标签: ETHICS
相关博文
-
What a controversial word is “ethics,” with its explosive potential lending itself to varying interpretations. It’s like the word, “obscenity.” Everyone knows what it is, but how do you define it? —Frank Lebell, The Manufacturers’ Representative I’ve been thinking about ethics recently, but not the generic kind represented by violations like taking a company pen home. And who among us can claim to be purists? I can’t—I have plenty of company pens laying around my office. And, truth-be-told, my war stories get more polished and elaborate each year. Let the stones in my glass house be unthrown. Without dusting off the inevitable business ethics textbook from college, most of us instinctively know what is right or wrong—and choose the high road, and not just on principle, but because experience guides us. Is the short term joy of dishonesty worth the impact on our careers? And, if you always tell the truth to the best of your ability, then you never have to worry about steering the story you’re telling. However, the flavor of ethics I’m thinking about is represented by artificial certainty. As Mark Twain put it: It ain’t what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. As engineers responsible for products important for people’s lives, we should be certain about what we say—more certain than a politician, for example. But how do we “know?” By testing, calculating, measuring and analyzing, that’s how. It would be great to always have complete knowledge, but we’re constantly called on to make decisions with incomplete information. As close as we may be, engineers are not God with perfect understanding of everything. Too bad. I will say this, however. You should make a reasonable effort to gather the necessary facts to make a rational decision. Do your homework. If you want to change a process, first make an honest effort to understand why things were done a certain way. If you’re changing a part or a design strategy, make an honest effort to understand the existing circuit and design decision. In decision making, the brash confidence of youth is cute and might be appealing to upper management, but there be alligators lurking in the deep. It’s hard to know the scope of what you don’t know, but it’s necessary. Wise up! If you don’t have sufficient information or context to make a decision, then defer to someone else or take the time to dig deeper. Perhaps we can take some guidance from pop culture…know, or don’t speak. I don’t think. Neither do I speculate, assume or hypothesize. —Joe Sarno, The Way of the Gun Do my comments stir any thoughts or recollections? What can you say about ethics in engineering? Ken Coffman Field Applications Engineer Member of the Technical Staff Fairchild Semiconductor
-
After being an engineer for 40 years, I have come to accept this profession as a truly noble one, in which we change the world, often radically, and more often than not for the good. The America of my youth would be unrecognisable to young people today, changed in no small way by entirely new technologies invented and perfected by members of our profession. Today engineers are developing ideas that will surely continue to improve the lot of the human race. Some will counter that there's blowback; that sometimes our products have unanticipated and undesirable side-effects. That's true, of course. We're human and not smart enough to know everything. But I remain a technology optimist. We will figure this stuff out. Others will complain that the ideas are mismatched to their intended use; in a recent radio diatribe the "expert" claimed the Gates Foundation's efforts to invent an accessible toilet for the poorest of the world was a lousy idea because, at $1k each, none of those people could afford it. But every development effort goes through evolution and change; some will fail; but those guaranteed to fail are those never started. Then there's the boss who makes demands which may lead to dangerous devices. Most engineers are employees and their paycheck is to some degree ( we're always free to quit) held hostage by those more concerned about the bottom line than more important issues. It's important that we always hold true to certain base truths. For instance, I keep a copy of the US Constitution on my phone as it represents the ideal of whom we want to be as a nation. No matter how you feel about all of the mad stuff in the news, there's so much smoke and FUD that it's easy to get swept up in the hysteria. Referring to our most important founding document grounds the discussion. Similarly, in engineering we do have some documents that should ground our professional behaviour. None are perfect, but they have some good insights. I like the IEEE's Code of Ethics . Another good one is the Statement of Ethical Principles from the Royal Academy of Engineering . In engineering we're always trying to improve; to continue to learn new things, to use better processes, and, if we're wise, to audit and improve, if necessary, our ethical behaviour. In management this would be called continuous improvement. What do you think? How do you balance the external forces that want to drive you from where you ethically want to be?
-
I recently had to deal with a work-related ethics issue. I am going to leave out the details, but I thought it was worth sharing the general case with you and to see what other types of issues you have to go through as part of your modern-day work environment. As background, I have done quite a lot of work in the area of patents over the past 15 years, as an author and as an assessor, I have worked with legal teams to both prosecute and defend patents, I have helped create patent strategies, and I have been an expert witness. So I do get asked to do various patent-related things as part of my consulting business. A couple of months ago I was approached by a lawyer representing a non-practicing entity (NPE)—something that is sometimes labelled a patent troll. These companies buy patents with the intention of suing other companies. In some cases these companies are less than ethical in that they will go after innocent companies and propose a settlement that is less than it would cost the targeted company to hire a lawyer and defend its position. It is cheaper to pay than to fight even if they are not guilty of infringement. Anyway, what these NPEs are willing to pay for patents depends on what they think is the likelihood of a pay-out and its size, and so a lawyer commissioned me to assess the validity of a couple of patents and the likelihood that the company he represented would be able to sue certain specified companies on the grounds of patent infringement. The patents were originally granted to very respectable companies, and I am sure the originating companies were just trying to monetise the intellectual property portfolios they had—especially those patents that were no longer in their primary areas of business. In this respect, the sale of those patents would be helping one set of companies. But what about the companies the NPE wished to sue? The NPE would not do this unless it thought it could extract more from them than they were paying for the patents. It had clearly defined large companies as targets and products that it believed might infringe, so this was, dare I say it, an ethical troll. A number of questions crossed my mind. First, do I want to do business with anyone I do not have the highest moral regard for? Second, if I do accept the assignment, do I give an honest opinion? I could stick it to the lawyer by saying the patents have lots of value and thus cause the NPE to lose money. Or, I could go the other way and tell the lawyer they have no value and thus stop the NPE from buying the patents in the first place. Of course, if it was ever discovered that I had done either of these things it would destroy my credibility. I did take the job, and it turned out to be an easy assignment because it was very easy to show how the patents would have no validity against the products the NPE wanted to target, therefore placing a low value on the patents in general. I felt I had done my job well, but I still wonder if I did the job for an ethical company. When I had completed my assessment I offered to send in a report. The lawyer declined. He only wanted to hear my findings verbally so that there was less evidence or paper trail. I am still not sure if I made the right choice. Interestingly enough, we never established a rate for my services before I started this work. I sent in an invoice and it got paid. What ethical issues do you face in your jobs as engineers today? No specifics necessary, and if you want to send stuff to me for anonymous responses that is fine. Brian Bailey EE Times
-
-
