W. Gale Cutler's Commentary: Teaching Engineering Ethics -Testing by a CO-OP Student
Author(s):
W. Gale Cutler
The aspect of this case that should produce the most concern
is the apparent and immediate conclusion by Tom that Jack
"faked" data without any concern about the results of his
action. This is equivalent to a "guilty until proven innocent"
approach to justice. The first action taken by Tom when he
learned that the results of the stress test were suspect should
have been to bring Jack into the discussion, either by
telephone or, in view of the seriousness of the situation, by
paying Jack's expenses to return to the laboratory to discuss
the tests. If Jack has a valid explanation for the results he
obtained, the failure to bring this explanation into
consideration could place an irreparable blight on Jack's
career because of the hasty accusation. This contact with Jack
should also have occurred before the University co-op
coordinator was contacted with the fear that Jack had falsified
data.
However, in terms of proper management of co-op students it
is unthinkable that the important tests such as Jack was
running were not closely supervised and the results checked
periodically. Such supervision is the essence of good
laboratory management and in no way displays a lack of trust in
Jack (or any other employee so supervised). At the very least,
Jack's test results should have been carefully reviewed before
he departed for college.
Certainly we have reason here to question the proficiency of
laboratory management in the Material Science Department at
XYZ. To judge Jack's behavior we also need to know exactly what
his instructions were when assigned to do the tests. Was he
told how critical the tests were? Or was he led to assume the
tests were merely routine? Did his supervisor say quickly, "I
need this part qualified by the end of the week?" If that's
what Jack heard he could have interpreted the directions as
"hurry and run some tests but the part is going into production
anyhow." In research and development situations we must always
take the time to explain all of the "why" of the problem when
we delegate a task. Analytical test work, in which the answer
depends particularly on the question asked and how it is asked,
demands an especially careful statement of the problem. If in
subsequent conversation with Jack he confesses to falsifying
data he should be severely reprimanded and probably XYZ (unless
extenuating circumstances are revealed) should terminate its
co-op relationship with Jack.
In the reprimanding (and terminating) procedure, Jack must
be reminded of the responsibility of an engineer. To quote the
National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics:
Engineering is an important and learned profession. The members
of the profession recognize that their work has a direct and
vital impact on the quality of life for all people.
Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honest,
impartiality, fairness and equity, and must be dedicated to the
public health, safety and welfare. In the practice of their
profession, engineers must perform under a standard of
professional behavior which requires adherence to the highest
principles of ethical conduct.... There is a growing and
encouraging trend to incorporate the teaching of ethics into
the engineering curriculum. This incorporation is being done
best in the form of case studies in engineering courses so that
the student has an opportunity to combine the study of both the
technical and ethical considerations of engineering problems.
Such instruction brings home to the engineering student the
responsibilities of the engineering profession and the personal
obligations of members of the profession. Responsible people
accept moral responsibility for their actions!