Professional engineers encounter situations involving public concern and controversy that require ethical decision-making. In such cases, engineers must prioritize the safety, health, and welfare of the public while considering the interests of all relevant parties. This article explores two cases from the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Board of Ethical Review (BER) to illustrate these ethical obligations.
Key Facts
- Honesty and Objectivity: Professional engineers have an obligation to be honest and objective in their professional statements and activities.
- Balancing Interests: Engineer A has an ethical obligation to balance the interests of all relevant parties, including the public, in order to reach an amicable resolution.
- Reporting Findings: If Engineer A discovers information that may impact public safety, health, or welfare, they have an ethical obligation to report their findings to the appropriate authorities.
- Disclosure of Relevant Information: Engineer A is not required to disclose information that is not “relevant and pertinent” unless specifically questioned about it.
- Challenging Unethical Practices: Engineers have an obligation to avoid associating with companies engaged in fraudulent or dishonest practices and should communicate concerns about potentially illegal activities to their superiors or seek higher management or legal department involvement.
Case 1: Engineer A’s Obligation to Consider Feasible Options
Engineer A, working for JKL Engineering, faces a dilemma when tasked with determining the route for a new road connecting two towns. The shortest route would save significant travel time but requires addressing the impact on a historic family farmhouse that has existed for over a century. The state has the option to exercise eminent domain and condemn the farmhouse, allowing the project to proceed.
Ethical Considerations
- Balancing Interests: Engineer A must balance the interests of the state, the towns, and the farmhouse owners. The potential benefits of the shorter route must be weighed against the impact on the historic property.
- Public Interest: Engineer A has an ethical obligation to serve the public interest, which may involve considering alternative solutions that minimize harm to the farmhouse.
- Creative Solutions: Exploring creative options, such as physically moving the farmhouse to another appropriate site, can help reach an amicable resolution.
Case 2: Engineer A’s Awareness of Possible Financial Improprieties
Engineer A, employed by Company X, learns that Engineer B, the company owner, has created a new company, Company Y, and advised clients of Company X to remit payments to Company Y.
Ethical Considerations
- Transparency and Communication: Engineer A should seek clarification from Engineer B regarding the reasons for this procedure to ensure transparency and address any concerns.
- Avoiding Unethical Associations: Engineers have an ethical obligation not to associate with companies engaged in fraudulent or dishonest practices.
- Reporting Concerns: If Engineer A’s concerns persist after discussing them with Engineer B, they may consider reporting the matter to the state licensing board.
Conclusion
In both cases, Engineer A has ethical obligations to balance the interests of various stakeholders, consider feasible options, and report any concerns about unethical or illegal practices. Engineers must prioritize public safety, health, and welfare while upholding the principles of honesty, objectivity, and integrity in their professional conduct.
References
- NSPE. (2015). Engineer’s Obligation to Consider Feasible Options. Retrieved from https://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/ethics-resources/board-ethical-review-cases/engineer-s-obligation-consider-feasible
- NSPE. (2011). Employment—Awareness of Possible Financial Improprieties. Retrieved from https://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/ethics-resources/board-ethical-review-cases/employment-awareness-possible-financial
- Mclaren, B. M. (1988). Case 88-6. Retrieved from https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~bmclaren/ethics/caseframes/88-6.html
FAQs
What is Engineer A’s primary ethical obligation in the road construction case?
Engineer A’s primary ethical obligation is to balance the interests of all relevant parties, including the state, the towns, and the farmhouse owners, to reach an amicable resolution.
Why should Engineer A consider alternative solutions in the road construction case?
Engineer A should consider alternative solutions to minimize harm to the historic farmhouse and serve the public interest, which may involve finding a route that balances the benefits of the shorter path with the preservation of the property.
What are Engineer A’s ethical responsibilities if they suspect financial improprieties in the second case?
Engineer A has an ethical obligation to address their concerns directly with Engineer B, seeking clarification and transparency about the financial procedures.
What actions can Engineer A take if their concerns are not adequately addressed in the second case?
If Engineer A’s concerns persist after discussing them with Engineer B, they may consider reporting the matter to the state licensing board, as engineers have an obligation to avoid associating with companies engaged in unethical or illegal practices.
Why is it important for Engineer A to prioritize public safety and welfare in the road construction case?
Prioritizing public safety and welfare is crucial because the road construction project has the potential to impact the safety and well-being of the communities involved, and Engineer A has an ethical obligation to ensure that the project is conducted responsibly.
What ethical principles should guide Engineer A’s decision-making in both cases?
Engineer A’s decision-making should be guided by principles of honesty, objectivity, and integrity, ensuring that their actions are transparent, truthful, and uphold the ethical standards of the engineering profession.
How can Engineer A balance the interests of different stakeholders in the road construction case?
Engineer A can balance stakeholders’ interests by considering the potential benefits and drawbacks of each option, seeking input from affected parties, and exploring creative solutions that minimize negative impacts while maximizing public benefit.
What are the potential consequences for Engineer A if they fail to address their concerns about financial improprieties?
Failing to address concerns about financial improprieties could lead to Engineer A being complicit in unethical or illegal activities, which could damage their reputation, jeopardize their professional license, and potentially result in legal consequences.