THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

Maintaining Professional Standards: Writing a Letter of Recommendation

Niemeyer is an engineer working for a medium-size manufacturing company and is being considered for a promotion. Niemeyer's employer contacts other engineers who have worked previously with Niemeyer and asks for their comments.

How should an employer determine who should be contacted for peer performance evaluations? Should the person being evaluated have input into the selection of peer review? Should the peer review results be shared with the employee? Should this be open or anonymous?

One of the people contacted about Niemeyer is Singh, who is currently employed by another company and who no longer has a direct professional relationship with Niemeyer. Singh is aware that Niemeyer has dropped his membership in the state professional engineering society. Singh believes that it is incumbent upon all engineers to support their profession through membership in the professional society -- preferably in an active role, or at least by payment of dues. Because of this Singh refuses to comment on Niemeyer's performance.

What is Singh's obligation to his collegue concerning perfomance review? Do members of a profession have an obligation to particpate in their professional societies? Why or why not?

The employer reports Singh's comments to Niemeyer. How, if at all, should Niemeyer respond to his employer? To Singh? Should Niemeyer communicate with the professional society about this incident?

--adapted from NSPE Case No. 77-7

<Current NSPE Code of Ethics An earlier version may have been used in this case.

Original Case and BER Judgement

• Return to Professional Ethics in Engineering Practice: Discussion Cases Based on NSPE BER Cases

• The Use of Work from an Unpaid Consultation

• Related Work Done by a Private Party Following Public Employment

National Academy of Engineering

500 Fifth Street, NWWashington, DC 20001T. 202.334.3200F. 202.334.2290