Study Guide For Henry’s Daughters (Without Graphics) Produced And

study guide for henry’s daughters (without graphics) produced and distributed by the national institute for engi

Study Guide for Henry’s Daughters
(Without Graphics)

Produced and distributed by the
National Institute for Engineering Ethics
Murdough Center for Engineering Professionalism
Edward Whitacre College of Engineering
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas

Copyright © 2010
Henry’s Daughters is designed to raise awareness of the ethical
aspects of engineering work, advance knowledge and understanding of
professional standards and public obligations and expectations,
improve skills in moral reasoning, and strengthen personal dedication
to exemplary conduct.
Henry’s Daughters is dedicated to the memory of
E. D. “Dave” Dorchester, P.E.
Past President, National Institute for Engineering Ethics; Past
President, Texas Society of Professional Engineers
Past Chair, Texas Board of Professional Engineers; Distinguished Life
Member, NIEE Executive Board
Dave was highly influential in promoting NIEE and Murdough Center
ethics programs. In 1989, he established the Professional Development
Program of the Texas Board of Professional Engineers. As NIEE
President, Dave worked with Dean Bill Marcy to bring NIEE to Texas
Tech University.
and
E. Walter LeFevre, Ph.D., P.E.
Past President, National Society of Professional Engineers; Fellow,
National Society of Professional Engineers
Past Director, Vice President and Fellow, ASCE; Past President,
Arkansas Professional Engineers Board; Distinguished Life Member, NIEE
Executive Board
Walt was the longest standing member of NIEE. He appointed the current
NIEE director to the original NSPE/NIEE Board of Directors and
encouraged all NIEE officers, including the last president of NIEE,
Dave Dorchester, actions instrumental in making the current
organization possible.
Contents
Page
Part A: Development of Henry’s Daughters 5
Project Team 5
--------------
Senior Investigators, Producer, Writer-Director 6
-------------------------------------------------
Special Thanks to Others Helping with Henry’s Daughters 7
---------------------------------------------------------
Benefits of the Movie 7
-----------------------
Objectives 8
------------
Part B: Suggestions for Using the Movie 9
Suggested Tests for Evaluating Actions 10
-----------------------------------------
References 11
-------------
Part C: Story and Cast of Characters 12
Part D: Ethical Issues 16
Part E: Discussion Questions 17
Suggested Assignment 23
Contributions from the following organizations and individuals are
gratefully acknowledged.
Contributors listed in order of size of their contributions, from
largest to smallest.
IEEE Foundation
United Engineering Foundation
Harry E. Bovay, Jr.
Texas Engineering Foundation
Victor O. Schinnerer Co.
William J. Lhota
American Electric Power
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Fluor Foundation
E. Walt LeFevre
National Council of Examiners for
Engineering and Surveying
National Society of Professional Engineers
US Army Corps of Engineers’ Institute for Water Resources
American Society of Safety Engineers
Donald Hiatte
Part A: Development of Henry’s Daughters
Henry’s Daughters was developed by the National Institute for
Engineering Ethics (NIEE) and Murdough Center for Engineering
Professionalism at Texas Tech University, with significant donations
from individuals, engineering societies, and companies. Great Projects
Film Company of New York City produced the movie. The script and other
information about the movie may be obtained from the NIEE Web site:
www.niee.org.
Henry’s Daughters is the collaborative product of a team that
represents several universities and individuals with experience in
various engineering disciplines and philosophy.
Project Team
Joining NIEE/Texas Tech University are co-principal investigators from
the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Arizona State
University, and the University of Texas at Austin. These co-PIs
provided considerable expertise in engineering ethics education and
research.
The project team consists of five Principal Investigators and nine
Senior Investigators/Technical Advisors, all members of the Executive
Board of NIEE. Together, they represent six engineering disciplines,
business, and industry, plus the professions of philosophy and law.
Principal Investigator and Project Director: Jimmy H. Smith, PhD, PE,
F.NSPE, F.ASCE, Professor of Civil Engineering and Director, National
Institute for Engineering Ethics, Texas Tech University
Co-Principal Investigator: Michael C. Loui, PhD, F.IEEE
Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Co-Principal Investigator: Joseph Herkert, D.Sc., PE,
Electrical Engineer and Lincoln Professor of Ethics and Technology
Arizona State University
Co-Principal Investigator: Steven P. Nichols, PhD, PE, JD
Professor of Mechanical Engineering and
Director, Murchison Chair for Free Enterprise, The University of Texas
at Austin
Co- Principal Investigator: William M. Marcy, PhD, PE
Electrical/Systems Engineer, Professor of Industrial Engineering
Texas Tech University; Licensed Software Engineer and
Executive Director, National Institute for Engineering Ethics
Senior Investigators/Technical Advisors
Distinguished Life Members of the NIEE Executive Board
Arthur E. Schwartz
Philip E. Ulmer
Vivian Weil
Elected Members of the NIEE Executive Board
Brock E. Barry
John Fielder
William J. Lhota
Joe D. Manous, Jr.
Byron Newberry
Sarah K.A. Pfatteicher
Carl Skooglund
J. G. “Greg” Soules
Karl D. Stephan
Andrew C. Taylor
Thomas J. Zachman
Society Representatives to the NIEE Executive Board
Thomas W. Smith, ASCE
Taft H. Broome, Jr., ASEE
Edward Ostrowski & Alan Kornhauser, ASME
William H. Propes, ASSE
Donald L. Hiatte, NCEES
Michael Shirley, NSPE
Project Assistant
Patricia M. Harper, Secretary/Treasurer, Executive Board, NIEE
Producer
Kenneth Mandel, Great Projects Film Company, New York, NY
Writer-Director-Editor
Paul Martin, Great Projects Film Company, New York, NY
Special Thanks to Others
Jose Novoa, Ron Prange, and Halff Associates (Dallas) for use of their
offices
Tracy Smith (Fort Worth) for the use of his boat
Kevin Passino, Ohio State University, for his review of script
Elbit Systems, Francis Govers and his team for the use of their robot
car ARCHER™, their engineering facilities and patience
Courtroom Sciences, Inc., for the senate chamber location
Benefit to the Engineering Profession
Although Henry’s Daughters and associated educational materials target
engineering students, the movie also applies to practicing engineers
and provides a broad perspective on professional responsibilities.
Because it contributes to the understanding of and commitment to
ethics in engineering work, the movie will enhance the profession.
The movie and the training materials will also be suitable for
educating students in business, science, and other majors. This offers
an indirect benefit to the engineering profession: encouraged dialogue
between engineers and other professionals.
Objectives of the Henry’s Daughters Project
1.
Produce a movie and associated educational materials that have the
following instructional goals:
*
Increase Sensitivity to the ethical dimensions of professional
work
*
Advance Knowledge of professional standards and public obligations
and expectations
*
Develop Judgment and improve skills in moral reasoning
*
Encourage Commitment to professional ethics and strengthen
personal dedication to exemplary conduct
2.
Produce a movie that focuses on technical fields, ethical issues
and dilemmas that have not been highlighted in prior educational
films, including:
*
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in engineering
practice and products, especially emerging ICT tools whose risks
and impacts are difficult to foresee
*
Macro-ethical issues in engineering and technology that are
presented to students alongside more conventional micro-ethical
issues
*
Gender issues in engineering and technology
3.
Produce a movie and associated educational materials that teach
audience members these concepts:
*
Ethical issues are an integral part of making decisions
*
A professional’s obligations go beyond fulfilling a contract with
a client or customer
*
Ethical problems in engineering and technology have both technical
and non-technical solutions
*
ICTs have significant benefits and costs, including threats to
privacy
*
While individual engineers have ethical obligations, the
engineering profession also has collective social and ethical
obligations to the public
*
Workplace issues such as gender discrimination are an important
part of engineering ethics
4.
Produce a high-quality study guide to accompany the movie
5.
Conduct an assessment of the movie’s educational effectiveness
6.
Disseminate the movie, associated educational materials, and
anonymous assessment results to a broad audience of engineering
educators, engineering professionals, and other relevant
audiences.
Part B: Suggestions for Using the Movie
The movie runs for thirty-two minutes and is designed for use in an
interactive context with a discussion facilitator. In a professional
development workshop or seminar, a minimum of one hour should be
allocated for viewing and some discussion.
The facilitator should view the movie in advance and organize the
discussion period. For example, the facilitator may break a large
audience into smaller groups of three to six participants for
small-group discussions.
During the discussion period, the facilitator should assign specific
tasks to the participants, such as generating further discussion
questions. Specific questions might require participants to:
*
Identify ethical, technical, and economic issues and problems
*
Identify affected parties (stakeholders) and their rights and
responsibilities
*
Identify social and political constraints for possible solutions
*
Determine whether more information is needed to make a good
decision
*
Suggest alternative courses of action that principal characters
could and should take
*
Imagine possible consequences of alternative actions
*
Evaluate alternatives using basic ethical values
In a class of engineering students, the professor might assign a short
in-class writing exercise or a longer reflective paper. In writing
assignments, students may articulate what they learned from the movie
and the discussion.
Sample discussion questions appear in Part E of this guide.
Suggested Tests for Evaluating Actions
(M. Davis [1997], C. Skooglund, J. Smith, & P. Harper)
Viewers might evaluate character actions by applying the following
tests:
Harms Test

Do the benefits outweigh the harms, short term and long term?
Reversibility Test

Would I think this was a good choice if I traded places?
Colleague Test

What would my professional colleagues say?
What does my professional code of ethics say?
Legality Test

Would my choice violate a law or policy of my employer?
Publicity Test

How would my choice look on the front page of tomorrow’s newspaper?
Common Practice Test

What if everyone behaved this way?
Wise Relative Test

What would my wise old aunt or uncle do? and/or
Would I want them to know what I’m doing?
The Hiding Test

Do I want people to know what I’m doing?
The Self-Respect Test

How will I feel about myself after making this choice?
These evaluation tests promote decisions based on how we would feel
about what we do, if someone else knew, or if we would be caught.
However, the best decision is to Do the right thing because it’s the
right thing to do —rather than out of fear of negative consequences to
ourselves.
References:
Davis, M., “Developing and using cases to teach practical ethics,”
Teaching Philosophy, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 353–385, 1997.
Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., and Rabins, M. J., Engineering
Ethics: Concepts and Cases, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2009.
Johnson, D. G., Ethical Issues in Engineering. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, 1991.
Martin, M. W., and Schinzinger, R., Ethics in Engineering, 4th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2005.
Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Research:
http://onlineethics.org
National Institute for Engineering Ethics: http://www.niee.org
Part C: Story and Cast of Characters
Story
Henry, 65, is a retired but still well-connected automobile executive
and sometime lobbyist. He is involved in an academia-industry-DOT
(Department of Transportation) smart highway design project called
SANSHANDS. The project goal is to develop specifications for automated
highways and car control systems so that people won’t have to drive
anymore.
Laura, 29, Henry’s older daughter, works at the DOT. She is a PE and
will be technical project manager on the SANSHANDS project. As project
manager, Laura is responsible for compiling and recommending the
specifications for the computer control system that will guide R&D
and, ultimately, define the next generation of smart highways. Her
recommendations will be considered by the DOT Commissioner before
being adopted.
Julie, 21, is Henry’s younger daughter. With her father’s finagling,
she was selected as an intern with OUTOCAR, a local start-up company
recently founded by state university engineers in partnership with the
University’s Business Incubator. A major existing firm, GUIDEME, is
competing with OUTOCAR to take the design of SANSHANDS concept to the
next level.
The story intertwines the lives of both young women. They live
together, and in their off hours, talk a lot about the project. Both
are excited to be involved with a project that will impact the future.
While most of their discussions focus on their technical and personal
challenges, sometimes the women unconsciously cross the ethical line
by letting proprietary information slip or by creating software and
using another company’s product as an example.
As the project evolves, though, both sisters begin to see the
corrupting influence that industry money can have on both government
and academia. Laura sees representatives of the firm GUIDEME taking
DOT executives on fishing excursions. Julie learns that her boss used
her work on the project as part of his PhD dissertation without
acknowledging her role.
There are pressures within the DOT and other state departments
indicating that GUIDEME is the preferred choice. OUTOCAR personnel
allege that ethical misconduct and possible criminal violations
happened during the project, and so the state senate ethics commission
calls Henry and Laura to testify at a hearing on the project.
Henry’s Daughters highlights ethical issues encountered by the
characters, such as professional relationships, conflicts of interest,
favoritism, confidentiality of proprietary information, intellectual
property, sexual harassment, and individual privacy. The characters
disagree over the tradeoffs between technical performance, safety,
reliability, sustainability, flexibility, and cost. The characters
also find that political and social factors can influence technical
decisions.
Cast of Characters
This is available as a PDF File at www.niee.org
Part D: Observations and Outcomes
Several ethical observations in Henry’s Daughters:
*
Ethics is an integral and explicit component of ordinary technical
and business decision-making in engineering practice. Engineers
impact people and should be more concerned about people than
objects.
*
Technically competent, ethically sensitive, reasonable people may
have different perspectives on an ethical issue, and can disagree
when faced with complex ethical issues.
*
Negotiations resolve some of the conflicts shown in the movie, but
other ethical conflicts remain unresolved. Ethical problems should
be resolved by rational methods.
*
Codes of ethics and guidance from licensing boards are helpful in
resolving ethical problems.
*
It is sometimes necessary to make decisions under pressure with
incomplete data, insufficient time, and insufficient information.
Consideration of consequences of technical, financial, and ethical
decisions is an important element of the movie.
Henry’s Daughters is designed to improve students’ and practicing
engineers’ ability to
*
Evaluate alternatives according to basic ethical values and
through simple tests
*
Identify and distinguish ethical issues, technical issues, and
economic issues
*
Identify affected parties (stakeholders) and their rights and
responsibilities
*
Identify social and political constraints on possible solutions
*
Determine whether additional information is needed and available
to make a good decision
*
Formulate alternative courses of action
*
Test the alternatives and imagine possible consequences of those
alternatives
*
Recognize that the obligations of engineers go beyond fulfilling a
contract with a client or customer.
Part E: Discussion Questions
Professional Issues
1.
What are the ethical implications when Henry, a lobbyist, hosts a
senator on his expensive yacht?
2.
Is there a legal or ethical limit to the level at which Henry
should host the senator? (For example, expensive yacht vs.
inexpensive restaurant)
3.
Is there an accepted code of practice or ethics for lobbyists? If
not, suggest a few ethical statements for lobbyists.
4.
Was it ethical for Henry to pull strings to get Julie her
internship?
5.
To what extent should engineers consider political factors and
social impacts in their engineering work?
Ethics and New Technology Issues
6.
What are the responsibilities of engineers when developing new
technologies whose risks are difficult to foresee?
7.
If GUIDEME has the “best” technology, why should cost and other
factors matter?
8.
Because the experience base for a new technology is limited, it is
difficult to write technical specifications. If engineers believe
that the specifications are inadequate for future needs, should
they recommend a system with characteristics exceeding those
specifications?
Conflict of Interest
9.
Was it appropriate for Henry and his daughters to work on the same
project for different parties?
10.
How should Laura and Henry have handled their apparent conflict of
interest?
11.
How should Laura and Julie have handled their apparent conflict of
interest?
12.
Was Laura given the project because of her engineering talents and
work ethic or because of Henry’s connections? If so, this might be
a conflict of interest. If you are involved in a conflict of
interest, what should you do?
Gender Issues
13.
Does the appropriate response to sexual harassment depend on the
setting—for example, whether one is in a situation with one’s
peers versus with one's supervisor?
14.
Are sexist comments disguised as “jokes” acceptable?
15.
Would Henry or the senator have treated events differently if
either or both of Henry’s children had been sons?
16.
Does the fact that Laura and Julie are attractive enter into any
part of the interaction? Should it?
17.
Is there a “glass ceiling” issue in this story?
18.
How should the engineering profession address either the “glass
ceiling” or the “men’s club” issue?
19.
Is it permissible for a male employee to put his hand on a female
employee’s shoulders? Or vice versa? For a male employee to put
his hand on another male employee’s shoulders?
20.
Is it permissible for a male employee to compliment a female
employee's appearance? Or vice versa?
Intellectual Property Issues
21.
What is proprietary information?
22.
Are there ethical limits to what the sisters can share with each
other about their work?
23.
Is it appropriate for an engineer to discuss work matters with
family members?
24.
How should employees and engineers decide whether to share some of
their information from work when they go home?
25.
When and why might using unlicensed software be unethical?
26.
Is Julie justified in feeling harmed by the fact that some work
she did for OUTOCAR was used as a dissertation without giving her
credit?
Issues for Henry
27.
What were the unethical actions(s) of Henry?
28.
What, if anything, did Henry do that was ethically laudable?
Issues for Laura
29.
What were the unethical actions(s) of Laura?
30.
What, if anything, did Laura do that was ethically laudable?
Issues for Julie
31.
What were Julie’s unethical actions?
32.
What, if anything, did Julie do that was ethically laudable?
33.
As a new employee, what are the limits to the engineering work
that she should perform?
Issues for Other Characters
34.
Given that the project was assured for GUIDEME, was it appropriate
to assign the OUTOCAR project to Warren and Marty’s team?
35.
Could Warren have done anything to thwart the chain of unethical
actions? How could he have ethically acted with the least residual
damage?
36.
Which of Barry’s actions were ethical? Unethical?
37.
Was Julie treated appropriately by Barry, Warren, and Marty?
38.
Was Marty’s treatment of Warren harassment?
39.
Should Laura have said something about Marty’s treatment of Warren
(like she did about the ogling of Julie)?
40.
Which of Jeff’s actions were ethical? Unethical?
Privacy Issues
41.
Biometric information is information about the physical condition
or characteristics of individuals. What are the ethical
implications of collecting this information?
42.
Should engineers be concerned about collecting biometric
information?
43.
Does tracking vehicle location cause a violation of privacy?
44.
Why might a central computer network be more threatening to
individual privacy and information security than a decentralized
system?
45.
Should individual privacy rights be trumped by the law enforcement
and safety benefits to the public from collecting such
information? Vice versa?
Legal, Regulatory, and Political Issues
46.
Should Senator Bob have recused himself from the investigative
committee? If not, why not? Is there anything that he should have
done differently as a member of the committee?
47.
How does an organization’s culture affect how engineers practice?
How might it affect their dealings with ethical issues? With legal
issues?
Effective Communications
48.
One team meeting is marked by tension about getting the projector
started. Do ethical obligations suffer when the team is
dysfunctional? Is some degree of disagreement appropriate? When
does conflict become counterproductive?
49.
If you were to develop an ethical corporate or organizational
culture, how would you encourage workers to feel comfortable about
speaking freely about ethical, safety, and legal issues, and see
such discussions as an obligation?
50.
What are some standards the leadership of an organization should
consider when creating an environment that creates good working
and communication conditions? How would you set the appropriate
standards? How would you make sure that you have communicated
those standards effectively so that people not only understand
them but also believe you are serious about them?
51.
Do organizations have an obligation to host sensitivity training
for their managers and their engineers?
52.
What has society taught people about sensitivity training?
53.
How can sensitivity training be brought into the organization’s
leadership practices?
54.
How can sensitivity training be subsumed into the organization’s
culture?
55.
What do you think you would do to promote trust and respect among
your colleagues and other professionals in other departments?
Safety Issues
56.
Do accidents “just happen,” or are they “caused”?
57.
Whose responsibility is it to make sure that reasonable care and
attention is given to safety?
a.
The engineer-designer?
b.
The Department of Transportation employee?
c.
Anyone who observes the problem?
58.
Did both designs involve an adequate margin of error?
59.
Since complete safety is unobtainable and safety comes at a cost,
what is a reasonable amount of protection from failure?
Making Decisions
60.
What would engineering codes of ethics say about Henry’s
activities? About Laura’s?
61.
When making final decisions, was Henry trying to meet his ethical
obligations within the constraints that he had?
62.
What options did Henry have?
63.
What options did Laura have?
64.
What options did Julie have?
65.
What would you have done if you had been:
a.
Henry?
b.
Laura?
c.
Julie?
66.
Do you think that you would receive the same degree of criticism
from your organization if you violated an ethical standard
compared to violating or missing a deadline or an objective?
67.
Do you put ethical issues on the same level of importance as
business objectives? Should you?
Important Elements of Business Relationships
68.
W hat is the most critical element in effective
relationships? Loyalty? Obedience? Money? Trust? Openness? Candor?
Something else?
69.
What role should trust play in our professional and personal
interactions?
70.
What role should candor play in a professional or personal
relationship?
71.
Would candor imply effective communications?
72.
Could you envision one definition of ethics being “those
activities and practices that enhance trust”? Why or why not?
73.
A lthough you will gain many things during a professional
career, other things can be taken away from you. Your job could be
taken away (and it often is during economic downturns).
a.
What things can never be taken away, unless you allow them to
be? Can your reputation for integrity be taken away?
b.
List several ways you could protect that reputation.
74.
If someone says “I trust you,” how does this make you feel about
the relationship?
Guidance for the Future
In our day-to-day work, we tend to look up to our leaders,
supervisors, and/or bosses for guidance and inspiration about how we
conduct ourselves.
If we imagined that we were the boss, we might ask additional
questions. Imagine that you own an organization, have all the
necessary money, and need to decide what to produce, where to produce
it, how to produce it, and how to set up your organization.
75.
What specific actions could you take as the boss to make sure that
everyone in your organization felt that they should conduct
themselves to the highest standards of professional conduct and
professional ethics?
76.
What specific attributes would you have in place in your
organization to make sure that happened?
77.
What would you do to make sure that everyone in your organization
conducted themselves to the highest professional and ethical
standards? Would some of the following actions come to mind?
a.
Clearly define your expectations of professional/ethical
actions
b.
Communicate those expectations effectively and continuously
c.
Live the standards personally. What people see in actions is
what they’re going to believe
d.
Create candor and open communication in the environment so
that anyone within the organization feels free to bring up and
discuss their thoughts, opinions, and ideas, but most of all,
they feel free to bring up their concerns, problems, and news,
be it good or bad, without fear of suffering some sort of
retribution or reprisal
Suggested Assignment
Before viewing Henry’s Daughters, copy and distribute this page. After
the movie, ask viewers to prepare a written response to the questions
below. (Suggested length: 2 to 3 pages; 1.5 space; 12 point type; 1
inch margins)
1.
List the ethical issues you observed in Henry’s Daughters.
2.
From your personal perspective, prioritize these ethical issues
from most critical to least critical.
3.
Discuss the movie from these three other perspectives:
a) Henry’s Perspective: Assume you are Henry.
i.
What specific ethical issues do you face?
ii.
What are some things that you should consider?
iii.
From whom or where should you seek guidance?
b) Laura’s Perspective: Assume you are Laura.
i.
What specific ethical issues do you face?
ii.
What decisions would you change if you were Laura?
iii.
From whom or where could you seek guidance?
c.
Julie’s Perspective: Assume you are Julie.
i.
What specific ethical issues do you face?
ii.
What decisions would you change if you were Julie?
iii.
From whom or where could you seek guidance?
d.
Responsibility Perspective: If you were in charge and had the
authority and the funding to make any changes you wanted to make
in your organization policies:
i.
What specific steps would you take to improve the organization
culture?
ii.
Who would you involve in this process?
iii.
How and when would you communicate the organization policies to:
(a) Your employees?
(b) Your clients?
(c) The public?
Henry’s Daughters
Copies of the movie may be purchased by contacting the
National Institute for Engineering Ethics
Box 41023, Lubbock, Texas 79409-1023
Phone: 806-742-3525; Fax: 806-742-0444
Email: [email protected]

Study Guide without Graphics for Henry’s Daughters – Page 23 of 23