Case Analysis Module: Chemical A or B? 1.2 2006/08/20 15:50:49 GMT-5 2007/03/02 08:39:25.906 US/Central William J. Frey wfrey@uprm.edu William J. Frey wfrey@uprm.edu Decision-Making Engineering Ethics This module is founded on two insights: the analogy between problem-solving in ethics and design methodology and the effectiveness of case analysis for practicing skills in ethical problem-solving. Students will practice using a four-stage decision-making framework developed on analogy from the software development cycle. They will also learn socio-technical system analysis and how to use this to formulate and solve ethical problems that arise in everyday engineering practice. This module has been developed to test the capacity of the EAC Toolkit to add value to engineering ethics modules and to draw together interdisciplinary teams in designing and modifying EAC modules. This module is being developed as a part of an NSF-funded project, "Collaborative Development of Ethics Across the Curriculum Resources and Sharing of Best Practices," NSF SES 0551779. Case Analysis Module for Engineering Ethics Chemical A or B? By William J. Frey Module Introduction: This module consists of three components designed to provide you with an opportunity to practice decision-making in real world situations. The first component, the case presented below, Chemical A or B?, actually happened although the particulars have been altered to protect the confidentiality of those involved. It provides you with a decision point. You must take on the role of one of the cases participants and make a decision from the standpoint of that participant. Following the case is a four stage process designed to help you make a rigorous ethical decision. First, you will specify the problem by specifying the underlying socio-technical system and identifying its conflicting embedded moral and non-moral values. Second, you will brainstorm solutions to this problem in a solution generation stage. Third, you will evaluate each solution alternative using ethics tests and a global feasibility analysis. Finally, you will use a detailed feasibility test to identify underlying resource, interest, and technical constraints. This will provide guidance for developing a plan for implementing your solution. Introduction You are a chemical engineering student has been working with a local manufacturing firm as a part of your university's co-op program. For several years the firm has been using chemical A as a catalyst in their manufacturing process. Chemical A is carcinogenic, although studies supporting this claim have only recently been published. Without taking elaborate safety precautions, workers handling chemical A would be exposed to sufficient amounts to risk developing cancer. The significance of this risk is covered over by the fact that the disease takes up to 20 years to manifest itself. The company has tried to implement safety procedures and controls, but workers routinely ignore them. The safety procedures slow down the manufacturing process, and the workers frequently cut corners to meet quotas. You know of another chemical, B, which also serves as a catalyst in this manufacturing process but is not carcinogenic. Nevertheless, chemical B is considerably more expensive.   Decision Situation: A meeting has been called to refine and possibly reengineer the company’s manufacturing process. Along with you are four other group members: a senior engineer, a manager, an industrial engineer who supervises the manufacturing process, and a marketing specialist. To repeat, you are the co-op student. Should you suggest changing to catalyst B at this meeting? If so, how should you present your case?   Decision Point You decide to bring the issue up at the meeting. You cite the recently discovered dangers of chemical A and the tendency of the workers to violate safety procedures in using it. Then you present the preliminary research on chemical B: although B is more expensive than A, it is much safer and is as effective a catalyst as A in the manufacturing process. When you finish, your argument meets with stiff resistance, especially from the manager present at the meeting. He tells you that your job is to make suggestions for streamlining the existing manufacturing process, not to design a new one. Furthermore, he argues, if there were a problem with safety he would have heard about it by now from the Human Resources or Legal Affairs departments. The two engineers present at the meeting say very little; they are intimidated by the manager and apparently intend to follow his lead. The manager asks the them if using chemical A violates OSHA regulations; they reply that to the best of their knowledge, it does not. The manager concludes by deciding that the company will continue to use chemical A.   You are the co-op student. What should you do? 1. Identify key components of the STS Part/Level of Analysis Hardware Software Physical Surroundings People, Groups, & Roles Procedures Laws & Regulations Data & Data Structures 2. Specify the problem: 2a. Is the problem a disagreement on facts? What are the facts? What are cost and time constraints on uncovering and communicating these facts? 2b. Is the problem a disagreement on a critical concept? What is the concept? Can agreement be reached by consulting legal or regulatory information on the concept? (For example, if the concept in question is safety, can disputants consult engineering codes, legal precedents, or ethical literature that helps provide consensus? Can disputants agree on positive and negative paradigm cases so the concept disagreement can be resolved through line-drawing methods? 2c. Use the table to identify and locate value conflicts within the STS. Can the problem be specified as a mismatch between a technology and the existing STS, a mismatch within the STS exacerbated by the introduction of the technology, or by overlooked results? STS/Value Safety (freedom from harm) Justice (Equity & Access) Privacy Property Free Speech Hardware/software Physical Surroundings People, Groups, & Roles Procedures Laws Data & Data Structures 3. Develop a general solution strategy and then brainstorm specific solutions: Problem / Solution Strategy Disagreement Value Conflict Situational Constraints Factual Conceptual Integrate? Tradeoff? Resource?Technical?Interest 3a. Is problem one of integrating values, resolving disagreements, or responding to situational constraints? 3b. If the conflict comes from a value mismatch, then can it be solved by modifying one or more of the components of the STS? Which one? 4. Test solutions: Alternative / Test Reversibility Value: Justice Value: Responsibility Value: Respect Harm Code A #1 A #2 A #3 5. Implement solution over feasibility constraints Alternative Constraint Resource Interest Technical Time Cost Individual Organization Legal/ Social Available Techno-logy Manufacturability #1 #2 #3