By RON BUCKNAM
University of Washington

The following story is true, but the names have been changed for the new "Ethics in Professional Practice Case-of-the-Month Program," now on the Internet:

Ralph was an engineer who was rapidly gaining authority and status in a well-established, successful firm: the Gamma Group. One day, he found that he must follow his wife to a smaller city if she was to get out of her career doldrums. To accommodate Ralph, his boss, Dirk, allowed Ralph to set up a branch office of the firm in the smaller city. Ralph did this, and the branch grew profitably.

In the meantime, Dirk was ejected from the firm for questionable dealings with a competing firm.

The plot thickened as Dirk started a new consulting business with competitive services, Compass Associates, and wanted to set up an office in Ralph's new home town. Dirk contacted Ralph to explain the potentially competitive situation and to convince him to join Dirk in his new enterprise.

Ralph decided to take the lucrative offer and brings ones of his top people with him to Compass Associates. They depart abruptly, leaving their hard-working Gamma Group staff in confusion and dismay. Immediately, Ralph's wife begins calling his former staff to urge them to join the new firm as well.

If you were one of the Gamma Group branch staff members, what would you do?

You can read the long version of this story, aptly titled "Where the Green Grass Grows," and register your own answer, at a new website: http:// www.engr.washington.edu/ epp/Pepl/Ethics.

Some of the 1,160 website visitors so far have voted on hypothetical responses ranging from bidding up the highest salary to calling the president of the Gamma Group immediately after the phone call from Ralph's wife. Others have registered their own responses.

The top vote getter, according to tabulated votes, is: Call the president. Loyalty wins.

The Ethics in Professional Practice Case-of-the-Month Program is only in its first year. The program features real situations taken from professional practice. The purpose is to stimulate greater focus on ethical issues within the engineering profession and to allow Internet web site visitors an opportunity to avoid similar pitfalls in their own careers. In addition to providing an opportunity for individuals to read and respond to case histories, it also provides a convenient forum for in-house discussion.

It is sponsored by the Professional Engineering Practice Liaison Program (PEPL) at the University of Washington. The program has been endorsed by 11 national professional societies.

It is an outgrowth of work over the past several years to increase the level of awareness of university students, faculty and young practicing engineers on the non-technical issues which most often spell the difference between success and failure in designed projects. Most of the situations described are derived from more than 30 years of practice as a consulting engineer and the experiences of a variety of practicing engineers across the country.

The language used is straightforward and understandable, and the solutions provided for consideration are realistic and, for the most part, practical.

The expressed intent of this program is to foster discussion of many day-to-day, sometimes gut-wrenching, ethical issues in professional practice and to derive practical solutions for practicing design professionals.

Every other month a new applied ethics case taken from actual professional practice is presented in narrative format. The names of the participants and their locations are altered to obscure the real identities of those involved. Several suggested solutions to the situation are also presented. Not all of these solutions are necessarily ethical, but may represent a spectrum of reactions found in professional practice.

Web site visitors are invited to vote electronically for the solution(s) they believe to be the most applicable. Alternatively, visitors may submit their own solutions to the ethical dilemma presented. This can be accomplished via the Web, as well as by direct e-mail, snail mail or fax.

The tabulated results of the site visitors' responses and additional solutions are compiled over a two-month period and presented at the web site. The corresponding case history narrative is also available for reference. All reasonable additional solutions submitted are synopsized and presented as well.

The identities of those submitting additional solutions are kept confidential, unless specifically requested otherwise. In addition, the recommendations of a panel consisting of members of the program's board of review are presented, and an epilog is appended in cases where the actual outcome to the situation is known.

Based on research conducted by the program director, a list of six recommended core ethical values are presented on another program page to assist people with ethical dilemmas encountered in professional practice. Additionally, recommendations for basic steps to personal ethical decision making and guidelines for facilitating solutions to ethical dilemmas in professional practice are presented for reference on separate linked web pages.

Contributions of real life case histories from a variety of professional design disciplines are encouraged. Reviewers for each case history site are selected from a non-convening board of review. These reviewers are asked to comment on and submit alternative solutions to the cases. The identities of the reviewers for each case and their respective suggested solutions remain confidential.

Information regarding case history contributions and how to volunteer as a reviewer is available at the web site, or by contacting Dr. Ronald E. Bucknam, Director, Professional Engineering Practice Liaison Program University of Washington, Box 352700, Seattle, WA 98195-2700, 206/543-1178; e-mail: rebuck@whidbey.net

Ronald Bucknam is director of the Professional Engineering Practice Liaison Program at the University of Washington.

Return to design '97 top page

---

Copyright © 1997 Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce.