Introduction
Human beings are social beings and hence necessitate societies to be formed. Co-relations in these societies has always proved hard and hence for members to co-exist peacefully with each other there need to be a set of guidelines. The society is held together by the moral fabric defined by the members which is based on their values, truths, norms, honesty or generally what is considered upright by the members.
The society concept also applies to different professions practiced worldwide. Every profession has their own society, this cuts across from the most esteemed professions such as engineering or architectural to the least professions. These societies not only offer some sort of “fellowship” of the members but they also aim at improving on the practice of the profession. From these societies there has erupted a need to form rules and regulating bodies which ensures individuals are kept in check within their profession. This rules and regulation bodies have different levels both locally and international bodies (Davis, 1991).
Engineering and Societies
Engineering as a profession is also not left out when it comes to societies. As a norm in most society’s morals, manners and laws play a key role in defining how we interact with each other. Morals of any society are defined by the truths honesty and loyalty. This forms the core values from which laws regulating the society are formed. From this laws it’s clearly defined what is deemed to be “good manners” or “bad manners” within the practice. This is aimed at ensuring there is minimal conflict within interactions of the different societies.
Engineer profession, is a highly esteemed field that plays a major role in the societies and is directly involved with projects that touch human lives directly, has great responsibilities since engineers are expected to be honorable in their practice. They are expected to adhere to the laws of the societies, be of good manners have high moral values.
According to Vesilind (1995) manners cannot be coined under one definition but are described according to the different societies they will be derived from. Manners generally can be referred to as “home-training”. Engineers derive their manners from the standard requirements in engineering ethics Code of the America society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). In explaining own work, Engineers need to have dignity and modesty and shun from selfish interests thereby expensing their integrity, honor and professional dignity.
Whether engineers should have codes of ethics is one debate that has elicited many discussions and has resulted to publications that are both pro and con of a standard ethical code for engineers. Different authors have argued that codes of ethics are unrealistic, self-serving, unnecessary or inconsistent. For the purposes of this thesis we will focus on the pros of having engineering code of ethics.
A code of ethics (professional) tends to be put in place where an occupation or practices is organized into a profession. The code is drafted in writing and legally approved. The code form as a part of constant reference when it comes to the profession (Davis, 2006). In a nutshell code of ethics can be defined as the set of procedures which is a convention among professions. A profession can be described as group of individuals who want to be united in practicing their occupation using the same ideals better as compared to serving individually. Engineering is one such profession though very varied according to area of interests, for instance electrical, mechanical or civil to so many other areas. Even in this all variations of the different field one thing that has stood is to have a common code of ethics for all the engineering fields but addition codes will be added according to the specific fields.
One of the myths that comes with codes of ethics is failure to distinguish that professional morality is not the same as personal morality. Primarily profession codes seeks to guarantee that an individual will regulate themselves in order to protect other people in the public from misuse of professional power.
A common question that is often floated is whether do engineers need profession ethics or is a personal code of ethics enough? Harris (2014) argues that being an ethical person will contribute to one being good in their profession, however professional ethics are not expansive in range of actions covered. Profession ethics deals with actions and not intent while personal ethic will emphasize on the intentions and also the actions. It can be argued that both the profession and personal ethics will complement each other when it comes to engineering profession.
Why codes of ethics are important to engineers? A common case normally used when discussing ethics in engineering is the case of “the Challenger disaster”. As it’s recorded the night before the deadly launch which caused the death of seven astronauts. On the fateful night the engineers at NASA had identified the faults but failed to convince NASA to stop the flight. Robert Lund who was the vice –president to Morton Thiokol did a presentation which included its engineering findings about the shuttle and clearly showed that the ship should not be launched below 53 degrees Fahrenheit which h clearly informed his boss, Jerald Mason. Mason would later rely the information to the space center. Lund thought the launch had already been cancelled as he trusted the space Centre as they would not launch the shuttle without approval from the technical team approving. Lund had not co-signed to the launch because as he had earlier discovered that the temperatures at the site of the launch will be freezing as the shuttle takes off. The space Centre was concerned about the ice forming on the boosters but for Lund the greatest concern was the “O-rings” sealants. The shuttle was built to precision but the “O-rings” were to be found later as faulty. From previous flights the rings had shown a tendency to erode during the flight with the worst form of erosion occurring on very cold lift-offs. Experimentally the evidence was not clearly indicated but it had some evidence. In conclusion from the engineering summary given it showed that at particular temperatures the rings would lose their resiliency and it would fail to form a proper seal and the shuttle would explode if the ring failed during the flight. This decision was challenged by the managers from both the Marshall, Space Flight Centre and Kennedy, Space Centre and it as argued that the data from previous experiment were enough and engineers later interpolated the data that would later give a false sense of safety of the shuttle.
The Space Center were eager to launch the shuttle but had to get Thiokol to approve. They pressured Mason to reconsider his decision which he revisited the evidence presented and concluded the rings would be able to hold at those temperatures. Joseph, Thiokol’s vice president in charge of shuttle programs was ready to approve but if only Lund was on board. Lund remained adamant and stood by his first decision. Mason threw a thought that would later have him rethink his decision. Mason challenged Lund to think like a manager as opposed to the engineer he was. This worked its magic and Lund shifted his stand and approved the launch. The shuttle was launched the morning after and sure from his previous findings the rings could not hold at the temperatures which caused the shuttle to explode killing seven astronauts (Ramirez, Seco and Cobo, 2011). This incident elicited the thoughts and continues to challenge engineers whether a code of ethics is necessary as Lund’s decision as an engineer should have regulated him rather than him making a decision as a manager. The questions have been where the line should be drawn when it comes to professional ethics. How should engineers think if not to use their technical knowledge of objects? Probable answers have been formed in legal code of ethics. When anyone challenges the presence of the code of ethics they are referred to the incident.
ASME
For the purposes of this thesis we will focus on ASME (America Standards of Mechanical Engineering) codes. Application of these codes is not a simple one either as other factor will have influence on it. Which further probes the question of are ethical codes universal or can they be based on cultural context? To try and this we will focus on the various issues which include cultural, social and economic factors that have a direct influence on their application. However ASME are categorized into three broad categories ;( 1) this describes provisions which deal with improving the status of the practice in the society. In this the fundamental principle (FP) is stated that Engineers as individuals will uphold and improve the honor, dignity and integrity of the profession in the society. (2) gives the provision of having to do with maintaining the customary standards of practice professionaly.FP under this states that engineers will be accountable to and seek to advance the dignity, honor and integrity of engineering as a profession by ensuring there is no impartiality and being honest, offering services with fidelity to their employer .the public and to their clients. Under this categories gifts and bribes and any other type of fee is elaborated to help differentiate between them. This aims at curbing personal interest which may lead for example an engineer soliciting for a bribe terming it as “gift”. However gifts are allowed to be given to the engineers. (3) This category deals with the social responsibility or obligation at large of the engineer to forge forward human wellbeing or welfare in engineering practice. The fundamental principle understates that engineers should uphold and seek to advance the honor, integrity and dignity of the practice of engineering by use of their skills and know-how for the betterment of the welfare of human beings.
Harris (2014), gives a comprehensive review on how cross cultural has affected the general application of the ASME code of ethics. In the review he mentions that it should be understood that cultural differences will always be there and we cannot impose guidelines on people or force them to conform to our ways of thinking or practice. However, all hope is not lost as from the review he offers nine reviews on finding and justified or proved culture transcending guidelines. The guidelines can be summarized as (1) shun away from exploiting the weak and very vulnerable cultures. (2) Elude from paternalistic handling of citizens from the host country. (3) Shun bribery and receiving and giving of gifts often and excessively. (4) human rights should not be violated (5) welfare of host country should be promoted within reasonable boundaries or limits.(6) at all times the cultural norms and legal laws should be respected.(7) healthy and safety of the residents in host country should be protected.(8) environment protection should also be included to strike a balance . (9) Promoting and respecting the society’s original background institution. These nine guidelines may not be all conclusive but they help strike a balance when it comes to engineering codes of ethics and bridging the cross-cultural barriers.
As discussed above on the reasons for having codes advantages can also be deduced which would support the practice of engineering codes. They will include ; equality and loyalty to the engineer’s associates, clients, employers, employees and his subordinate staff; pushes the engineer to maintain high standards of professionalism as indicated in the codes and also as a result of personal ethics; brings about competence and fair and healthy competition within the profession and ensures public needs will be met (Lynch and Kline, 2000) .
Engineering ethics can be learnt on the field but due to various changes in the engineering field the practice needs to be incorporated in the study curriculum. There has been various changes which are changing the tradition way of practicing. Among the top contributors to these changes is the technological advancement in engineering. New codes are being formed which regulates the use of technology and mode delivering this technology. Societies now demand more openness of the engineering activity. This is raising questions on how much should be revealed and limits that both protect the public and the engineers. Other reason as the engineering fields continue to be diversified there is a need to teach the classical values of engineering. Upon these value the engineering field was birthed and if forgotten then the moral fabric which hold the profession will be lost. Moving forward this will make it mandatory for code of ethics to be included in the study of engineering.
References
Davis, M., 1991. Thinking like an engineer: The place of a code of ethics in the practice of a profession. Philosophy & Public Affairs, pp.150-167.
Davis, M., 2001. Three myths about codes of engineering ethics. Technology and Society Magazine, IEEE, 20(3), pp.8-14.
Davis, M., 2006. Engineering ethics, individuals, and organizations. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(2), pp.223-231.
Harris Jr, C.E., 2004. Internationalizing professional codes in engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10(3), pp.503-521.
Lynch, W.T. and Kline, R., 2000. Engineering practice and engineering ethics. Science, Technology & Human Values, 25(2), pp.195-225.
Ramirez, F., Seco, A. and Cobo, E.P., 2011. New values for twenty-first century engineering. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education & Practice, 137(4), pp.211-214.
Vesilind, P.A., 1999. The good engineer. Science and Engineering Ethics, 5(4), pp.437-442.
