Honesty
In manufacturing the Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, the manufacturer’s moral consent and level of honesty determine his or her concentration on the duty to ensure that the UAV meets the target (Grant, Hackney & Edgar 2010, p. 81). This would eliminate cases of missing target and harming innocent lives. Through honesty, one would uphold certified standards within restricted framework of making UAV to maintain public trust, integrity and professional values.
The values such as honesty and integrity are very critical in making decisions during the manufacturing the aircrafts, thus making the person reject bribery when confronted during his/her work. Second, the person will not intentionally deceive a customer regarding the quality and capability of UVA.
Third, it is through honesty that the UVA makers will adhere to professional standards without being compromised by his/her opinions or those of others. This is important in delivering quality products and services to clients. Forth, an honest UVA manufacturer will not overexaggerate the value of the products, but will tell an absolute truth about what the aircraft can achieve in terms of efficiency and aerodynamic requirements. It helps in limiting the amount of funds to be used in the undertaking. Fifth, honesty will make the manufacturer distinguish workable and professional ideas from mere propaganda when making UVA.
Drones and Deontology
Drones are considered to be UVAs which are made and manipulated by humans to achieve a particular mission without necessarily having the person on board. This means that the UVA do not have the ability to function automatically in the absence of the manipulator or remote control systems which direct its operations. The UVAs just respond to the simple remote controlled directives from a person not seen by the audience to accomplish the duties which that person wants them to carry out.
People who carry out this manipulation are usually professionals who sit behind the curtains as they make the UVA perform the duties, meaning that they should be ethical to make the undertaking successful (Brookins 2011, p. 1).
Deontological studies seek to accomplish the specific duties without being influenced by a third party or personal instincts. The reason for this is that following personal instincts, the UVA might not produce desirable outcome that may not please the audience. An individual’s desire and belief that do not rhyme with the professional standards and guidelines cannot make a UVA/drone achieve the specified objectives. Therefore, the experts are compelled to stick to the deontological outlines even if such directives could be conflicting with his/her personal ideals (Evans & Wurster 2006, p. 80). This is a practical way of ensuring that the intended functions of the UVA are not compromised.
Drones and Relativism
Since people’s opinions differ considerably even on a single issue, it might be difficult to point out the target when operating the UVA and the specific outcome achieved. However, the people’s divergent views regarding the certainty or uncertainty of manipulating UAVs could also assist in establishing the best course of action to take so that the intended outcome could be achieved. In such cases, issues regarding the operationalization of UVAs may seem to be abstract in nature for many people, but fulfilling the objectives, which they were made to accomplish (Chaffey 2003, p. 45).
Therefore, it does not matter what a group of people believe in regarding the capability of the drones provided that the procedures and professional standards of manipulating them are adhered to. This means personal instincts do not have any role in making sure that the objectives are accomplished. The most important thing is one’s safety and assurance of privacy during the manipulation of UVA must be assured.
In addition, the drones might not achieve absolute affection to the crowd, but should be enjoyed by the majority. This means that there is no total relativity about the drones. The policies regulating UAV activities significantly differ according to the country in question and thus must be strictly observed.
Drones and Ethical Pluralism
The question of ethical pluralism is more controversial when it comes to the issue of UVA. Different categories of people have divergent opinion concerning the characteristics and purpose of a drone. There are people who believe that the UAV are threats to public safety since the manipulations and controls could fail. The situation could lead to accidents and injuries to unsuspecting people; hence people view the operations of drones as unethical and insensitive to the public.
Alternatively, there are experts who believe that flying the UAV, which are installed with powerful cameras, could improve the security of people due to the claim that the cameras could record and transmit unlawful acts and purported threats, thus prompting security operations to thwart the attempts (Ambrosini & Bowman 2003, p. 217).
In reality, these perceptions characterise the differences in views by the members of the society. Personal interests emanating from the diverse categories of people whose agenda might include financial benefit or fame could also affect the operation of the UAV (Caldeira & Ward 2003, p. 117). Other demands such as additional remuneration for those manufacturing such UVA, could affect the entire operations.
Opinion
The Unmanned Aerial Vehicles’ makers should courteously handle issues emanating from privacy concerns. This could be achieved through making sure that the UAV and their activities do not violate the privacy of the manipulators and anticipated audience.
References
Ambrosini, V & Bowman, C 2003, “Managerial Consensus and Corporate Strategy: Why Do Executives Agree or Disagree about Corporate Strategy”, European Management Journal, vol. 21 no.2, pp. 213 – 221.
Brookins, M 2011, What Are The Advantages and Disadvantages of CRM?. Web.
Caldeira, M & Ward, J 2003, “Using Resource-Based Theory to Interpret the Successful Adoption and Use of Information Systems and Technology in Manufacturing Small and Medium Sized Enterprises”, European Journal of Information Systems, vol.12 no.1, pp. 114 – 127.
Chaffey, D 2003, Business Information Systems: Technology, Development and Management for the e-business, Pearson Education Ltd, Boston.
Evans, P & Wurster, A 2006, Strategy and the New Economics of Information, Harvard Business Review, Massachusetts.
Grant, K, Hackney, J & Edgar, J 2010, Strategic Information Systems Management, Cengage Learning, New York.