SOSC 111 - Science Technology
and Society
Today: Lesson 17
Ethics, Engineering and Business
October 30, 1998
Dr. Vincent Duffy - IEEM
http://wwwieem.ust.hk/dfaculty/duffy/111
email: vduffy@ust.hk
1
Overview for today
View videotape ‘Think before you leap’
 segment 2: ‘Blowing the whistle’
 Discuss Rational Technique
 Compare to the Ethics Plus Model
 QOTD

5
Questions of the Day
Q1. What is the meaning of whistle blowing?
 Q.2. What is the difference between the
‘ETHICS-PLUS model and the ‘Rational
Technique’?
 Q.3. What is the significance of the sunshine
test? Why do we worry about company business
being discussed openly since it is private?
 Q.4. Who are the stakeholders in the Pepsi case?
Who is at fault?
6

rational technique

define the problem
 recognize

the problem and collect information
consider the options
 generate
alternatives and compare
 who benefits or suffers - how much?

make a decision
 select
option based on conformity w/laws, code
of ethics, etc.
 implement - think about what is missing?
10
What would you do?
facts? Tang gave her promotion
 problem was brought to her attention
 ethical issue?
‘whistle blowing’

11
What would you do?

alternatives?
 conspire (to cheat) w/Alex
 pretend not to know
 verify Alex claim about Tang
 if false? consult w/Tang & senior management
 if true? seek employment elsewhere &/or .…whistle

these actions by Alex/Tang can not survive ‘Sunshine test’
 if
malpractices are discovered by public her career
prospects will be poor both inside and outside company
12
What is the meaning of ‘whistle blowing’?
 whistle
blowing is what someone might do to get the
authority’s attention
 to
tell (in chinese)
 in
the old days, policemen used to blow a loud
whistle if they needed assistance from other police
 in the case of Sandra’s office, (Think before you leap-video)
 money
from a client account was used by her co-workers
to trade securities for their own benefit
 Sandra
was to decide whether or not to get the
attention of ‘authorities’
 either
 She
outside her company or in her company
was trying to decide whether or not to ‘blow the
whistle’ to get the authorities attention
What is missing from Rational
Technique?

Feedback nothing
built in to show that perception of the
implementation by others will affect the
outcome
 remember sunshine test?
 can
the decision stand the light of day?
 can the issue be discussed openly and discussed
w/out problem?
13
Recall: Ethics-Plus Model

ETHICS - Establish relevant facts
Take stock of ‘stakeholders’ involved
Have assessment of positions & likely responses
Identify viable alternatives
Compare & evaluate consequences of alternatives
Select appropriate course of action
PLUS - Professional conduct
Legal requirements
Uncompromisable values eg. integrity, loyalty, honesty

Sunshine test - can the issue and decision be discussed openly?








8
Q3. What is the significance of ‘sunshine
test’?
Why do we worry about company business
being discussed openly, since it is private?
 Though the matters are private (company),

 it
should be considered how the public would react
if they find out the actions, because
 it is possible that someone will find out
 maybe by chance
 maybe from a ‘whistle blower’ or
 maybe just newspapers asking questions
New case

Today: discuss Pepsi
 science
technology and society
 a ‘computer problem’ causes a situation where
a difficult decision has to be made
ex. Pepsi Cola-Philippines
sales have been running a distant 2nd to Coke
 Pepsi launched ‘Number Fever’ campaign in
Feb.92. Numbers printed on the underside of
cap and winning numbers announced each day
 Prizes up to $1M pesos, $300k HKD
 Ads in newspapers, radio, TV, saying ‘today
you could be a millionaire’
 Promotion successful, extended 5 more weeks
 most won 100 pesos ($30HKD)

Victoria Angelo, unemployed mother of 5,
lives w/family in tin-roofed shack in Manila
 husband, Juanito, earns $30HKD/ day
 began drinking pepsi, every meal, snack
 each day prayed to get winning number
 gather around small TV w/neighbors to see
 May25, #349 flashed winner

‘we are a millionaire’ to children ‘you can
finish school and go to college’ to husband ‘you
can buy passenger jeep’ to self ‘we can buy a
real house’
 a dream come true
 unfortunately, Pepsi realized mistake, thousands
of people were demanding payment
 realizing the mistake could cost Billions of $
 Pepsi refused to pay

Riots broke out, Pepsi delivery trucks were
stoned, torched, overturned
 homemade bombs were thrown at Pepsi
plants and offices
 in one case, fragmentation grenade tossed at
a parked Pepsi truck bounced off truck
 killed 5 year old girl, schoolteacher and
wounded others

The violence frightened the company officials
and they offered then $50 HKD to the winners
 more than 480,000 winners claimed the prize
 if paid in full more than $50Billion HKD
 Violence resulted in 30 burned trucks, 6000
people filed civil suit for damages
 5000 criminal suits charging fraud (false
advertising)
 Pepsi claimed it was started by a ‘computer error’

QOTD - Q4 - Pepsi a ‘computer problem’
In the Pepsi case, who are ‘stakeholders’?
 Were any ethical principles violated?
 Was Pepsi justified?
 What should they have done differently?
 When?
 Would the result have been similar or
different in Hong Kong?
