Scribd
Upload
506 views

Proper Engineering and Management Decisions: Functions of Engineers and Managers

The document discusses proper engineering and management decisions. It defines a proper engineering decision (PED) as one that requires technical expertise or protects health and safety. A proper management decision (PMD) involves factors like cost, scheduling, and employee welfare without compromising ethics. It provides examples of paradigmatic PED and PMD cases. A non-paradigmatic case involves both engineering and management considerations. The document also discusses responsible organizational disobedience through contrary action, non-participation, or protest.

Uploaded by

Najmul Puda Pappadam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
506 views

Proper Engineering and Management Decisions: Functions of Engineers and Managers

The document discusses proper engineering and management decisions. It defines a proper engineering decision (PED) as one that requires technical expertise or protects health and safety. A proper management decision (PMD) involves factors like cost, scheduling, and employee welfare without compromising ethics. It provides examples of paradigmatic PED and PMD cases. A non-paradigmatic case involves both engineering and management considerations. The document also discusses responsible organizational disobedience through contrary action, non-participation, or protest.

Uploaded by

Najmul Puda Pappadam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

CIV402 Sec22 & 66 4/22/2020

Proper Engineering and Management Decisions

Functions of Engineers and Managers

The primary function of engineers within an organization is to use their


technical knowledge and training to create structures, products, and
processes that are of value to the organization and its customers. Thus,
engineers have a dual loyalty—to the organization and to their profession.
Engineers also ascribe prominent importance to safety. Moreover, they are
inclined to be cautious in this regard, preferring to err on the conservative
side in safety considerations.

The primary function of managers is to direct the activities of the


organization, including the activities of engineers. Rather than thinking in
terms of professional practices and standards, managers tend to enumerate
all of the relevant considerations (‘‘get everything on the table,’’ as they
sometimes say) and then balance them against one another to come to a
conclusion.

Distinction between Proper Engineering Decision


(PED) and Proper Management Decision (PMD)
PED: A decision that should be made by engineers because it either
(1) involves technical matters that require engineering expertise or
(2) falls within the ethical standards embodied in engineering codes,
especially those that require engineers to protect the health and
safety of the public.

PMD: A decision that should be made by managers because


(1) it involves factors relating to the well-being of the organization, such
as cost, scheduling, and marketing, and employee morale or
welfare; and
(2) the decision does not force engineers (or other professionals) to
make unacceptable compromises with their own technical or ethical
standards.

Dr. Manish A. Kewalramani 1


CIV402 Sec22 & 66 4/22/2020

Paradigmatic and Non-paradigmatic Examples


It will be useful to employ the line-drawing technique in handling moral
issues that arise in this area. We refer to the relatively uncontroversial
examples of PEDs and PMDs as paradigmatic.
Example 1: Paradigmatic PED
Suppose engineer Jane is participating in the design of a chemical plant that her firm will build
for itself. She must choose between valve A and valve B. Valve B is sold by a friend of Jane’s
manager, but it fails to meet minimum specifications for the job.

It has, in fact, been responsible for several disasters involving loss of life, and Jane is
surprised that it is still on the market. Valve A, by contrast, is a state-of-the-art product. Among
other things, it has a quicker shutoff mechanism and is also much less prone to malfunctions
in emergencies.
Although it is 5 percent more expensive, the expense is one that Jane’s firm can well afford.
Valve A, therefore, is the clear and unequivocal choice in terms of both quality and safety.

Example 2: Paradigmatic PMD


Suppose valves A and B are equal in quality and safety, but valve B can be supplied much
faster than valve A, is 15 percent cheaper, and is manufactured by a firm that is a potential
customer for some of the products of Jane’s firm.
Valve A, however, is made by a firm that is potentially an even bigger customer for some of
the products of Jane’s firm, although cultivating a relationship with this firm will require a
long-term commitment and be more expensive.
If there are no other relevant considerations, the decision as to whether to purchase valve A
or valve B should be made by managers, or at least made in accordance with management
considerations.
Comparing the decision by the two criteria in the PMD, we can say that
(1) Management considerations (e.g., speed of delivery, cost, and the decision as to which
customers should be cultivated) are important, and
(2) No violation of engineering considerations would result from either decision.

Dr. Manish A. Kewalramani 2


CIV402 Sec22 & 66 4/22/2020

Example 3: Non-Paradigmatic Case: PED/PMD


Consider another version of the same case in which valve A has a slightly better
record of long-term reliability (and is therefore somewhat safer), but valve B is 10
percent cheaper and can be both delivered and marketed more quickly.

It is important to remember that, as in all line-drawing cases, the importance or


moral ‘‘weight’’ of the feature must be considered.

One cannot simply count the number of features that fall on the PMD or PED
side or where the ‘‘X’’ should be placed on the line.

Exercise: Pollution Issue


Suppose process A is so much more costly than process B that the use
of process A might threaten the survival of the company. Suppose,
furthermore, that process B is more polluting, but it is not clear whether
the pollution poses any substantial threat to human health.
Make a line-drawing illustration of the case.
Based on good-will thinking; decide whether management or
engineering considerations should prevail.

Student’s Activity

Dr. Manish A. Kewalramani 3


CIV402 Sec22 & 66 4/22/2020

Responsible Organizational Disobedience


Organizational disobedience is defined as a protest of, or refusal to follow,
an organizational policy or action.

There are at least three distinct areas in which responsible engineers


might be involved in organizational disobedience:

1. Disobedience by contrary action, which is engaging in activities


contrary to the interests of the company, as perceived by management.
2. Disobedience by nonparticipation, which is refusing to carry out an
assignment because of moral or professional objections.

3. Disobedience by protest, which is actively and openly protesting a


policy or action of an organization.

1. Disobedience by contrary action


Examples : An engineer might be a member of a political group that is generally
held in low esteem by the community.

An engineer may be a member of a local environmental group that is pressuring his


or her company to install antipollution equipment that is not required by law.

An engineer is lobbying to keep the company from purchasing some wetland area
that it intends to drain and use for plant expansion.

First, some actions by employees outside the workplace harm an organization more
directly than others. Employees should be more careful in areas in which the harm
to their organization is more direct.

Second, there can be a major difference in the degree to which curtailment of an


employee’s activities outside the workplace encroaches on his freedom.

Therefore, employees should allow themselves more freedom in areas that are
closely related to their basic personal commitments than in areas more peripheral to
their most important concerns.

Dr. Manish A. Kewalramani 4


CIV402 Sec22 & 66 4/22/2020

2. Disobedience by non-participation
For example, engineers are most likely to engage in disobedience by
nonparticipation in projects that are related to the military and in projects that may
adversely affect the environment.

Employers should not force employees to make a choice between losing their job
or violating personal or professional standards.

Sometimes employers may not have any alternative work assignments, but many
organizations have found ways to respect employees’ views without undue
economic sacrifice.

3. Disobedience by protest

In some situations, engineers find the actions of the employer to be so


objectionable that they believe mere nonparticipation in the objectionable activity
is insufficient. Rather, some form of protest, or ‘‘whistleblowing,’’ is required.

Dr. Manish A. Kewalramani 5

You might also like