Integrated Buildings & Structures

After reviewing the attached doc., I thought it useful to, perhaps, trigger a dialogue.

Not a self-righteous one, but one aimed at first understanding what those with some
"Miles on their slide rules". . . .is there actually anyone left, other than myself, who still
even has one of those?....is doing, or can do, in real time, to guide the next generation of
engineers?

An early experience I recall is that of a very experienced NYS Licensed Land Surveyor who taught me
that "Your integrity will be formed, one decison at a time, based on what you do when you are sure that no one is watching."

Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

This report seems rather broad.  Ethics as a component of practice and curriculum is vital.  But unless an engineer is in a management position, they have little control over the social impact or welfare of a project.  The job is technical and governed by the guidance of architects, owners, and other authorities.  The question here becomes what are the roles of the consulting engineer, contractor engineer, Engineer of Record, Architect of Record, building inspector, or other member of the design process?  What are the responsibilities of that role?  What does delegated design mean?  How does an engineer ethically avoid liability that is outside their scope?  Engineering ethics is framed as a subject for leadership and all encompassing decision making on a project.  It seems to neglect the team aspect and the role of an entry level engineer.  If you want to instill good ethics in young engineers, be sure they know how to define their role and the role of others.  Make sure they know that they are a part of a team and their input matters.

------------------------------
Chad Morrison P.E., M.ASCE
Professional Engineer
Greenville RI
------------------------------

Hey William,

Great to communicate with one who has used a slide rule . . . harder and harder to find us.  I do have one . . . somewhere . . . but when you get to be my age you forget where you put things.

Ethics is not only important but critical to the practice of highly responsible professions such as medical, legal and our own of engineering.  Ethics is not man created.  Just as we must deal with the God given effects of wind, gravity, thermal expansion and contraction, etc. we must also consider the God assigned responsibility of "thou shall . . ." and consider what these boundaries are.

In my personal practice I have learned that my designs and work product are no better than my ability to incorporate the underlying principles of the 10 Commandments (Exodus 20:1-20, Deuteronomy 5:6-21) .  Just as these critical mandates serve as the background principles of the U. S. Constitution so do they serve as the grounding principles for engineering ethics.  Our commission to protect the life of those who utilize our designs come from Commandment 6: "Thou shall not kill" and to protect property from Commandment 10: "Thou shall not envy thy neighbor."

Over my career as I have mentored interns, managers and evened seasoned professionals, I have attempted to explain these underlying principles in the day to day activities of properly performing our work.  Following our ASCE ethical canons keep us out of the court room following moral principles allow us to do what is right.  After all we do have an eternal examiner / inspector to which our work will be judged.

Best to you!



------------------------------
Daniel Witcher P.E., M.ASCE
1065 Oakland Drive
Bristol, TN 37620
------------------------------

Everybody should act ethical.

Having said that I have problems with the codes of ethics adopted by various organizations and the way they are interpreted.

In general an ethical system must in the long term reward or at least not penalize an individual who follows it.

Take for example ASCE's cannon that says that the engineer's paramount duty is to the public, not to the engineers client.  For one thing this is an aspirational goal that some interpret in such a way that compliance is impossible.  Yes an engineer has a duty to the public but legally this duty is essentially defined by the law related to negligence and the regulations adopted by the state.

I suggest that when an engineer is acting as a professional his primary obligation is to his client.  This is compatible with the state licensing laws.  In addition in those cases where the professional has fiduciary duties to his client the law is clear that the engineer must place the interests of the client ahead of his personal interests.

------------------------------
Mark Gilligan S.E., M.ASCE
Berkeley CA
------------------------------

Thanks Chad, Daniel, Mark, for sharing your opinions on this, at times, somewhat abstract subject.

While it may be challenging at times to define it, one can usually "Smell what it isn't" most times.

The attachment lists sources that provides all of us with time-tested 'benchmarks' our colleagues
argued about, resolved, revised, and then re-issued.

Turns out, our professional ethics as professional engineers is as simple and as profound as it
states right on our license certificates. . . .and in our various "Code of Ethics:"

". . .to safeguard life, health and property, and promote the public welfare."

Numero uno remains numero uno!
Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-08-2017 04:16
From: Mark Gilligan
Subject: Overcoming Challenges To Infusing Ethics Into the Development of Engineers

Everybody should act ethical.

Having said that I have problems with the codes of ethics adopted by various organizations and the way they are interpreted.

In general an ethical system must in the long term reward or at least not penalize an individual who follows it.

Take for example ASCE's cannon that says that the engineer's paramount duty is to the public, not to the engineers client.  For one thing this is an aspirational goal that some interpret in such a way that compliance is impossible.  Yes an engineer has a duty to the public but legally this duty is essentially defined by the law related to negligence and the regulations adopted by the state.

I suggest that when an engineer is acting as a professional his primary obligation is to his client.  This is compatible with the state licensing laws.  In addition in those cases where the professional has fiduciary duties to his client the law is clear that the engineer must place the interests of the client ahead of his personal interests.

------------------------------
Mark Gilligan S.E., M.ASCE
Berkeley CA
------------------------------

There is a difference between what a state board of registration requires and the code of ethics adopted by a professional organization.  If you fail to comply with the board of registrations requirements you are subject to legal ramifications.  If you fail to comply with an organizations code of ethics it is a private matter between you and the professional organization.

Statements of intent similar to that of NJ are not enforceable.  What is enforceable are the adopted regulations.   Statements of intent may give the agency authority and direction when they adopt regulations but it is the regulations that count.

The terms safeguard life, health and property and promote the public welfare do not provide clear direction what to do.  These terms are  subject to multiple interpretations often ones that are self serving.  Our building codes are compromises.  In addition any individual that attempted to prevent all potential loss of life would find it impossible.  All we can do is reduce the possibility to an acceptable level.

------------------------------
Mark Gilligan P.E., M.ASCE
Principal
Berkeley CA
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-11-2017 13:11
From: William Hayden
Subject: Overcoming Challenges To Infusing Ethics Into the Development of Engineers

Thanks Chad, Daniel, Mark, for sharing your opinions on this, at times, somewhat abstract subject.

While it may be challenging at times to define it, one can usually "Smell what it isn't" most times.

The attachment lists sources that provides all of us with time-tested 'benchmarks' our colleagues
argued about, resolved, revised, and then re-issued.

Turns out, our professional ethics as professional engineers is as simple and as profound as it
states right on our license certificates. . . .and in our various "Code of Ethics:"

". . .to safeguard life, health and property, and promote the public welfare."

Numero uno remains numero uno!
Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

Well said Mark!
As you will note below, I have taken portions of your notes to frame my own interpretations.

"There is a difference between what a state board of registration requires, and the code of ethics adopted by a professional organization. "

Actually, not really ( as to the primary protection of the public interests . . . ) according to what I read from the sources I referenced in my earlier post.

"If you fail to comply with the board of registrations requirements you are subject to legal ramifications."
Yes.

"If you fail to comply with an organizations code of ethics it is a private matter between you and the professional organization."
And yet, I think the outcome is made public; but I may be wrong.

"Statements of intent similar to that of NJ are not enforceable.  What is enforceable are the adopted regulations.   Statements of intent may give the agency authority and direction when they adopt regulations but it is the regulations that count."

Both the state's regulatory and Society assertions for ethics regarding the protection of life, health, etc., are enforceable.

"The terms safeguard life, health and property and promote the public welfare do not provide clear direction what to do."  

Which makes a great deal of sense in that the "Clear direction" would only matter based on the specifics of a given situation, in the judgement of the Professional Engineer in charge.

Thanks for the candid remarks.

Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-12-2017 01:31
From: Mark Gilligan
Subject: Overcoming Challenges To Infusing Ethics Into the Development of Engineers

There is a difference between what a state board of registration requires and the code of ethics adopted by a professional organization.  If you fail to comply with the board of registrations requirements you are subject to legal ramifications.  If you fail to comply with an organizations code of ethics it is a private matter between you and the professional organization.

Statements of intent similar to that of NJ are not enforceable.  What is enforceable are the adopted regulations.   Statements of intent may give the agency authority and direction when they adopt regulations but it is the regulations that count.

The terms safeguard life, health and property and promote the public welfare do not provide clear direction what to do.  These terms are  subject to multiple interpretations often ones that are self serving.  Our building codes are compromises.  In addition any individual that attempted to prevent all potential loss of life would find it impossible.  All we can do is reduce the possibility to an acceptable level.

------------------------------
Mark Gilligan P.E., M.ASCE
Principal
Berkeley CA
------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 07-11-2017 13:11
From: William Hayden
Subject: Overcoming Challenges To Infusing Ethics Into the Development of Engineers

Thanks Chad, Daniel, Mark, for sharing your opinions on this, at times, somewhat abstract subject.

While it may be challenging at times to define it, one can usually "Smell what it isn't" most times.

The attachment lists sources that provides all of us with time-tested 'benchmarks' our colleagues
argued about, resolved, revised, and then re-issued.

Turns out, our professional ethics as professional engineers is as simple and as profound as it
states right on our license certificates. . . .and in our various "Code of Ethics:"

". . .to safeguard life, health and property, and promote the public welfare."

Numero uno remains numero uno!
Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

Thank you William for bringing up this point. I have extracted few sentences and will put them on the notice board of the office.

No doubt all codes and rules set (including the ten commandments) are meant to help us to do good, but the role of the educator -the boss, the mentor, is to "give reasons for doing good". We, humans too easily find excuses to tone down or "interpret" our obligations.
It follows that many bosses, and educators need guidelines for teaching and motivating for the good and the better.

Because, many times it is not easy to discern, I believe case studies help a lot. In that regard I found very interesting that section "The Law" in ASCE -CE magazine or that other one of "A matter of Ethics" in the ASCE Newsletter we used to receive. Also there is one Spanish book which I found amazingly interesting: "Deontologia para Ingenieros" by engr. Rafael Escola. The book is full of case studies on engineering ethics.

On that note I  just want to share some of my recent experience: 
Napoleon

------------------------------
Napoleon De La Colina A.M.ASCE
Eng Mgr
ICM - India
Bombay MH
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-11-2017 13:11
From: William Hayden
Subject: Overcoming Challenges To Infusing Ethics Into the Development of Engineers

Thanks Chad, Daniel, Mark, for sharing your opinions on this, at times, somewhat abstract subject.

While it may be challenging at times to define it, one can usually "Smell what it isn't" most times.

The attachment lists sources that provides all of us with time-tested 'benchmarks' our colleagues
argued about, resolved, revised, and then re-issued.

Turns out, our professional ethics as professional engineers is as simple and as profound as it
states right on our license certificates. . . .and in our various "Code of Ethics:"

". . .to safeguard life, health and property, and promote the public welfare."

Numero uno remains numero uno!
Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------

Another colleague writes (regarding a different post re: "Project Conflict" elsewhere in ASCE.Collaborate:

 

"Great summary!  As a fellow "seasoned professional" I can relate that your observations and research align with my program/project experience as well.  It is unfortunate that the importance of interpersonal relationships, leadership, decision making skills were not emphasized more at university and during my earlier years in the profession. It took the advent of partnering - and only when an owner embraced the full bore implementation of it - to open my eyes to the criticality of the soft skills (that are really hard).  

I would be interested to know if there are universities that provide core engineering courses in the soft skills.  If you are aware of examples, it would be very helpful . . ."

 

No, my friend, I do not.

It is my hope that this discussion may "Flush" some out to the benfit of all.

 

Cheers.

------------------------------
William Hayden Ph.D., P.E., CP, F.ASCE
Management Quality By Design, Inc.
Amherst NY
------------------------------