Introduction
This article focuses on Fred, a chemical engineer working for Phaust Chemical Manufacturers. The company hired Fred to design a new plant in Mexico. Fred’s position in the company put him in a compromising situation. He faced some ethical challenges in the course of designing the new plant, which would manufacture a new paint remover to compete with that by Chemitoil Chemical Manufacturers.
The purpose of this article is to highlight the ethical issues surrounding the engineering profession. It shows how the video used helps the instructors teach facing and solving professional and ethical problems in engineering. This task is accomplished by formulating two basic cooperative learning techniques.
These two techniques are to generate questions in pairs and structure discussions in small groups (Loui 1). Also, the video promotes learning. Further, this article recommends solutions that will help Fred achieve ethical decisions without compromising his job.
Executive Summary
This article analyzes a video clip produced by the National Institute for Engineering Ethics in 2003. The video under consideration is an Incident at Morales (National Ethics for Engineering Ethics 1). The clip starts with Phaust learning of its competitor’s intention to introduce a new paint remover.
The competitor threatened Phaust’s dominance over the paint market with this new paint. The issue concerns Phaust’s management. Therefore, the executives decided to produce new paint remover. Phaust did not have enough funds to compete with Chemitoil Chemical Manufacturers effectively. Thus, the executives deliberated on constructing a new plant in Mexico.
This new plant was to be responsible for producing new paint remover. The company hired Fred Martinez to design the building. Fred had formerly worked as a design engineer for their competitor. However, a problem emerged when Phaust’s headquarters in France reduced the budget. The headquarters slashed the proposed budget by 20%. Therefore, this compelled Fred to make compromising decisions to meet the requirements of the company. These decisions conflicted with the ethics of the engineering profession.
The limited funds negatively influenced Fred’s decisions. The situation forced him to compromise the standard of materials bought for building the plant. For example, he used pipes and connectors made of alloys. He did not line the evaporation pond installation to prevent seepage of dangerous effluents.
Further, he failed to use expensive controls manufactured by Lutz and Lutz. He settled for cheaper controls that malfunctioned after installation. Such actions had a negative influence on the environment and the functioning of the company (Smith and Nichols 4).
Ethical issues
In the video, Fred faced many challenges that undermined his professional ethics. He neglected engineering ethics when making decisions. Fred did this in bid to save his job as the designer for Phaust’s new plant in Mexico. When buying different materials for the construction, Fred disregarded the implications of the substandard materials. For example, he purchased substandard pipes and connectors.
These substandard materials could not withstand extreme conditions for long (Smith and Nichols 4). Also, he did not line the evaporation ponds to stop evaporation of dangerous effluents. Further, instead of settling for the standard sensors he settled for cheap ones. Those sensors of inferior quality often malfunctioned forcing the plant manager to operate the plant manually. Eventually, this malfunctioning resulted in the manager’s death.
Phaust having neglected environmental ethics designed that manufacturing plant. The management did not insist on the need to inspect the plant by the relevant authorities before the company started operating. The company’s desire to make profits and dominate the market compelled the management to disregard ethics of the engineering profession.
Also, the society also neglected the ethical issues as the local authorities had not set standards for companies setting up in the area. Further, the Mexican environmental regulation’s failure to implement strict regulations encouraged setting up of substandard companies in the region (Smith and Nichols 1). Overall, negligence of ethics by the stakeholders had severe consequences, and the aftermaths affected all the concerned parties.
Evaluation of ethical issues
Different factors that triggered ethical issues were visible in the video. These factors put decision makers in compromising situations. For example, Fred had to compromise engineering ethics to secure his new job at Phaust Chemical Manufacturers. The need for Phaust to dominate the market and make profits prompted it to cut costs. Further, the leniency of the Mexican environmental regulations body compromised the country’s ethics (Smith and Nichols 4).
The sides involved in the case found themselves in compromising situations. However, they had other options. For example, Fred would have raised his concerns about the cost and other inconveniences that he had encountered. The company would have explored other options. For instance, they would have improvised on spending rather than cut costs. The society had a responsibility of protecting its environment and should have concentrated more on the issue.
The Mexican environmental authorities should have implemented firm regulations for the companies. All the stakeholders should have realized that ethics is universal and an integral component of life. Fred as an engineer should have known that ethics was essential in decision-making in the engineering practice. He should have thought of people more than of the profit and his benefits.
Recommendations
Competition increases tension in the companies and pushes the stakeholders to make decisions under pressure. At times, companies lack adequate resources, data, and time. People have different perspectives and hold different views when faced with such complex situations. Such challenges compromise the ethics of different professions.
When making decisions that will affect the ethics of the company, stakeholders should enter into negotiation. As evident in the video, negotiations help in solving different conflicts. It is advisable for stakeholders to resolve ethical problems by using rational methods rather than undermining professional ethics (Davis 1). Also, subordinates should raise questions concerning the designing process and air their views.
Further, the stakeholders should refer to the professional ethics and cases from the professional and technical engineering societies and engineering licensing boards. These measures would help in resolving ethical problems related to the engineering profession in the study under analysis. Further, stakeholders should consider the implications of technical, financial, and ethical decisions that they make.
Conclusion
This video achieves the purpose it was produced. It accomplishes this by using dramatization of a fictional but an applicable case to raise ethical issues in the engineering profession and focus on their possible solutions. The video improves people’s awareness of the ethical aspects of the engineering profession.
The content of the video provides learners with knowledge on the required professional standards, such as codes of ethics. This clip triggers sound judgment in students and helps them to develop skills in critical thinking. The video shows the factors that compel people to make ethically compromising decisions, the ways different people handle these problems, and the consequences of the decisions made. Overall, this piece effectively addresses the issues that surround ethics in the engineering profession practices.
Works Cited
Davis, Michael. Thinking Like an Engineer. 1991. Web.
Loui, Michael. Incident at Morales: an engineering ethics video. 2003. Web.
National Ethics for Engineering Ethics. Study Guide for Incident at Morales. Texas: College of Engineering, Texas Tech University, 2003. Print.
Smith, Jimmy, and Steven Nichols. “An Engineering Ethics Story.” Incident at Morales (2004): 1-6. Print.