Handouts of Lecture 11 Professional Practices (IT)

Lecture Title: Professional Ethics (Cont.)

Analysis of the code

The analysis of the Code underscores that moral decision-making in software engineering is not
mechanical and requires careful judgment, especially when conflicting principles arise. It
acknowledges that two people with similar ethical perspectives may arrive at different
conclusions, highlighting the need for a nuanced approach to problem-solving. The preamble
emphasizes the importance of context and warns against applying the code too rigidly. Instead,
software engineers should reflect on underlying principles when faced with ethical dilemmas,
balancing the interests of individuals, organizations, and society.

Alternative, Discipline-Independent List of Fundamental Principles

This list of principles is designed to promote fairness, transparency, and accountability in

software engineering and other professional disciplines. These principles align with the code’s
specific clauses, offering a broader perspective on ethical behavior. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Be Impartial:
o The principle of impartiality suggests that personal, organizational, and societal
interests should be equally valued. It emphasizes fairness and the need to balance
various competing priorities.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 1.02, 1.03, 1.05, 1.07, 3.03, 3.12, 4.01, 6.05.
2. Disclose Information that Others Ought to Know:
o Transparency is key to preventing harm. Withholding crucial information or
making misleading statements violates ethical standards. This principle also calls
for the disclosure of conflicts of interest.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 1.04, 1.06, 2.06, 2.07, 3.01, 4.05, 4.06, 5.05, 5.06, 6.07,
6.08, 6.09, 6.12, 6.13.
3. Respect the Rights of Others:
o Upholding privacy, property, and intellectual property rights is central to
maintaining ethical standards in software development.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 2.02, 2.03, 2.05, 3.13.
4. Treat Others Justly:
o This principle emphasizes fairness in providing compensation, recognition, and
opportunity. It opposes discrimination and retaliation for ethical behavior.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 5.06, 5.07, 5.08, 5.09, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12, 7.03, 7.04, 7.05,
7.07, 8.07.
5. Take Responsibility for Your Actions and Inactions:
o Software engineers must accept accountability for both their actions and any harm
caused by their failure to act.

Page 1 of 4
 o Relevant Code Clauses: 1.01, 3.04, 3.05, 3.06, 3.07, 3.08, 3.10, 3.11, 3.14, 3.15,
4.02, 7.08.
6. Take Responsibility for the Actions of Those You Supervise:
o Managers must ensure their team operates in an ethical and efficient manner, and
they are accountable for fostering a culture of quality and risk management.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 5.01, 5.02, 5.03, 5.04.
7. Maintain Your Integrity:
o Integrity is the foundation of ethical behavior. Engineers should honor their
commitments, follow laws, and lead by example.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 2.01, 2.04, 2.08, 2.09, 3.01, 3.02, 3.09, 4.03, 4.04, 6.06,
6.10, 6.11, 8.08, 8.09.
8. Continually Improve Your Abilities:
o Lifelong learning is essential for personal and professional growth, ensuring that
engineers stay current with technological advancements and ethical
considerations.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 8.01, 8.02, 8.03, 8.04, 8.05, 8.06.
9. Share Your Knowledge, Expertise, and Values:
o Contributing to the professional community through volunteering and mentoring
fosters growth and promotes ethical practices.
o Relevant Code Clauses: 1.08, 6.01, 6.02, 6.03, 6.04, 7.01, 7.02, 7.06.

Whistle-Blowing: Ethical Dilemma and Considerations

Whistle-blowing is a complex and ethically charged issue that can have significant consequences
for the individual, the organization, and society at large. It involves revealing information about
harmful practices, often after attempts to report concerns within the organization have been
ignored or dismissed. The motivations, potential consequences, and moral obligations
surrounding whistle-blowing are crucial to understanding the ethical dimensions of such actions.
Below, we analyze the case of whistle-blowing, exploring the motivations, the ethical
implications, and the responses that may arise from this act.

Motivations of Whistle-Blowers

Whistle-blowers may be motivated by a range of reasons, which can influence the morality and
outcomes of their actions:

1. Good Motives (Altruistic Whistle-Blowing):

o Desire to Help the Public: In the most morally justified cases, whistle-blowers
act out of a desire to protect the public from harm. For example, someone may
blow the whistle on a dangerous product or a harmful practice that could have
wide-ranging negative consequences for society. Here, the whistle-blower’s
actions are intended to prevent harm to others, not to serve personal interests.
2. Questionable Motives:
o Retaliation: A person may become a whistle-blower out of frustration or to
retaliate after being treated unfairly, such as being denied a promotion or raise. In

Page 2 of 4
 this case, the motive is less about public interest and more about exacting personal
revenge on the organization.
o Avoiding Punishment: Whistle-blowers may also act when they feel that their
own wrongdoings are about to be uncovered. They may come forward to reduce
the likelihood of personal consequences, such as punishment or legal action.

Corporate Response to Whistle-Blowing

1. Condemnation:
o Disloyalty and Damage to the Company: Organizations often view whistle-
blowing as an act of betrayal, as it can generate negative publicity, disrupt
teamwork, and damage the company’s reputation. From a corporate perspective,
whistle-blowing can be seen as disloyalty that harms both the organization and its
employees. While the company may face legal repercussions if harmful practices
are revealed, it often focuses on mitigating the damage caused by the whistle-
blower’s actions.
2. Organizational Failure:
o A Symptom of Organizational Dysfunction: Some argue that whistle-blowing
highlights deeper issues within an organization. It can reveal a failure in internal
communication, ethical oversight, or decision-making processes. Whistle-blowers
often turn to external authorities because internal channels have failed them.
Organizations that foster an environment where whistle-blowing is necessary may
be facing issues with transparency, trust, and ethical leadership. The focus should
then shift to creating internal structures that allow concerns to be raised and
addressed without the need for public exposure.

Whistle-Blowing as Moral Duty

Ethical philosopher Richard De George proposed that whistle-blowing could be considered a

moral duty under certain circumstances. He outlined five key questions to assess whether
whistle-blowing is justified:

1. Serious Harm: Is there a genuine risk of “serious and considerable harm to the public”?
2. Internal Reporting: Have internal concerns been raised with management or appropriate
channels within the organization?
3. Exhaustion of Channels: Have all possible channels within the organization been
explored to resolve the issue?
4. Evidence: Is there documented evidence that can persuade an impartial outsider that the
whistle-blower’s concerns are legitimate?
5. Likely Action: Will exposing the issue to the public lead to meaningful change or
prevent the harm?

If the answers to the first three questions are "yes," De George suggests the individual has the
right to whistle-blow. If all five questions are answered affirmatively, the whistle-blower has a
duty to disclose the information.

Page 3 of 4
However, these requirements have been critiqued for being too strict. For instance, there may be
situations where the whistle-blower does not have time to exhaust all internal channels (e.g., in
urgent cases like a nuclear meltdown). Others argue that gathering convincing evidence is not
always feasible, especially when an individual may not have access to the resources needed to
investigate thoroughly.

Moral Responsibility vs. Other Forms of Responsibility

1. Moral Responsibility:
o Moral responsibility is unique because it is not exclusive. This means that a
person can bear moral responsibility for actions even if they are not legally or
causally responsible. For example, parents share a moral responsibility for the
well-being of their child, even if only one parent is the primary caregiver.
Similarly, an employee might have a moral duty to whistle-blow if their actions
(or inactions) could prevent harm, even if they were not directly responsible for
the problem.
2. Role Responsibility:
o This refers to duties that are assigned based on a person’s role within an
organization. For example, a bookkeeper is responsible for keeping accurate
financial records, and an engineer is responsible for ensuring that products meet
safety standards. Role responsibility is usually more exclusive—i.e., only the
person in the role bears this responsibility.
3. Causal Responsibility:
o Causal responsibility is assigned based on the individual’s actions that caused
something to happen. For example, if an employee’s actions directly cause harm
(e.g., releasing a virus), they bear causal responsibility.
4. Legal Responsibility:
o Legal responsibility is based on laws and regulations. For example, an employer
is legally responsible for providing a safe working environment, and homeowners
are legally responsible for injuries that occur on their property.

Page 4 of 4