Daniel Josef M. Aloroy                                                                                                2.19.08

ITETHIC                                                                                                                       O0B

CHAPTER 4: PROFESSIONAL ETHICS, CODES OF CONDUCT, AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

Describe some virtues of the ethical codes of conduct adopted by professional societies such as the ACM and the IEEE-CS, and list some shortcomings of these professional codes as well. In the final analysis, do the advantages of having a code outweigh the prospects of not having one? Use either an actual or a hypothetical case to establish the main points in your answer.

The strengths of both codes of the company are more inestimable in a way that they prevail over the weaknesses of both company’s codes. The cases of having these professional codes can deliver better outcomes than in instances where there are none. A hypothetical case that I can give is when a programmer who works for an antivirus company uses his knowledge on creating impregnable viruses and Trojans. In that case, he is warned by his superiors that if he continues to create viruses like those he did, he will be fired. He was also given some advices on how to improve his skills and use them ethically instead.

Do you believe that a coherent and comprehensive code of conduct for computer professionals is possible? If so, which of the codes mentioned in this chapter best approximates such a code? In answering this question, you should consult the full descriptions of the five professional codes included in Appendices through E on the book’s website (www.wiley.com/college/tavani).

I think it would be very possible to have a comprehensive code of conduct for computer professionals because from the codes of IEEE-CS and ACM are comprehensive enough and should be able to guide their employees accordingly.

You have been working for the XYZ Computer Corporation as an entry-level software engineer since you graduated from college last May. You have done very well so far; you are respected by management, well liked by your fellow employees, and have been assigned to a team of engineers that has consistently worked on the most critical and valued projects and contracts that XYZ Corp. Has secured. Their most recent contract is for a U.S. defense project involving the Missile Defense System, and again, you have been assigned to the team that will develop software for this project. However, you are staunchly opposed to the project’s objectives, so you ask to be reassigned. You supervisor and co-workers, as well as upper management, are disappointed to learn of your strong feelings about this project. You are asked to reconsider your views, and you are promised a bonus and a substantial pay increase if you agree to work on this project during the next year. You also discover from a colleague that refusing to work on this project would greatly diminish your career advancement at XYZ and may even make you vulnerable to future layoffs. To compound matters, you and your spouse are expecting your first child in about 3 months and you recently purchased a home. What would you do? Describe the process of ethical deliberation that you would undertake in trying to resolve this dilemma.

Although it would really be a good-paying project, I would still definitely accept the project. Since my spouse and I are expecting a baby within a few months from now, it will be advantageous for my family if I accept the project. We would be able to finance the expenses we will be making. Having a good reputation to the company, I will be confident that I would make the software on time and successfully.

For the past 6 months, you have worked on a project to develop a transportation software program for the city of Agropolis, which has been designed to make some much-needed improvements to Agropolis’ system of public transportation. You and your team of programmers have worked very hard on this project, but you have encountered difficulties that could have not possibly anticipated in the original design plan; these difficulties have put your project significantly behind schedule. The city transportation planners are nervous, because they depend on the software from your company to get the new transportation system up and running. And the management at your company is very uncomfortable because they signed a contract to deliver the required software on time. Although the software is not yet foolproof, testing thus far reveals that it works about 99 percent of the time. The few glitches that remain apply only to the transportations system’s backup code, which arguably would be needed in only the most severe emergencies. Residents of the city are also to have the new transportation system in place.

A decision is made by the management at your company and by the managers of the city transportation system to go ahead and implement the software as it is. They base their decision on the probability that the backup system would not be needed for several months (at which time the remaining bugs should be fixed). A decision was also made by management on both sides not to announce publicly that the software still has a few bugs. You and a few of your co-workers believe that the bugs are more dangerous than management is willing to admit. What would you do in this case? Would you be willing to blow the whistle? Defend your position.

First of all, this project is not yet implemented and no one really knows what could possibly happen by the time the system is running already. There are still slight chances of encountering errors and emergencies due to the minimal bugs found in the software. I would confer with my co-workers regarding the problem and we will discuss on what we are going to do.  Probably, we should be talking with the board of directors of both companies in order to inform them what could possibly be caused by the implementation of the software having some glitches. We are going to document what really is the glitch and then present them to the BOD and make them realize of the harms it threatens.

Recall the various arguments that we examined as to when it is appropriate, and sometimes mandatory, for software engineers and IT professionals to blow the whistle. The criteria for when whistle-blowing is permissible, at least for those working in some federal government agencies, may have changed recently. In November 2002, the Homeland Security Act passed in both Houses of Congress and was signed into law by President Bush. On one interpretation of the new law, whistle-blowing acts similar to that of Colleen Rowley – who blew the whistle on her FBI superiors who failed to act on information in the days preceding September 11 – would be illegal and thus a punishable offense. What implications could this have for software engineers and other computer professionals whose employment comes under the auspices of the Homeland Security Department? In this case, what set of rules should computer professionals follow?

Certainly, if the criteria for whistle-blowing have already changed, therefore it would be better for me not to blow the whistle anymore since my career is at stake and I could’ve been jailed for that reason. In this case, computer professionals may be stuck between two grinding stones, confused of what they should do. Because they work for the Homeland Security Department, they should abide by their rules. In the end, when somebody is threatened by the decision, the organization itself should be the one to blame for having such laws illegalizing whistle-blowing.

Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr. didn’t actually follow the criteria for whistle-blowing. Based on De George’s principles, he just satisfied 2 or 3 principles. Being the former president of Philippine Forest Corporation, he knew back then what are the deal’s consequences. He is also knowledgeable of the matter because he himself is an ECE. So I can say that Lozada is only ‘required’ to blow the whistle but not obligated.

Source: Ethics and Technology: Ethical Issues in an Age of Information and Communication Technology

                        (Herman Tavani, 2004)