Vidic 2:00
L19
AN ETHICAL DILEMMA WITH AUTONOMOUS CARS
Daniel Gunter (dtg16@pitt.edu)
The Scenario
The Dilemmas
Sometime in the near future, the first autonomous car will
be put on the market. After years of testing, Google and BMW
are in a neck and neck race to see who can get their
autonomous car out on the market first. The stakes are very
high, and there is a lot of pressure on both companies from
the public to get their cars out. I work for an engineering
consulting firm that has done work with Google before, and
since this is a very important project, they approach us to
inspect their car before they put it out on the market. My boss
gives me the job, so I arrange a nondisclosure contract (that is
common in all consulting firms [1]) with Google and begin
my inspection.
Upon inspection, I find a minor problem where one of the
sensors in one of the models of their cars occasionally
malfunctions. I am aware of how important this inspection is;
that my passing of this vehicle is the only thing keep Google
from getting their cars out on the market before their
competitors, but, I also have a moral responsibility to include
anything unsatisfactory in my inspection report. Also, I am
aware that fixing the sensor would only delay the release two
months at max, but this would give BMW the time it needs to
release its cars first, boosting their sales tremendously. So,
reluctantly, I file my report, including the minor problem with
the sensor.
Later that day, my boss, accompanied with a manager from
Google, approached me and told me to remove the part of my
report that includes the malfunctioning sensor, so that car will
be cleared for sale to the public. The manager from Google
assures me that the sensor issue is so minor that it would never
cause an accident (which, from my expertise as a mechanical
engineer, struggle to agree with), and continues to explain
how much is riding on this release and how great of an
advancement this new technology is. My boss says that this
inspection is one of the most important inspections that our
company has ever done. Getting the recognition of being
associated with the passing of the first autonomous car would
put our company higher up than our competitors in the eyes
of the public and other potential clients. Also, my boss says
that Google has been a longstanding partner of our company,
and that not clearing this car would negate any further work
with them, effectively destroying a large part of business for
the company. Finally, he adds that if I do not manipulate the
data, I will get fired. They both leave and thoughts come
rushing to my head as to what actions I should or should not
take.
The main ethical dilemma in this situation is that I was
asked to lie about the data collected in my inspection.
However, this brings about a multitude of other moral
questions. Is it right to go public with the data? Due to my
signing of the nondisclosure contract with Google, it would
be unethical to release the information to the public, as it
would both violate my contract, and it would also violate a
part of the NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers. This code
states that “an Engineer will not reveal facts, data, or
information without the consent of the client” [2].
So, if directly going public with the data violates the code
of Ethics, do I go to someone higher up than my boss? This
seems like a reasonable course of action because I will not be
breaching the terms of my contract, and I will still be getting
the information to someone with power. However, I cannot
assume that this person would be willing to agree with me and
act on the information. My boss had to have gotten his orders
from somewhere, and there is a chance that these higher-ups
also want me to manipulate the data.
So if it seems like the whole company is corrupt, what is
the right thing to do? One course of action is to try to expose
the company. In the book The Legal Environment of Business
by George W. Spiro, a Professor at Harvard Law School by
the name of E. Merrick Dodd gives a description of the
responsibilities of corporations. He says that the managers of
corporations have responsibilities to their stockholders,
employees, customers, and to the general public, to use the
corporation’s assets safely, honestly, and wisely so that the
“stockholders receive a fair rate of return” [3], “the employees
have a right to fair wage and continuity of employment”[3],
“the customers have a right to good value for money” [3], and
“the general public has the right to expect that the company
will perform its duties as a great citizen should” [3]. Going
along with this thinking, Google and my company would both
be acting unjustly and would be held accountable for their
actions. Lying to the public about something so serious would
especially hit home in the eyes of the law. However, in this
case, it is just the word of an experienced engineer against two
major companies about an issue they may or may not be
significant. More solid data would have to be gathered in
order to make a case.
Another course of action would be to just resign. If I
resign, how would my report be handled? One would assume
that someone else would just manipulate the data and Google
would be in the clear to sell their cars. Also, if I do resign and
decide to go public with the information, how credible would
my claims be? In the eyes of the public I would just seem like
a man who lost his job and is trying to get back at the people
who fired him.
University of Pittsburgh, Swanson School of Engineering 1
2015-11-03
Daniel Gunter
What if I do manipulate the data? Google claimed that the
faulty sensor is so minor that it could not cause an accident to
occur, so if there is no threat to the public, I could potentially
do it and still abide by the NSPE code. However,
manipulating data is never morally or ethically right.
However, for the sake of discussion, let’s say that I do
manipulate the data, with a sort of hope-and-pray mentality
that Google is right and no one will get hurt. This could have
one of two results. The first is that Google releases their selfdriving cars, everyone is happy because they work just as
expected, and the number of traffic accidents is significantly
reduced. That is the happy ending. The second is that the
people who buy the models with the faulty sensor start getting
into accidents. After reading descriptions of the accidents, I
realize that the accidents were caused by the failure of the
sensor that I had initially discovered. What do I do from here?
The Institution of Mechanical Engineers says that Engineers
shall conduct their work in regard with the welfare of the
people and the organizations that they work with [4]. This
means that I would have violated my code of conduct, and put
people’s lives at risk.
the structure would be very large. Dismissing the mistake and
thinking that the building will be fine could also harm his
reputation, due to the building potentially collapsing, killing
thousands in the process [6]. So, Dr. X must choose between
telling the Building’s owners that he has made a mistake, or
hoping that the structure will be able to stand, regardless of
his mistake.
A third case study that helped me during research was a
case that did not relate to my situation directly, but rather to
the problems in the NSPE Code of Ethics that I run into. This
problem is that releasing the information about the sensor to
the public violates one part of the Code, and not releasing the
information violates another. In this third case study,
Engineer A signs a confidentiality agreement with one his
clients and then does his job of inspecting the structural
integrity of an old building the client is trying to sell. While
inspecting the building, the engineer notices a problem with
the electrical system that could be potentially harmful to the
inhabitants. He makes a note of this finding in his report, as
well as tells his client about his concern. His client thanks him
and tells him that the building is being sold “as is” and that no
more repairs are going to be made. The Engineer wants to tell
the potential buyers and local authorities about the problem
with the electrical systems, but ends up not saying anything
due to the confidentiality agreement between him and his
client [7].
This scenario brings up a conflict between two points in
the NSPE Code of Ethics that directly affects my ethical
dilemma. These points are that “Engineers shall hold
paramount the health, safety, and welfare of the public” [2]
and that “Engineers shall not reveal facts, data, or information
without the prior consent of the client or employer” [2]. In the
case study, the NSPE Board of Ethical Review ruled that
although revealing and not revealing the information both
break the ethical code, the safety of the public must take
precedence over the confidentiality [7].
Relevant Case Studies
When I began researching this dilemma, the first thing I
looked at was case studies. A large factor affecting my
decision is the relationship between my company and Google.
Case Study 1010 on Texas Tech’s ethics cases page discusses
a woman who experienced a similar problem. The woman,
Julia, prides herself on the relationships between her and her
clients. One of her clients asks her to inspect the windows of
a building that he is trying to sell, and, during the inspection,
she finds a problem with something other than the windows.
She mentions it to the client, but he says that he is not going
to do anything about it [5]. In both Julia’s and my cases, the
relationship with clients is a large factor in determining what
course of action to take. However, according to the NSPE
Code of Ethics for Engineers, Engineers must “Hold
Paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public” [2].
So, following this guideline, and the Institution of Mechanical
Engineer’s code, I would not change my report, because it
makes the safety of the public more important than passing a
potentially dangerous product.
Another factor affecting my decision is my reputation. By
this point in my career, I have built a good name for myself
as a mechanical engineer. If I go public with the information
and am wrong, then my reputation will be ruined. The same
result will happen if I refuse to comply with the demands of
my boss (as he will probably spread word of my
incompetence). In a case study called “The Cost of Integrity”
on the webguru webpage, a renowned structural engineer
referred to as “Dr. X” comes to the realization that he made a
serious mistake in his calculations for one of his more famous
structures, and, because of this mistake, the structure is at risk
of collapsing. Bringing the information to the building’s
owners would ruin his reputation because the cost of fixing
Ethics in Engineering
Ethics within the engineering field in general is an
important topic to discuss. Engineering is field that focuses
on innovation and advancing technology, but sometimes lacks
the concern for moral implications. In an article about
William Marcy, executive director of the Murdough Center
for Engineering Professionalism/National Institute for
Engineering Ethics, it is stated that, “Making an ethical
decision is thinking about the lifecycle of a project or product
or design, not just assuming everything is fine” [8]. Marcy
then goes on to explain the exciting innovation of electric
cars. He says, “It’s very interesting because you would think
about the responsibility of the safety of the car—but what
about the batteries?” The car will eventually end up in a dump
somewhere, and those batteries are harmful to the
environment, so what methods has the company put in place
to ensure that the batteries are properly disposed of [8]?
2
Daniel Gunter
[7] (2014). “Public Health and Safety-Delay in Addressing
Fire Code Violations”. National Society of Professional
Engineers. (case study).
http://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/BER%20Case%20No
%2013-11-FINAL.pdf
[8] E. Butterman. (2014). “Ethics in Engineering”. American
Society of Mechanical Engineers. (online article).
https://www.asme.org/engineeringtopics/articles/engineering-ethics/ethics-in-engineering
[9] D. Gunter. (2015, October 31). Email.
I think that Marcy brings up a very good point here. In the
excitement of inventing new technologies, it is hard to think
about all of these factors. As engineers, we tend to think “oh
that’s a really cool idea, let’s make it happen” and jump right
into building or designing, rather than taking a step back and
considering the implications of what we are trying to do.
To get another, more real-world perspective on ethics, I
talked to my father, who is a supply chain analyst in an
engineering consulting firm. He said that from a business
ethics standpoint, when dealing with problems in a design, it
is always better to confront the problem, no matter how far
into the process, rather than ignoring it. It is much better to
discover the mistake and to go back and fix it, rather than
ignoring the mistake because the project is “too far along”. In
the end, more money and resources will be saved. [9]
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my mother and my friend Ben
Reynolds for proofreading my paper, as well as my father for
giving me his thoughts on ethics in his career.
Conclusion
After researching this ethical dilemma scenario and other
similar case studies, I have to come to realize that ethical
dilemmas are rarely a simple decision. There are usually
many factors that come into play, some that I had never even
thought about until researching these different scenarios (for
example, I would not have thought about the disposal of the
battery in an electric car, as mentioned above by Marcy.)
With my newly acquired knowledge of codes of ethics, and
after looking at case studies that involved similar situations to
the one I was in, I have decided that I would go public with
the information by informing ethical authorities and having
them handle the situation. Acting in this manner keeps me in
line with the NSPE Code of Ethics, as well as gets the
information to people who I know will handle it the right way.
(2353)
References
[1] C. Berman; and D. Media (2015). “Ethics and Consulting
Firms.” Chron. (online article).
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/ethics-consulting-firms72348.html
[2] (2015). “NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers”. National
Society of Professional Engineers. (website).
http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics
[3] G. Spiro. (1989). The Legal Environment of Business.
Anglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. (print book). pp. 37
[4] (2015). “Ethics”. Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
(website).
http://www.imeche.org/about-us/governance/ethics
[5] (2015). “Ethics Cases.” Texas Tech University. (case
study).
http://www.depts.ttu.edu/murdoughcenter/products/cases.ph
p
[6] (2014). “The Cost of Integrity”. Webguru. (case study).
http://www.webguru.neu.edu/professionalism/casestudies/cost-integrity
3