ENGM 604: Social, Legal and Ethical Considerations for Engineering Ethics and Professionals

The Challenger Disaster A Crucial Decision The Challenge: “Take off your engineering hat and put on your management hat.” A Conflict of Roles Consequences

The ‘Red Adair of disaster relief’ Frederick Cuny and Intertect Relief and Reconstruction Corp. Model or Anomaly? Implications for engineering managers? Image source: mgrefurl= /bio/cunyinbosnia.html&h=110&w=150&sz=9&tbnid=JTOmjT 36qlgJ:&tbnh=66&tbnw=90&hl=en&start=2&prev=/images%3 Fq%3D%2522Frederick%2BCuny%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3 Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3 Den%26sa%3DG

The Pull of Morality How should we understand the claims that morality has on us? Force? Scope? What is it about us that makes us susceptible to these claims?

Engineers and Morality A more specific answer to the question of susceptibility is available for engineers: engineers are Professionals. Why would the professional status of engineers make them subject to moral concerns? Answer might be found in the definition of profession (EE, p. 9).

The Professions: A Taxonomy The definition of profession gets us started, but it obscures as much as it helps. A more detailed account of the characteristics which distinguish the professions from other sorts of occupations is needed. Training with a significant intellectual component. Professional activities are centrally concerned with the well-being of society. Monopoly over the professional activities. High degree of work-place autonomy.

Grounds for Obligation? What does this list add up to? Taken individually and as a whole, the characteristics of a profession provide a basis for arguing that professionals have significant moral responsibilities. Historically, professions have recognized this and formulated these responsibilities in Codes of Ethics.

What’s Different? Are professionals really that different from other people? While they certainly have obligations specific to their professional activities, this specificity is in principle no different than the many specific obligations that we all have. Parents, Managers, Classmates

A Taxonomy of Morality Understanding the specificity of obligation requires us to make some distinctions in the field of morality. A common schema divides the field into regions of increasing generality. Personal Morality: the set of moral commitments specific to each individual. Role Morality: the set of moral commitments specific to socially defined roles individuals inhabit. Common Morality: the set of moral commitments exhibited by a culture or society.

Professional Obligations and Role Morality According to this schema, professional obligations would belong to the region of role morality. They would thus be no different in kind from the variety of responsibilities we all have as role players. They would be different, however, due to the specialized nature of the role.

Special Obligations of Professionals Most of our work in this module will focus on the obligations specific to your roles as engineers and business people. Before looking at these specifics, however, we can point to a feature common to the majority of professions. Generally, professional obligations are articulated in codes. The text collects some samples starting on p. 365.

Codes of Ethics: Functions Professional Codes have a number of functions. They make explicit the shared standards of the practitioners of the profession. This is a benefit to the practitioners in that it clarifies what is expected of them and what they can expect of each other. It also benefits the public, providing the basis for reasonable expectations of professional behavior and competence.

Codes of Ethics: Functions Professional Codes have a number of functions. They serve as a touchstone for the evolving discussion of the content of professional responsibility They perform an important protective function by giving professionals cover under which they can make unpopular or potentially insubordinate decisions.

Types of Codes Professional codes of ethics come in all shapes and sizes. Sometimes they are unwritten, part of the “common understanding” of the profession; sometimes they are vaguely or imprecisely written; sometimes they are written in very specific detail. Sometimes they enunciate purely moral principles; frequently they are a mixture of principles, rules of etiquette, and economic considerations (rules against competition, etc.). Sometimes they make explicit reference to broader ethical perspectives and practices (usually for purposes of justification); sometimes they don’t.

Limitations of Codes Despite their undeniable benefits, codes have significant limitations. Codes have force only for the membership of the establishing association. Codes are insufficiently action guiding. Not an algorithm. Require significant casuistry. Coverage is incomplete.

An Ounce of Prevention The limitations of codes of ethics as action guiding principles emphasizes the importance of considering broader moral contexts and personal judgment. In ethics, as in engineering, anticipation, in the form of sustained reflection on the nature and substance of our professional responsibilities, is much more effective than reaction at forestalling problems.