The Engineer & Society

2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Instructor: Prof. Dr. Hasan Hüseyin ERKAYA

Eskişehir Osmangazi University

March 2021
 2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Outline
• Faulty Chip Case
• Is Engineering a Profession?
• Code of Ethics
– IEEE Code of Ethics
– NSPE Code of Ethics
• Case Studies:
– Denver Airport Runway
– Paradyne Computers

Source: C.B. Fleddermann, Engineering Ethics, 3rd Ed. New York: Prentice Hall, 2008
 2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Faulty Chip Case

• In 1994, reports were published claiming

that Intel’s Pentium chip had a problem.
• Some arithmetic operations were done
incorrectly.
• Intel, the manufacturer, denied the claims.
• Later the company admitted that there was a slight problem,
but it would not affect the everyday use of the computer.
• They were working on correcting the problem.
• People asked their chips to be replaced.
• Intel refused it at first. Later it agreed on replacing them if the
customer requested.
• Ultimately, Intel spent 475 million dollars to solve this problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Did Intel do anything unethical?

• Professional engineering societies developed codes of
ethics.
• These codes are main guidelines for engineers in carrying
out their profession.
• The ethics code suggests that engineers should not make
false claims or represent a product to be something that is
not.
• Intel knew the problem and acted as though there were
no problems.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Is Engineering a “Profession”?

• Job: any work for hire—regardless of the level of skills or

responsibilities.
• Occupation: employment that brings income to a person.
• Occupation ≈ Job  sometimes “profession” is used to
mean these two words.
• Professional athlete: a person who receives money for
doing sports.
• Professional carpenter: a carpenter with high level of
skills acquired through years of experience who will provide
an excellent service.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Profession

• Work that require sophisticated skills, use of judgement,

exercise of discretion. Non-routine work, not machanizable
work.
• Membership in profession requires extensive formal
education—not simple training or apprenticeship.
• The public allows the professional organizations to set
standards for admission and conduct of members and
enforce these standards.
• Significant public good comes from the practice of
profession.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Profession

• The “judgement” refers to significant decisions that affect

people. These decisions are based on the formal training of
the professional.

• “Discretion” could mean “confidentiality.” The professional

does not share private information with others.

• “Discretion” could also mean “judgement, decision.” A

professional is wholly “trusted” in his or her decision.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Profession

• A professional receives payment for his or her services. This

payment is often at a high level in comparison to a payment
for a job.

• A professional athlete or
a professional entertainer  not a professional as described
above.

• A professional carpenter  requires special skills, but many

aspects of their work can be mechanized. Little judgement is
required. On the job training is required.  not a professional
as described above.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Is Engineering a “Profession”?

• Medicine  Sophisticated skills, formal training, judgement

and discretion needed, have professional societies, meets a
public need. Hence  a profession

• Law  Sophisticated skills through formal training, serves a

public need, judgement and discretion needed, have special
societies. Hence  a profession

• Engineering  Extensive and sophisticated skills that

require formal training, engineering design = judgement and
discretion, safety of public, work cannot be mechanized,
(new designs, modifications), have special societies. Hence
 a profession
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Code of Ethics
• Professional societies have codes of ethics.
• These codes describe rights, duties and obligations of the
members of the profession.
• The code of ethics could be stated by various institutions and
corporations—it is not limited to professional societies.
• Code of ethics  a framework for ethical judgement; a starting
point for ethical decision making
• Code of Ethics  not a recipe for ethical behavior—one should
not substitute code of ethics for sound judgement.
• Code of Ethics  not a legal document—violation of code does
not put a person in jail, but can cause the expulsion from the
society; however, one can still practice as a non-member.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Code of Ethics
• Code of Ethics  not a new set of ethical principles but a
restatement of well-established practices, foundation of ethical
and moral principles dating back many centuries earlier
• Code of Ethics  helps one to apply moral and ethical principles
to professional practice.

• Objection to the Codes

– Not all engineers are members of professional societies.
– Some members are unaware of the code.
– Some never read it.
– Some conflicts exist but nothing is suggested to resolve the
conflicts.
– It is often a warning—not encouragement.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics

• The origins of the IEEE Code of Ethics can be traced back

to 1906 when the president of AIEE gave an address that
led to the creation of a “Code of Principles of Professional
Conduct,” adopted in 1912.
• Following the 1963 merger of AIEE and IRE, a new code of
ethics for IEEE was adopted in 1974 and revised in 1979
and 1987.
• In 1990 a shorter code was adopted, with content and
wording more appropriate for a worldwide membership.
• In 2006 the word, engineering, was deleted in one
sentence.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 1990 and 2006

We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our
technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in
accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and
the communities we serve, do hereby commit ourselves to the highest
ethical and professional conduct and agree:

1. to accept responsibility in making engineering decisions consistent

with the safety, health and welfare of the public, and to disclose
promptly factors that might endanger the public or the
environment;
2. to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible,
and to disclose them to affected parties when they do exist;
3. to be honest and realistic in stating claims or estimates based on
available data;
4. to reject bribery in all its forms;
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 1990 and 2006

5. to improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate
application, and potential consequences;
6. to maintain and improve our technical competence and to
undertake technological tasks for others only if qualified by training
or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent limitations;
7. to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to
acknowledge and correct errors, and to credit properly the
contributions of others;
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 1990 and 2006

8. to treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race,
religion, gender, disability, age, or national origin;
9. to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or employment
by false or malicious action;
10. to assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional
development and to support them in following this code of ethics.

Approved by the IEEE Board of Directors

August 1990, revised February 2006
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 2020

We, the members of the IEEE, in recognition of the importance of our
technologies in affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in
accepting a personal obligation to our profession, its members and
the communities we serve, do hereby commit ourselves to the highest
ethical and professional conduct and agree:

I. To uphold the highest standards of integrity, responsible behavior,

and ethical conduct in professional activities.
1. to hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
public, to strive to comply with ethical design and sustainable
development practices, to protect the privacy of others, and
to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or
the environment; (1 expanded)
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 2020

2. to improve the understanding by individuals and society of
the capabilities and societal implications of conventional and
emerging technologies, including intelligent systems;
(5 expanded)
3. to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever
possible, and to disclose them to affected parties when they
do exist; (2)
4. to avoid unlawful conduct in professional activities, and to
reject bribery in all its forms; (4 expanded)
5. to seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work,
to acknowledge and correct errors, to be honest and realistic
in stating claims or estimates based on available data, and to
credit properly the contributions of others; (3 and 7 combined)
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 2020

6. to maintain and improve our technical competence and to
undertake technological tasks for others only if qualified by
training or experience, or after full disclosure of pertinent
limitations; (unchanged)

II. To treat all persons fairly and with respect, to not engage in
harassment or discrimination, and to avoid injuring others.
7. to treat all persons fairly and with respect, and to not engage
in discrimination based on characteristics such as race,
religion, gender, disability, age, national origin, sexual
orientation, gender identity, or gender expression; (8
expanded)
8. to not engage in harassment of any kind, including sexual
harassment or bullying behavior;
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

IEEE Code of Ethics 2020

9. to avoid injuring others, their property, reputation, or
employment by false or malicious actions, rumors or any
other verbal or physical abuses; (unchanged)

III. To strive to ensure this code is upheld by colleagues and co-

workers.
10. to support colleagues and co-workers in following this code
of ethics, to strive to ensure the code is upheld, and to not
retaliate against individuals reporting a violation.
(reworded, expanded)

Adopted by the IEEE Board of Directors and incorporating revisions

through June 2020.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers

Preamble
• Engineering is an important and learned profession.
• As members of this profession, engineers are expected to exhibit
the highest standards of honesty and integrity.
• Engineering has a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for
all people.
• Accordingly, the services provided by engineers require honesty,
impartiality, fairness, and equity, and must be dedicated to the
protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
• Engineers must perform under a standard of professional behavior
that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical
conduct.

.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers

Fundamental Canons
Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall:
1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
5. Avoid deceptive acts.
6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and
lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of
the profession.

Details: NSPE Code of Ethics

https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/Ethics/CodeofEthics/NSPECodeofEthicsforEngineers.pdf
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

• In 1989, the city of Denver, Colorado, gets the approval for a new
airport: Denver International Airport (DIA).
• Construction Company: Ball, Ball, & Brosamer (known as 3Bs)
• A very large, costly, and complex project.
• Possible problems: cost overruns, worker safety and health issues,
and controversies over the need for the project.
• Design changes took place upon to request of the airliners.
• An actual problem: a high-tech baggage handling system
consistently mangled and misrouted baggage and frequently
jammed, leading to the shutdown of the entire system.
• Problems with the baggage handling system delayed the opening
of the airport for 16 months and cost the city millions
• It opened on February 28, 1995, with a cost of $4.8 billion.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

Engineering ethics problems:
• August of 1993: Two subcontractors filed lawsuits against 3Bs,
claiming that 3Bs owed them money.
• Allegations:
– 3Bs had altered the recipe for the concrete used in the runway and
apron construction, deliberately diluting the concrete with more gravel,
water, and sand (and thus less cement), thereby weakening it.
– 3Bs hadn’t paid them for materials that had been delivered. These
materials had been used to dilute the mixture, but hadn’t been paid
for, since the payment would leave a record of the improper recipe.
• Denver city officials relied on the independent concrete test results
and saw no problem.
• Additional test samples were taken from the runways that tested
fine.
• Subcontractors claimed that even if the tests were fine, it would
shorten runway lifetime severely.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

Engineering ethics problems:
• FBI got involved due to federal funding of the project.
• August 1994: the Denver district attorney’s office started
investigation on allegations that inspection reports on the runways
were falsified during the construction.
• November 1994: Denver Post reports allegations that Empire
Laboratories falsified the concrete test results.
• Some of the concrete used in the runways contained clay balls up
to 10 inches in diameter.
• One of the batch plant operators for 3Bs explained that they were
tipped off about upcoming inspections so that they would use the
proper mixture while being inspected.
• A batch plant operator also gave a sworn statement that he had
been directed to fool the computer that operated the batch plant.
(Entering a negative number for the water content of the sand).
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

Engineering ethics problems:
• Concrete samples were taken from runways, and some parts
found to be below standards.
• 3Bs was paid for those areas that were below standard at a lower
rate than for the stronger parts of the runway.
• 3Bs contended that the city still owed them $2.3 million (in addition
to the $193 million that 3Bs had already been paid) for the work
they did.
• The city claimed that this money was not owed. The reduction was
a penalty due to low test results on some of the concrete.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Denver Airport Runway

Engineering ethics problems:
• The nature of the test modifications and the rationale behind them
illustrate many of the important problems in engineering ethics,
including the need for objectivity and honesty in reporting
results of tests and experiments.
• One Empire employee said that if a test result was inconsistent
with other tests, then the results would be changed to mask the
difference. This practice was justified by Empire as being “based
upon engineering judgment.”
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

Competitive Bidding
• Competitive bidding is a well-established practice in purchasing
• The idea: the buyer can get a product at the best price by setting
up competition between the various suppliers.
• It can lead to many ethical problems:
– Deception on the part of the vendor
– Unfairness on the part of the buyer in choosing a vendor
– Especially with large contracts, the temptation to cheat on the bidding
is great.
– Deliberate underbidding to win contracts, followed by cost overruns
that are unavoidable
– Theft of information on others’ bids to underbid them
– Leaking information to a preferred bidder
– Giving advance notice or detailed knowledge of evaluation procedures
to preferred bidders
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

The Paradyne computer case
• The case illustrates some of the hazards associated with
competitive bidding.
• June 10, 1980: the Social Security Administration (SSA) published
a request for proposals (RFP) for computer systems to replace the
older equipment in its field offices.
• SSA intended to purchase an off-the-shelf system already in the
vendor’s product line, rather than a customized system.
• This requirement was intended to minimize the field testing and
bugs associated with customized systems.
• The bidder had to provide a sample of the product and
demonstrate it worked.
• In March of 1981, SSA let a contract for $115 million for 1,800
computer systems to Paradyne.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

The Paradyne computer case
• Paradyne computers failed the acceptance testing.
• The requirements were finally relaxed so that the computers
would pass.
• After delivery, many SSA field offices reported frequent
malfunctions, sometimes multiple times per day, requiring
manual rebooting of the system.
• One of the contract requirements was that the computers
function 98% of the time. This requirement wasn’t met until
after 21 months of operation.
• After nearly two years of headaches and much wasted time
and money, the system finally worked as planned.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

Ethical Issues:
• The product supplied by Paradyne was not an off-the-shelf
system, but rather was a system that incorporated new
technology that had yet to be built and was still under
development.
• Paradyne had proposed selling SSA their P8400 model with
the PIOS operating system.
• The bid was written as if this system currently existed.
However, at the time that the bid was prepared, the 8400
system did not exist and had not been developed,
prototyped, or manufactured.
• There were other problems associated with Paradyne’s
performance during the bidding.
•
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

Ethical Issues:
• Paradyne did not have its own computer system to demonstrate to
the SSA
• Paradyne modified a PDP 11/23 computer manufactured by Digital
Equipment Corporation (DEC) and placed it in a cabinet that was
labeled P8400.
• DEC brand labels were covered with Paradyne labels.
• Paradyne did not have an operating system either.
• SSA did not inspect Paradyne’s production facilities despite the
requirement.
• Paradyne had a consultant who used to work for the SSA
• The consultant was the mediator to have SSA change the
requirements.
2. Professionalism and Codes of Ethics

Case: Paradyne Computers

Ethical Issues:
• Afterwards, many investigations were initiated by government
agencies.
• New regulations were accepted.
Next: 3. Understanding Ethical Problems

Thanks for your attention

Prof. Dr. H.H. Erkaya