town located very
close to the plant f ence.
Workers made the following attempts to save the plant:
• They tried to turn on the plant ref riger ation syst em to c ool down the
environment and slow the r eaction. (The r efr igeration system had been
drained of coolant weeks before and never refilled -- it cost too much.)
• They tried to r oute expanding gases to a neighboring tank. (The t ank's
pressure gauge was broken and indic ated t he tank was full when it was really
empty.)
• They tried to purge the gases through a scrubber. (The scrubber was
des igned f or f low rates, temperatures and pressures that were a fraction of
what was by this t ime escaping from the tank. The scrubber was as a result
ineffective.)
• They tried to route the gases through a flare tower -- to burn them away. (The
supply line to the f lare tower was broken and hadn't been replaced.)
• They tried to spr ay wat er on the gases and have them settle to the gr ound --
by t his time the chemic al r eaction was nearly complet ed. (The gases were
escaping at a point 120 feet above ground; the hoses w ere des igned to shoot
water up to 100 feet into t he air.)
In just 2 hours the chemicals escaped to form a deadly cloud ov er hundr eds of
thousands of people incl. poor migrant labourers who stay ed c lose to the plant.

2. What are the benefits of M ulti National corpor ations doing business in less
devel oped countries for both the M NCs and the host country?
Benefits to MNCs:
• Inexpensive labour
• Availability of natural res ources
• Favourable tax conditions
• Fresh markets f or products
Benefits to developing host countries:
• N ew jobs
• Gr eat er pay and gr eat er challenge
• Transf er of advanc ed technology
• Social benef its fr om sharing wealth
3. What are t he t hree senses of relative values?
3.1. Ethical Relativism

• Actions are mor ally right in a par ticular society if they are approved by law,
custom, or other conventions of the society.
3.2. Descr iptive Relativism

• Value beliefs and attitudes differ f rom c ulture to culture and this is a fact.
3.3. Moral Relationalism or Contextualism (Ethical pluralis m)

• Mor al judgements should be made in relation to factors that vary between issues.
Hence it is not possible to formulate rules that are simple and applicably to all
situations.
4. Which standards should guide engineers’ conduct when working in foreign

countries?
A lternate 1: „W hen in Rome, do as the Rom ans do‟

A lternate 2. Follow the identic al practic es which were f ollowed in the home country.
Both are unacceptable. A v ia media should be found based on the context.
5. What are t he International Rights as enumer ated by Thomas Donaldson?
• The r ight to freedom of physical movement

• The r ight to ownership of property
• The r ight to freedom from torture
• The r ight to a fair deal
• The r ight to non-discriminatory treatment
• The r ight to physical secur ity

• The right to freedom of speech and association

• The r ight to minimal education
• The r ight to political partic ipation
• The r ight to subsistence
6. What can M NCs do to promote mor ally j ust measur es? Or what are R ichard
T. De George’s guidelines for moral promotion by MNCs?
• MNCs business should do more ov erall good than bad towards the economy of
the host country than doing good to a few corrupt leaders in oppressive r egimes.
• They must respect laws and regulations of the loc al country as long as they do
not violate basic moral r ights.
• They must pay a liv ing wage, even when loc al c ompanies fail to pay such a
wage, but other wise pay only enough to attract compet ent work ers.
• It is permissible f or the US to tr ansf er danger ous technology lik e asbestos
pr oduction to another country and then simply adopt that country‟s safety laws only
under the following conditions.
– W orkers m ay be so desperate f or income to f eed their f amilies that
they will work under alm ost any conditions
– P ay work ers f or the extra risk
• Good judgements exercised in good faith, than abstract pr inciples, is the only
way to address prac tic al problems.
7. Write in brief about Technology Transf er and Appropriate Technol ogy?
7.1. Technology Transfer:
„The process of moving technology to a novel setting and implement ing there.‟
• N ovel s etting is any situation c ontaining at least one new variable relevant to
success or f ailure of given technology
• Transf er of technology fr om a familiar to a new environment is a complex
process
7.2. Appropriate Technology:
„Identification, transfer, and implementat ion of the most suitable technology for a new
set of condit ions‟
• Condit ions include social factors that go beyond r outine economic and
technic al engineering c onstr aints
• Identif ying them requires att ention to an arr ay of human values and needs
that may influence how a technology affects the novel situation
• Intermediate technology
8. How is environment degraded?
1. By c ausing injuries to nature
i.Usually this damage is c aus ed slowly

ii.Sometimes this also happens in sudden strikes

2. Misuse of our res ources, fouling our environm ent
3. Practicing growths in c onsum ptions and population leading to non-
availability of resources
4. Industrial activity denudes land(to destr oy all plant and anim al life), pollutes
atmosphere and wat er, reduces the yield fr om s ea and land
9. What are the questions to be answered by Engineers in their role as

experimenters?
• How does an industry affect the environment?

• How f ar it can be c ontrolled?
• W hether protective measures are available and implemented?
• W hether engineers can ensure safe & clean env ironment?
10. What is acid rain? What are its effects?
Acid rain:
• pH of normal rain is 5.6
• pH of r ainf all in north eastern ar eas of North America is 3.9 to 4.3.
• It is 10 to 100 tim es more acidic than normal. This is „acid r ain‟.
• Snowm elt into wat er releases huge amount of acid which got f rozen during
winter.
Effects:
• „Acid shock‟ from snowmelt c auses mass destruction of fish. On long term it also
harms fish eggs and s ources of f ood.
• Thous ands of lakes were killed by acid rain in Sc andinavia and North America.
• The c auses are burning of fossil fuels leading to release of SO 2 in particular and
Nitrogen oxides.
• Problems of Sweden c aused by Industrial plants in England and North Europe.
• Problems of N orth America c aus ed by utilities in Ohio valley, the largest polluter
of SO 2 in USA.
• Some of the potential changes are still unknown
 Micro organisms in s oil are being affected
 Groundwat er is pollut ed but its ultim ate effects are not known
 The ef f ects may be k nown only af t er another 100 years
• Effect on f ood s ources are also unclear
11. What are the ot her problems caused to the environment?
• Build-up of CO2 from the use of fossil fuels by Industrial nations c ould result in
Greenhouse effect.
• Damage to protective OZONE layer due to the release of Freon is related to
technologic al products us ed by the people of these nations.

12. What is Greenhouse effect?
„Gr eenhouse Ef f ect‟ is defined as „The pr ogressive warming up of earth‟s surface

due to blanketing effect of m an made CO2 in the atmosphere.‟
A gr eenhouse is that body which allows the short wavelength inc oming solar
radiation to come in, but does not allow the long wave outgoing infra r ed radiation to
escape. The earth‟s atmosphere bottles up the energy of the sun and it acts like a
gr een hous e, where CO2 acts like a glass windows.
13. What are the effects of Greenhouse?
• The temperature effect of the CO 2 and water vapour combined together has a
long range impact on the global climate.
• Bec ause of incr eas ed c onc entr ation of CO 2 and due to much warmer tropical
oc eans, there m ay occur cyclones and hurricanes and early snow melt in
m ount ains will c ause more floods during mons oon.
• Incr ease in global temperature c an adversely effect the world f ood production.
• At higher altitudes in the atmos pher e, CO 2 undergoes photochemical r eactions
producing CO, which is drastically dangerous.
• CFCs are responsible f or 20% incr ease in warming. This may incr ease the
chances of dis eas es in humans and animals.
14. Describe the case st udy of environment al degrad ati on caused by PCB &
Kanemi’s Oil?
In Southern Japan, in 1968 a large number of people suffer ed by disfigurement of

skin, discolouration, fat igue, numbness, respirat ory distress, vomit ing and loss of
ha ir.
– 10,000 people got affected & some died
– Two gr oups of 121 people each were tested and results were as follows:
• It was f ound that fried food us ing rice oil produc ed by Kanemi c ompany
was eat en which caus ed the problem
• After 7 months of investigation….
– It was found that the presence of Polychlorinated biphenyl-PCB was
the cause f or the effects and it was pres ent in the rice oil.
– Rice Oil was heated at low pressure to remove the odour thro‟ a heat
exchanger and a liquid known as KANECHLOR which contained PCB
was used f or heat tr ansfer
– Pipes of the heat exchanger was corroded and led to leakage thro‟
those pinholes.
– In fact, Kanemi had been replenishing 27 kgs of lost PCB per month for
sometime without realizing the s eriousness.
• Indirect path – t his rice was us ed as chicken-f eed and half of one million
chickens that were f ed died.

Other Similar Effects:

 Plastic bakery wrappers containing PCB mixed with ground stale br ead
was used as chicken-feed and 140000 chickens had to be slaughter ed in
N ew York.
 PCB leaked into fishmeal fr om a heating system in Nor th Car olina plant
and 12000 t ons of fishmeal were c ontaminated and 88000 chicken, fed
with fishmeal had to be destroyed.
 High pressure inject ion of water near Baldwin Dam in Los Angeles c aused
the reservoir crack open along a f ault line. The water releas ed killed 5 and
damaged property worth $14 million.
15. How can we int ernalise Costs of Environmental De gradation?
 Time cost of a product – includes numer ous fact ors like effect of pollution, the
depletion of energy and raw materials, social costs, etc.
 If these costs are int ernalized ( added to the price), then the cost c an be
charged directly to the beneficiary of the degradation of environment.
 It is better to make the us er to pay f or all its costs than to levy higher taxes.
 An accept able mechanism f or price f ixing must be found by the engineer with
the help of the economist, scientist, lawyer and politici an which c ould protect
the environment through s elf correcting proc edures.
 Good design practices may give better environm ental protection without
added cost.
16. Give a brief account of Technology Assessment?
o Engineers are said to be f inding the r ight answers f or the wrong questions
o Finding the r ight questions is much more difficult than finding the right
answers to these questions
o Engineers should
 Try to assess the technology and its environment al impacts and focus
on c ontaining the major adverse effects.
 During assessment even if engineers were strongly believe that the
projects have no adverse effect, they should continue to m onitor the
outcome even after its implementation which only would give the
complete picture of the c ons equences of the project.
17. Write short notes on Senti ent – Center ed Et hics, Bio – Centric Ethics,
Ecocentric Ethics and Human – Centered Environmental Ethics.
Sentient – Centered Ethics

Sent ient animals are those which feel pain and pleas ure. This ver sion of Nature-
center ed ethics is advanc ed by some ut ilitarians, notably Pet er Singer, who s ays that
right action maxim izing good f or all should include sent ient animals as well as
humans. Failure to do so leads discrimination like racism, which is known as
„Speciesism‟. There is always a dispute as to whether the inherent worth of anim als
can be equat ed to human beings or not.
Bio – Centric Et hics
This regards all living organisms as hav ing inher ent w orth. W e should live with the
virtue of „reverence to life‟, as s et f orth by Albert Schweitzer (1875-1965). This will
enable us to take decisions about when life c an be sacrific ed.
Ecocentric Ethics
This locates inherent w orth in Ecological systems and this appr oach is differ ent from
the other two, as it is not individualistic. This is voic ed by Aldo Leop old (1887-1948).
There is another view that ecoc entric ethic does not replace s ocially generated
hum an- oriented duties to f amily, neighbours and humanity
Human – C ent ered Environment al Ethics
This is an ext ension of et hic al th eories to c ombat thr eats to human beings presented
by the destruction of nature.
18. Define comput er ethics?
Computer Ethics deals with „the evaluation of and decision making in a variety of
moral problems c aused by comput ers‟.
19. What shifts are caused in power r elationships by Computers?
Power relat ionship c aused by Comput ers:

1. Job Elimination:
 Comput ers still continue to lead to elimination of jobs.
 W hile employees cannot be paid when there is no work, all attempts are to be
made by employers to readjust work assignments and retain employees.
 The abs ence of t his practice cr eates an employee or pubic backlash against
introduction of Computers.
2. Customer Relations:
 It is very easy f or a customer to notice an err or in a computer printout, of the
price dif f er ence between what is shown at the shelf and what is shown in cash
receipt register.
 Here mor al s ense and long term business requirement requires that t he
policies should be made f avourable to c onsumers.
3. Biased Software:

A gr oup of people with k nown convictions, may tend to pr oduce software

which favours their views rather than views fr om all angles to let the user
decide f inally.
4. Stock Trading:
Automatic, hands-of f trading of stocks and curr ency c an be perf ormed,
benefiting the trading c ommunity but it will harm the intended purpos es.
5. Unrealistic Expectations:
Sales personnel have a tendency to oversell systems that are t oo large for
custom ers‟ requirements; sometimes even those which are not r eady for
delivery.
6. Political Power:
By obtaining inform ation about differ ent groups of people regarding their
attitudes and values, the computers c an be made to help politicians to make
speeches, send mails, etc. which would be appealing selectively to these
groups.
7. Milit ary Weapons:

Computeris ed military weapons, even if perfected, will only make opposing
countries to develop their striking or responding capability which is not healt hy
f or the world.
20. What problems are encounter ed in the use of comput ers with properties?
The two major problems enc ountered in the use of computers with properties are:
1. Embezzlem ent and
2. Theft of software and information
21. How the probl em of embezzlement takes place throu gh computers and
why?
 The speed and geographic c overage of the comput er syst em and the difficulty
of tracing the tr ansactions thr ough com puters makes c atc hing the thieves
troublesome.
 Computers are abus ed in i) st ealing by employees at wor k, ii) stealing by non-
employees or former employees, iii) stealing f rom or cheating clients and
consumers, iv) violating c ontracts f or computer sales or ser vice and v)
conspiring to use computer networks to engage in widespr ead fr aud.
 Penalties for computer crime are mild compared to conventional crimes.
 Passwords and more recently, data encr yptions are used f or sec urity wit h
limited effectiveness.
22. Explain briefly about Data and Software with respect to property problems.
 „Data‟ is inf ormation stored in a c omput er.

 „Sof tware‟ or „program‟ c onsists of i) an algorithm, ii) a s ource code and iii) an
object code.

 Software c an be protected by Copyrights and Trade secr et laws. Pat enting on

sof t ware is limit ed to detailed c oding sequences but not f inal pr oducts.
Algorithms and object codes cannot be copyrighted. B ut s ource code c an be
copyrighted.
Eg. Buying one copy and reproducing dozens of c opies.
23. Describe how and in what ways ‘violati on of privacy’ occurs in and through
Comp uters.
Comput ers make more inform ation available to more people. This makes protection
of c omputer privacy difficult.
1. Inappropriate Access:
• Documents rec orded for a crime which one did not commit but was arrested.
• As a child you were arrested f or drinking alcohol
• Medic al data about visits to a psychiatrist.
• A loan default to a N ational Bank.
Any of the above inform ation can be accessed by, let us s ay, a prospective employer
during a security check.
2. D ata Bank Err ors:

• Even erroneous information when generated by computers is taken to be
authenticated.
• Immediate reaction to such wrong information may mostly prove to be inc orrect.
3. Hac k ers:
• „Hackers‟ are people who c ompulsively challenge any c omputer sec urity system,
choke networks, give out f alse inf ormation, etc.
• This can be extremely harmful.
• It is a violation of property rights.
• At the leas t, it reduces productivity by shutting down systems.
• Individual privac y, national securit y, freedom to protect proprietary information
are thr ee values requiring limits on access to inf ormation.
24. How has law responded to computer abuses?
• A s eries of laws enacted to prevent abuse of information.

• Inf ormation c an be access ed only by c onsumer c onsent or court order.
• Consumers have the right to examine and challenge information contained in
computers.
25. What Pr ofessio nal Issues arise in Computer ethics?

Owing to the high degr ee of job complexit y and technic al proficiency r equir ed, a lot
of issues arise in engineering ethics.
1. Computer failures:
• Failures c an occur due to either hardware or software
• Hardware errors do not occur frequently.
• Software errors are the major failures of the c omputers.
• Hardware errors are easily detected.
• Software errors are difficult to detect.
• Trial runs are absolutely ess ential to check the program.
2. C omputer Implementation:
• New computer system should be attempted successf ully before the old one
bec omes inoperative. Many failure cases have been report ed while switching
over to a new syst em.
3. Health Condit ions:
• Ergonomic conditions should be implemented to reduce back problems, provide
wrist support, to become good looking.
26. Give one argument each for and against Weapons Development?
• Weapons Development is a defensive measure against greater destruction by

politic al advers aries, terrorists and enemy states.
• They are devices to kill human beings, innocent civilians or equally unwilling
soldiers on the other side.
27. What should engineers do in taking part in Weapons development?
Engineers need to examine one‟s conscience to take part in any f orm of weapon
development.
o They have to c onsider the circumstances leading to the specific c onflict and
decide whether it is justified to take part in ass ociated weapons development.
o If necessary, they should refuse to be a part of it and be prepared to face
consequences.
28. How much is being spent in Defence expenditure and how Arms Trade gets
promoted by private manufacturers of arms?
o Hundr eds of billions of dollars, annually, throughout the world, are being spent
f or military operations.
o 25% of this is spent on just procurement of weapons.
o 17% of these are spent in tr ansactions across countries.
Promotion of A rms Deals :
1. Krupp, a family of successful arms merchants and manufacturers

 Armies and navies invested in Krupp‟s nickel st eel arm our

 Then Krupp made chrome st eel shells that c an pierce nick el leading to f urther
investm ent by military.
 Then they made a high-carbon armour plate that c an resist the new shells
resulting in more orders
 Then Krupp again produces, „c apped shot‟ with explosive noses which can
pierce through the high-carbon armoured plate als o
 Arms deals c ontinued to flourish
2. Vick ers and Schneider-another arms manufacturer
 Supplying arms to Chines e, Japanese and Russians
 Pointing out the gr owth of the Japanese navy to Chinese
 Pointing out the gr owth of the Chinese to their rivals, Russians
 Russia – Japanese war in 1905 was usef ul f or the c ause of arms
manufacturers.
 Russians lost the war, hence order ed fresh arms f or rehabilit ation
 Japanese won the war, but were ups et since t errible bloodbath was caused
by Russians machine guns on land.
29. Describe the destructive nature and power of weap ons and their
development?
• Towards the end of W orld W ar II, night raids sometimes on civilian areas were
very comm on
• The deaths c aus ed by Atom bombs on Hiroshima, Nagasaki were not more than
the deaths c aused by single air r aids in W orld W ar II
• But they were horrible bec ause of their power in rapid delivery of destructive
power in immense c onc entration
• Hiroshima Bomb – equivalent to 20000T of TNT powder c arried on 267 bogies of
r ailr oad (2 miles long) f or one bomb – again equivalent to 740-B52 bombers to
carry this load.
• USSR exploded Hydrogen bombs in 1960 – 50 & 60 mega ton range f or tests
with capabilities such as:
 2000 to 3000 times powerful than Hiroshima bomb
 4000 to 6000 miles long train required to c arry an equivalent amount of
TNT powder which will take 100 hours to pass any point
 W ill require one and a half million planes +(bombers) to c arry the
powder
Towards the end of cold war
 USSR had 5800 megatons (9500 w arheads on 2700 launchers) and
 USA had 3300 megatons (10800 warheads on 2000 launchers)
30. Illustrate the involvement of engineers in Weapons Dev elopment with

examples.

1. B ob is employed by a firm manufacturing anti-personnel bombs. These bombs tie

up much of the enemy‟s res ources in tr eating the wounded who survive its explosion
(by showering its fragments on to the victims). Though he does not like to be
involved in bomb mf r., he justifies hims elf that someone would have to mfr them. If
he does not, then som eone else will. Of cours e, his f amily also needs a st eady
income.
2. A chemic al engineer, Mary, got into napalm mfg when she was promot ed. She
does not like wars, but she f eels that govt. knows better about international dangers.
She also k nows that if she c ontinues doing well in her job, she will again be
promot ed to work on a commercial product.
3. Ron is a specialist in missile c ontr ol and guidanc e. He knows that he was one of
the engineers instrument al in keeping any pot ential enemy in check thr ough his
work . At least, there is enough mutual det err ence for a third wor ld war.
4. J oanne is an electronics engineer working also on avionics for fighter planes that
are s old abr oad. She does not want these planes to be s old to hostile countries.
Since she does not have any s ay on who should be their customers, she even alerts
occasionally her journalist friends with information about her work which she f eels all
public should have.
Anyone who is involved in weapons development should be very clear as to his/her

m otives f or being in the industry.
31. What are the Problems of Defense Industry in brief?
1. Large military build- ups, massive projects all lead to unet hic al business practices
and the urgency of completion of the weapons projects does not allow proper
controlling and monitoring.
2. „Technology creep‟ – development of cruise missiles alters diplom atic
arrangements
3. The impact of secrecy surr ounding any def ense activity
4. O verall ef f ect of def ense spending on economy
32. Expl ain the problems of defense industry with examples.
1. Large military build- ups: $2 billion cost overrun on the development of C5-A
cargo plane report ed to the public by Ernest Fitzger ald due to poor oper ating
efficiencies in def ense industry. He point ed out how large suppliers felt secure in
not c omplying to c ost-cutting plans but small c ontractors were willing.
 25% firms hold 50%of all def ense contracts and 8 firms conduct 45% of
defense research.
2. Technology creep: The arms are not only growing in size, it is also bec oming
better. The development of a new missile or one that c an target more accurately,
by one c ountry, c an ups et or dest abilize a diplomatic negotiation. Sometimes t his
fad f or modernization leads to undesirably c onsequenc es. The F15 fight er planes
were suppos ed to be fastest and most maneuverable of its kind but most were
not available f or ser vice due to repairs, defects and lack of spares. Engineers
should be beware of such pitfalls.

3. Impact of secrecy: Secrecy poses problems to engineers. Engineers should be

aware of the answers to the f ollowing questions:
Should discover ies of s ignificance to milit ary be informed to govt.? Can they
be shared with other res earchers, in other countr ies? Should t hey be withheld
from the scientific and public community? W ill the secrecy in weapons
development will also serve to hide corrupt ion or their mistakes in defense
establis hments? Can secrecy help the promotion of weapons systems without
criticism or inter fer ence from outs iders?
4. Effect on economy: E very dollar spent on def ense pr oduces less jobs than what
could be pr ovided f or by using the resource on other neglect ed sect ors such as
educ ation and r oad development. May be a changeover by training def ense
engineers to use their designs, processes and techniques to bring about better,
compet itive civilian products is what would be the most appr opriate thing to do
now.
33. What are the difficulties in Decommissioning Weapons?
1. E ven now, shells (duds or live) which landed about 90 years back during W orld
W ar I are f ound by farmers during ploughing. Special bomb dispos al squads are
being kept busy with hundreds of c alls.
2. There ar e, still more, unexploded and hidden bombs allover the world that fell
during W orld W ar II
3. S ever ed limbs and dead bodies are being disc overed in lands f illed with mines in
C ambodia and Vietnam in 1960s and70s.
4. Anti-personnel weapons are found in Afghanistan, Angola, Bosnia, Mozambique,
Nicar agua and Somalia.
5. These weapons are easily spr ead by air but are very difficult and danger ous to
detect and remove.
6. About 100 million landmines remain still sc atter ed in the above countries as per
est im ates by U .S.State dept.
7. Landmines present a serious ethic al dilemma to leaders who want to be ethic al in
wars also
8. Design, mfr, deployment and eventually their disposal is a huge experiment.
9. W idespr ead ignor ance on radiation amongst the public
10. Gas warfare experiments, Anthr ax carriers, nuclear weapons all c ause both
known and unknown problems
11. Engineers dealing with danger ous material should c onsider both the intended
use and also the unintended c onsequenc es and also their dispos al.
34. Which studies are more usef ul to ‘engineer managers’ than even
engineering?
Richard L.Meehan, a civil engg gr aduate fr om MIT, was retained by Gener al Electric
as a c onsultant to testify before Nuclear Regulatory C ommission about the capability
of GE‟s nuclear plant in California, U.S.A. to withstand earthquakes.
He found, while trying to understand the effect of earthquakes on nuclear plants, that
1. His basic study of physics is more usef ul in studying this ar ea compar ed to
the more advanced studies in engg.
2. His understanding of risk analysis was bas ed not only on probabilit y theory
but also on value judgement about safety.

3. But more interesting was that understanding people was more important than
anyt hing else.
4. P ers on oriented skills are as im port ant to engineers as technic al skills.
35. Why managements prefer to make engineers as managers than non-

engineers? / Why engineers find management positions attractive?
 Engineers undergo the most intensive technical training amongst professionals.

But still, many of them move to managerial pos itions early in their car eer for
which they rec eived no training.
 Organisations find it easier to teach the business side to engineers than
teac hing engineering to non-engineers.
 They also value the quant itative analysis, strong work-ethics, and conf idence in
problem solv ing exhibit ed by engineers.
 Engineers also pref er the management attractive, since car eer in management
off ers bett er recognit ion than tec hnic al track.
36. ‘M anager s’ responsibil ity is to conduct business to increase profits’.

Discuss.
• Nobel laur eate Milt on Friedman s aid „The social responsibility of business is
to incr ease its prof its……. The responsibility of managers is to conduct
bus iness in accordance with their stockholders‟ desires, which generally will
be to make as much money as possible while conforming to he basic rules of
society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom‟
• The et hic al custom refer ed by Friedm an m eans only „refr aining f rom fr aud,
dec eption and c orr uption.
• But Martin and Schinzinger s ay that Friedm an is not c orrect in s aying that
managers‟ ethics reduce to only respons ibility to maximize prof its for
stockholders.
• The pr imary res ponsibility of managers is to produce pr oduct or ser vice while
maintaining respect f or pers ons, including c ustomers, employees and public.
• Ethic ally, pers onnel and safety c omes first before profits.
• By def inition, com par ed to charitable institutions, r eligions, organizations, etc
organizations and c orporates operate only f or profits.
• But the ult im ate goal of managers should be to make valuable pr oducts that
are also profitable since profit making is one of the conditions to be in
business.
• Good business and sound ethics go together. H ence the moral roles of
managers and engineers are complementary and not oppos ed.
• Engineer managers have two major responsibilities – prom oting and et hical
climate and resolving c onf licts.
37. E xpl ain how Ethi cal Climate is promot ed in organizations through
examples.
There are highly ethic al organizations, examples of some of which are given below:
1. Marilyn H amilt on, founded Quickie Designs in 1980, who was a t eacher and
athlete who was paralyzed in hang-gliding accident. A highly mobile and vers atile

wheel chair was designed weighing 26 pounds, half the weight of chairs that were
currently produc ed. The company grew up within a decade to $65 millions in sales. It
had a policy of customer sponsor ed sports events f or young people in wheelchairs. It
is relatively s mall (500 strong) and exc eptionally committed.
2. Martin Mariette C orpn began an et hics pr ogram in 1985 em phasizing basic value
like honesty and f airness and responsibility f or environment and high pr oduct quality.
They draf t ed a code of c onduct, conduct ed and et hics workshop f or managers and
created eff ective proc edures f or employees to express their ethic al c oncerns.
3. T exas Instruments (TI) is an example of an ethic al large corporation em phasizing
on trust, respect for other pers ons, etc. TI appoint ed a full time Ethics Director, Carl
Skooglund. He surveyed to know the et hic al c onc erns of employees and their
awareness. He conduct ed workshops on ethics, wrote brochures and was directly to
all employees through a confidential phone line. E ven though they made it clear that
unprofessional c onduct would not be tolerated, the focus was on suppor ting ethical
conduct than punishing wrong doers.
4. A large def ense c ontractor start ed an ethics pr ogr am that was not successf ul.
Higher management viewed the pr ogr am as a success but the professional
employees c onsider ed it as a sham/f arce f or public relations and window dressing.
The primary
dif f iculty was the gap between the int entions of t op management and the unchanged
behaviour of the S enior managers.
38. What steps can be taken to improve the et hical climate by managers?
1. Ethic al values and their full c ompl exity are widely acknowledged and
appreciat ed by managers and engineers. Neither prof its nor promoting the
interests of the organization is neglected but the moral limits on profit-s eeking
go beyond s imply obey ing the law and avoiding fraud.
2. The sincere use of ethical language is recognized as a legitimate part of
corporate dialogue. This is done either by f ormulating corporate code of ethics
or by including ethic al responsibilities in job descriptions at all levels.
3. Top management must set a moral tone, in words, in policies and by personal
exampl e. E veryone should be c onfident that management is serious about
ethics.
4. There must be procedures for conflict resolution. Managers should be tr ained
to resolve c onflicts and on the other hand, a pers on should be exc lusively
made to have c onfidential discussions about moral c onc erns.
39. What are the most common confl ict s?
o C onf licts over schedules, depending mostly on support depts. but where
managers do not have any c ontr ol.
o C onf licts over which is the most import ant dept or function at a given time
o C onf licts over personnel res ources
o C onf licts over technic al issues
o C onf licts over administrative proc edures
o Personality c onflicts
o C onf licts over costs

40. C an conflicts be managed by force or authority? How are different conflicts
resolved?
o „I am in-charge - see it my way or I will fire you‟. This is gener ally perceived
as self-def eating.
o C onf lict arr angement sometimes m eans toler ating and even inviting some
forms of c onf lict
o Manager‟s task is to cr eate climate in which c onf licts are addressed
constructively
o P ersonality c onf licts are ranked relatively low in int ensity but they are most
difficult to res olve.
o They are generally woven with technic al/c ommunic ation problems
o Properly managed tec hnic al and ethical c onf licts are usually f ruitful and not
harmful. Differing views provide opportunity f or improved creativity.
41. What are the 4 ways to resolve conf licts among persons suggest ed by
Harvard Negotiation Project?
1) P eople: Separate people fr om the problem.
E ven though both the people and the pr oblem are import ant, the personal
aspect of the c onf lict should be separat ed fr om the pr oblem to deal with it
bett er. On personality clashes, the focus should be on behaviour and not on
people.
2) Interests: Focus on interests and not position\s
This principle applies most clearly to personnel matters and ethic al views,
r ather than technic al disputes. Positions are stat ed views but these may not
r eally express their best interests.
3) Options: Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do.
Cr eate a wide range of options especially in technical and ethical issues and
facilitate discussions.
4) Criteria: Insist that the result be based on some objective standard.
B eyond the goals of efficienc y, quality and custom er s atisfaction, it is
important to develop a s ense of fair process in how the goals are met.
42. What is the nature of work for Engineers as Consulting Engineer s?
• Consulting engineers work in private practice.

• They earn by getting their fee f or services r ender ed.
• They have gr eater freedom in decis ion making compared to salaried employees.
• But they also have a need to earn a living.
43. What are the major areas of work for engineer consult ant s?
1. Advertising
2. Competitive bidding
3. Contingency f ees
4. Safety and client needs
44. ‘Advertisi ng, once thought to be unprofessional has now been accept ed by
law’ – E xplain.
Before 1976, advertising was thought to be „ unprofessional‟, in U.S.A. The state

f elt that work should be won t hrough reputat ion as engineer and not t hrough
advertisement.
But in 1976, Supreme Court ruled that
 Ban on professional advertising is an improper restraint
 It reduces public awareness of available professional services
 They keep prices higher than they might otherwise.
Now t he focus has been shift ed t o restrain deceptive advertis ing which is done
through:
1. Outright lies
2. H alf-truths
3. E xagger ation
4. Making false suggestions or implications
5. Obfuscation (c onfusion or not being clear) created by ambiguity, vagueness
6. Manipulation of the unc onscious
45. When is advertising considered to be deceptive?
Example 1: A c onsulting firm played actually a very minor role in a well-known

project
Situation 1: Its broc hure claims that it played a major role

Situation 2: It makes no claim but only shows the picture of the project
S ituation 3: It shows the picture along with a f ootnote in fine print the true det ails
about its role in the project
Situation 4: If the same statement is print ed in larger type and not as f ootnote.
Example 2: An ad shows an electronics device to convey that the it em is r outinely
pr oduc ed and available f or sale. B ut actually the ad shows only the prototype or
mock-up and the item is just being developed.
46. What are the norms to be followed by ethical consultants in advertising?

• Generally c onsumer products can be advertis ed suppressing the negative
aspects and even some exaggeration is allowed.
• But advertisement of professional serv ices like engineering services is governed
by strict norms.
NSPE f orbids the following:
“the use of statements contain ing a material misr epresentat ion of fact or omit t ing a
material fact necessary to keep the statement from being misleading; statements
intended or likely to create an unjustified expectation; statements c ontaining
prediction of f uture success; statements c ontaining an opinion as to the quality of the
showmanship inc luding the use of slogans, jingles or sensational language format.”
• Some degree of s olicitation may be useful in enc ouraging healthy c ompetition

• Or will it open the door to people who are not honest, who criticize unfairly or who
exaggerate the merits of their services?
• In any cas e, res trictions on misleading advertis ement are a must.

47. Why was Compet itive Bi ddi ng pr ohibited earlier and th en why was it
approved by courts?
 Competitive bidding was prohibited f or quite sometime due to the following

r eas ons:
 C onsulting jobs, unlike industrial and c onstruction work, are not suit able for
precise c ost estimates and hence precise bids.
 Here c ompet itive bidding, would enc ourage cutting safety and qualit y, in case
of lower bids and padding/over designing in the case of higher bids.
 Lat er, Compet itive bidding was appr oved by C ourts of law on the r eas oning
that fr ee trade is restr ained in an unf air manner.
48. When consul ting engineers reject competitive bidding, what can be the
basis of their selection?
Consulting engineers, in the abs ence of c ompet itive bidding c an be select ed only
bas ed on their reput ation and pr oven qualification. But younger, competent
engineers may be disadvantaged by this method.
49. What is your underst anding of C ontingency Fees?

Contingency f ee is dependent on some specific conditions b eyond normal,
satisfactory performance in work.
• A client may hire a c onsultant engineer to find methods of cost s aving on an
ongoing project to s ave a minimum of 10%. If consultant s aves 10%, he will get
his f ee; other wise no f ee will be paid. The f ee c an be either an agr eed amount or
a %age of s avings.
• W hen the f ee is a %age of s aving, it becomes „c ontingency f ee‟. In many cases,
consultants tend to be bias ed and in order to gain the f ee, they may specify
inf erior design or process to cut costs.
50. How does NSPE address the issue of ‘Contingency Fee’?
NSPE has address ed this issue as follows:

“An engineer shall not request, propos e, or accept a professional commission on a
contingent basis under circ umst ances in which his professional judgement may be
compr omis ed, or when a c ontingency provision is us ed as a device f or promoting or
securing a prof essional c ommission.”
51. When does the ‘cont ingency fee’ become permissible?
To decide whether „c ontingency f ee‟ practice may be allowed or not, the potential
gains should be weighed against the pot ential losses. Henc e, this again calls for
contextual r easoning bas ed on et hic al theories, which provide a f ramework for
ass essing morally relevant issues of the problem.

52. How ‘Safety and client needs’ should be addressed by consulting
engineers?
 C onsulting engineers have gr eat er freedom with wider ar eas of r esponsible

decision making c ompared to salaried engineers.
 This cr eates special difficult ies for c onsulting engineers.
 In „design-only‟ projects, consult ants do not have any role in the c onstruction
or implementation as per the design specs.
 Ideally, only the designer would r eally know the areas of dif f iculty in
execution.
 E ven when changes in design are r equir ed during exec ution, the
consultant may not be around to effect the changes
 Client may not have capable people f or inspection of the work based
on the c onsult ant‟s design.
 Does the c onsultant have a mor al responsibility to f ollow thr ough the
design in exec ution
 In any case, job safety is one prime responsibility of the c onsultant
engineer
53. What are t he reasons t hat cause ‘Disputes’? Who is the major loser in any
dispute?
• Large projects involve owners, c onsultants and c ontractors and many participants
at various levels in these three organizations.
• O verlapping responsibilities, f ragment ed c ontr ol, delays and inability to resolve
disputes are s ome of the problems encountered during these projects.
• Resolving dis putes becomes especially difficult when projects last f or s everal
years and connected pers onnel also change during t his period.
• Owners have the most to lose in such situations.
• Hence they try to shift the risks to others.
• Consulting engineers are generally tied to the c ontract provisions and they do not
try any innovative ideas (do not want to add risks)
• All this have led to c onsider able litigation and any litigation is time c onsuming and
costly.
54. What are the steps to be taken resolve disputes?
1. Define how risks are to be apportioned and payment of f ees to be made

2. Make c ontractual pr ovisions f or dispute solving vehicles to avoid legal battles in
lines of mediation – ar bitration
3. Mediat or attem pts to resolve f irst and if it f ails, the ar bitrat ors‟ decision should
be f inal.
4. National J oint B oard f or s ettlement of Juris dictional Disputes will be c alled to
pr ovide a leaking board and appeals board.
5. The Cons ulting Engineer, from the “social experimentation” nature of
engineering, has the obligation to include such clauses in c ontracts and should
make sure that these clauses are adhered to by all.

55. What is the work done by Engineers as Expert s?
Engineers, in their pos ition as experts, explain the happenings of the past in terms of
Causes of accidents, malf unctions of equipment and other technologic al events.
They also help in events of the future lik e, public planning, pot ential of pat ents and
policy making (in technology)
56. How should Expert Engineers f unction?
They should f unction as impartial s eekers of facts & Communicat ors of truth but not
as hired guns i.e. advocates f or lawyers, officials, etc
57. What are the types of cases, expert witnesses are call ed upon to test ify in
court & what are the stakes?
57.1. Types Of Cases

I. Airplane crash
II. Defective pr oducts
III. P ersonal injury
IV. Property damage
V. Traf f ic accident
57.2. Stakes
I. Legal liabilities
II. Economic interests
III. Reputations of corpns. and professionals
58. What are the Expert engineers’ responsibilities towards their hirer s?
They should
 Pres ent their qualifications to the client
 Investigate thoroughly the cas es entrusted to them.
 Testify in c ourt
59. How sho uld t he expert witness exhi bit o ne’s ‘co nfid ential ity
responsibility’?
The expert witnesses must
 Not divulge their in vestig ations unless called upon to do so by the c ourt
 Not volunt eer evidence favourable to the opponent
 Answer questions truthfully when opp osing attorney puts f orth pertinent
questions
But he should not just be the c lient‟s mouthpiece.
60. What are the aims of a legal system?

A ims Of A Legal System is
To adminis ter a complex system of legal rights that define legal justice ach ieved
through adversarial relationships, with rules about admissible forms of evidence
and permissible forms of testimony

61. What is the role of an expert in a court system consistent wi th Professional
standards (codes of ethics)?
Role of an Ex pert in a Court System
 Exp erts must earnestly try to be impartial in identifyi ng and int erpr eting
complicat ed data thrown up by the c omplexit y of modern science and
technology to help t he c ourts
 Ideall y, if courts pay the expert witness, the expert will bec om e totally
un b iased.
 But it is a very costly issue
 So parties to the dispute are c alled upon to pay and hire them on both sides
and also allow them to be cross examined by both sides
62. What is the difference between E ye wi tness and Expert w itness?

 Eye W itness
Is permitted to testify on observed and to s ome extent perc eived f acts.
 Expert Witness
 Is permitt ed to testify on facts, perceptions and int erpretations of facts in the
area of their expertise
 To comment on opponent‟s expert witness‟ view
 To report on applic able professional standards
63. What are the types of abuses of Engineers as Expert witnesses?
Expert witnesses are abus ed in the following ways:

 Hir ed Guns
 Fin ancial Bias
 Ego Bias
 Sympathy Bias
64. Write short notes on: a) Hired Guns, b) Financi al Bias, c) Ego Bias and
d) Sympathy Bias
a) Hired Gun
An unscrupulous (unpr incipled, cr ooked, immoral) engineer
• Makes his liv ing by helping lawyers to portray facts in favour of their clients
• Never tries to be objective
• Violates standards of honesty and care in conducting investigations
• Overall a shame on engineering community
b) Financial B ias
 The expert witness is biased to the party which pays more money
 The bias incr eases substantially wh en payments are agr eed as Contingency
Fee to be paid only in case the hir er w ins the case
 Full time for ensic engin eers, being dependent on lawy ers for their liv ing, try to
create a reputation of a winning engineer.
c) Ego B ias
 Com petitive attitudes, being on one side of the disputing parties makes an
exper t, egoistic and makes him influence judgments
 They st art identify ing themselves with their side of the disput e

d) Sympathy B ias
 The p lig ht of the victims and their sufferings c an invoke sympathy f rom the
expert witness
 This upsets impartial investigation of facts
65. What is needed of the Expert E ngineers?
 Engineer Experts should maintain their integr ity in the face of all the above
biases
 Courts also must rely on balance pr ovided by exp ert witnesses on both sides
of the case and pr ovide opportunities to lawyers to remove t he bias by cross-
examination
66. What is the work of Engineers as Adviser s?
Engineers act as Advis ers in Planning and Policy-Making like Economists,

sociologists, urban planners, etc.
In Policy-Making they advise about the Cost benefit analysis of alt ernate solutions for
trans port, housing, energy, def ens e, etc.
In Planning they check the f easibilit y, risks and benefits of the specific technological
projects which aff ect public in local c ommunities
67. What are the Stakes for the engineer advisers?
Their stakes ar e:
1. Opposing politic al views
2. Social perspectives
3. Economic interests
4. And their individual values like,
 Honest y
 Public trust
 Respect for c ommon good
68. How should Engineer advisers act?
Advisers are to:

 Chart all r e alistic options
 Carefully assess each under different assumptions about future c ontingencies
 Act favourable to the c lient by basing t h eir studies on particular assumptions
about future c ontingencies
69. What are the factors t hat inf luence Adviser s?
Advisers are influenced by:

 Large amounts of money involved
 Direct and overt (obvious and unc onc eal ed) pressure applied by pro or anti-
people invol ved in that project
 Hope of additional work in f uture
 Their wish to get the respect of clients

70. What are the normative models of Advisers? Briefly explain each of them.
Normative Models of Adv isers
Thr ee types:
 Hir ed Guns
 Value N eutr al Analysts
 Value Guided Analysts
Hired Guns – This is the most undesir able role that c an be played by the advis er.
 Here the obligati on to clients onl y is param ount and other values are not
bothered about.
 Studies are made just c onforming to the client‟s wish.
 Advis er highlights only the f avourable facts to the customer.
 All the unf avour able facts are very much downplayed.
Value Neutral Analysts

 C ompletely impartial engineers.
 They identify all opt ions and analyze factual issues of each option.
 Cost-benefit analysis are made based on value crit eria specified and made public
Value Guided Analysts

 Responsibility to pu blic paramount
 Maintain honesty about technical facts and values
 They c an adopt partis an views for the good based on their profession al judgm ent
71. What are the virtues of independent expert advisers?
V irt ues of Independent Experts

 Honesty- avoiding deception, being c andid in st ating relevant facts and
truthf ul in interpr eting facts
 Competence- b eing well trained, adequately exp erienc ed in the relevant field
and having relevant skills
 Diligence- c arrying out tasks carefull y and promptly
 Loya lty- avoiding c onf licts of interes t, maintaining c onf identiality and c onc ern
f or the interests of the client
72. List t he roles of engineers as ‘leaders’.
Engineers perform as Lead ers in the roles of

1. Managers
2. Business Entrepreneurs
3. Consultants
4. Academics and
5. Govt officials.
73. What is leadership and who are moral leaders?
Leadership is „Successfully moving a group towards its common goal‟.

But Mor al leaders are those who move the group successf ully towards goals which

do public good and not evils i.e. the goals must be „morally valuable‟. H ence Moral
Leaders c an be defined as,
„The individuals, who direct, motivate, organize, cr eatively manage and move groups
toward mor ally valuable goals‟
74. ‘Technologi sts were best qu alified to govern because of their t echni cal
expertise’. Discuss in det ail.
Mussolini and Hitler were gr eat leaders, but not „Mor al Leaders ‟, since their goals
were not morally valuable.
„An Utopian society shall be governed by a philosopher-king whose mor al wisdom
best qualifies him to rule‟ – P lato
„Technologists were best qualified to govern bec ause of their technical expertis e, as
well as their logic al, practical and unprejudiced minds‟– Frederick Taylor
 But no single profession has the only right to moral governance of society.
 Leadership is also m oving away from any narrow professional interests.
 Mor al leadership is not „dominance by elite‟, but stimulating groups toward
morally desirable ends.
75. Expl ain Moral Creativity.
Moral cr eativity is
• Identif ying most important values in particular situations
• Focusing on them through effective communication within the group.
• Deep commitments grounded in integrity to implement them.
Cr eativity consists in ident ifying new possibilit ies for applying, extending and putting
into practic e, rather than inventing values.
76. How participation in Professional Societies will improve moral leader ship?
Professional Societies
o Promote c ontinuing education for their members
o Unify the prof ession, speak and act on behalf of them
o Are a f orum f or communic ating, organizing and mobilizing change within, a
change which has a moral dimens ion.
o Cannot take any pro-employee or pro-management stand since they have
members in management, supervision and non-management.
o But they can play a role in res olv ing mor al issues
o A mor al responsibility as well as mor al cr eativity is shar ed.
77. How can individuals make a di fference in leadership of Professional

Soci eties?
o St ephen H. Unger, as an individual was mainly responsible f or persuading

IEEE to focus on supporting responsible engineers than punishing wrong
d oers. He was instrum ent al in IE EE pres enting awards to the thr ee BART
engineers.
o In 1988, NS PE cr eated N ational Inst itute of E ngineering Ethics with a mission
to promote ethics within engineering. The focus was on educ ation rather than

propaganda.
o But eff ective prof essional activity, r equir es a s ubstantial trust fr om clients and
the public.
o Building and sust aining that trust is an important responsibility shar ed by all
engineers.
o In t his ar ea also Mor al Leadership within professional societies is im port ant.
78. Write short note on ‘Leadership in Communities’.
Leadership responsibilities of engineers as citizens go beyond those of non-

engineers. They should provide gr eat er leadership in social debates about
 Industrial P ollution
 Automobile Safety
 Dispos al of Nuclear W ast e, etc.
79. What are the different views on ‘leadership in communities’?
• One view is that no one is strictly obligated to participate in public decision

m aking. It may be a moral ideal for citizens.
• An opposite view is that all are obligated to devote sometime and energy in public
policy making.
• Non-engineers sh ould at least s tay informed about public iss ues and
profess ionals have obligations as exp erts in their ar eas.
• Hence the need for identif ying and expanding ar eas of poss ible good.
80. What are the arguments for and against Voluntary Service by engineering
professionals?
 Should engineering professionals of f er engineering ser vices to the needy,

without charging f ee or at r educ ed f ee?
 Voluntarism of this kind is alr eady enc ouraged in Medicine, Law and
Education.
 But ABET code states “Engineers shall not undertake or agr ee to perform any
engineering ser vice on a fr ee basis” and other codes also insist that engineers
are obligated to adequate com pensations (which means f ull f ee)
 Engineers find it dif f icult to donate their ser vices individually compared to
doct ors and lawyers since their out put is on a shar ed basis
 But, as suggested by Robert Baum, engineers c an volunt eer their ser vices in
the f ollowing ar eas, in groups, either fr ee or at cheaper than norm al f ee.
 Environm ental im pact studies that is harmful to a community
 Health issues of polluted wat er and s oil
 Minimal needs of elderly and minorities like running water, sewage
systems, electric power and inexpensive transportation.
81. Wh at can engineers and engineeri ng soci ety do to publ ic in terms of

‘volunt ary service’?
Engineers c an
 Urge Govt. to expand ser vices of the Army Corps of Engineers

 Enc ourage students to focus their projects on ser vice f or disadvantaged

groups
 Enc our aging c orpor ations to cut their f ee by 5 to 10% f or charitable purposes.
Morally c onc erned Engineering Prof ession-

o Should recognize the r ights of c orporations and engineers to voluntar ily
engage in philanthropic engineering s ervices.
o Professional societies should endorse voluntary exercise as a desirable ideal.
Many engineers and some societies alr eady are engaged in

o Tutoring disadvantaged students
o Advice loc al governments on their engineering pr oblem.

Pe Unit Wise Notes PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Pe Unit Wise Notes PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

www.Vidyarthiplus.

Sub Code / Name : GE 6075-Professional Ethics in Engineering

GE 6075- PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

UNIT I – HUMAN VALUES

The Story of a Carpent er

(Modified from LIVING WITH HONOUR by SH IV KH ERA)

Do we find ourselv es in s imilar s ituations as the c arpenter?

How do we regain our focus as individuals and organizations?

This is the challenge f or the employee and the employer.

Ethics are fundament al standards of c onduct by which we work as a professional.

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

 Values are individual in natur e.

“Never change your core values.”

 Morals are guiding principles that every citizen should hold.

PERSONAL ETHICS - everyday examples

RELIGION AND ETHICS

• T he “Golden Rule” is a basic tenet in almost all religions: Christian, Hindu,

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

M ORALITY AND ETHICS

There are two aspects to ethics:

An ALGEBRA c ourse will teach you ALGEBRA.

But, W ill an ETHICS c ourse teach you to be ETHICAL?

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

UNIT II - ENGINEERING ETHICS

– What does Adm. Rickover mean by this?

• Engineers have an ethic al and s ocial responsibility to themselves, their clients

ENGINEERING ETHICS is:

• Stimulating the moral imagination

IMPEDIM ENTS TO RESPONSIBILITY

QUESTIONABLE ENGINEERING PRACTICES

• Trimming – “smoothing of ir r egular ities to make data look extremely accurate

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

SENSES OF EXPRESSION OF ENGG. ET HICS

 Ethics is an activity and ar ea of inquir y. It is the activity of understanding

VARIETIES or APPR OAC HES OF MORAL ISSUES

MICRO-ETHICS emphasizes typic ally everyday problems that can take on

M ORAL PROBLEMS IN ENGINEERING

4.4. Electronics Company ABC gear ed up f or pr oduction of its own version of a

Some of the questions are:

2. C ONCEPT UAL INQUIRY:

A) W hat is „SA FETY‟ and how is it relat ed t o „RISK‟

3. FACT UAL ( DES CRIPTIVE) I NQUIRI ES

Why st udy ENGINEERING ETHICS

ENGINEERING ETHICS is a m eans to incr ease the ability of c oncerned engineers,

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

 CONFLICTING REASON S: E ven when it is perfectly clear as to which moral

Steps in confronting MORAL DILEMMAS:

M ORAL AUT ONOMY

i) Proficiency is rec ognizing mor al pr oblems and issues in engineering.

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

STAGES OF MORAL DEV ELOP MENT

• Pre-convent ional Level

• Pre-convent ional Level

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

Differences between the TWO THEOR IES

CONSENSUS AND CONTROVERSY

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

PR OFESSIONS AND PR OFESSIONALISM

• Has a bachelor‟s degree in engineering from an accredited school

Differing views on Prof essionals

“Engineers are professionals when they 1) attain standards of achievement in

GE 6075 PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN ENGINEERING

M ODELS OF PR OFESSIONAL ENGINEERS