Instructions for Mini-project and Final Project

for 2.95J, TPP09J, Real World Ethics

For the mini project you will:

1. Develop a brief (300-400 word) hypothetical scenario--see below-- and questions in which you as an engineer or scientist in some organization discover what looks like an ethical problem. This will usually be a safety problem or an instance of research misconduct. The safety problem may present a hazard for any number of reasons e.g., because of the design, manufacture, its possible use in ways or in environments other than those for which it was designed, etc., and may present risks to your fellow workers or to unknown operators or consumers. Similarly the suspected misconduct may take any of a number of forms. You will develop the scenario and questions--see below--alone or with the two or three members of your subgroup.

2. Present the scenario to someone at MIT who is knowledgable about the situation you present. If you form a team, each interview a different person.

3. In the oral reports you (or your team, if you work together) should begin by displaying your scenario on an overhead and reading it aloud and displaying your questions. Each person (member of your team) will give a brief report on the interviews that he conducted and the conclusions that he drew on the basis of the interview. If you work in a team, the team will then present a brief comparison of the team's interview experiences in any way that seems appropriate.

4. For your mini-project you will give an oral report only. You need only interview one MIT person for your mini-project. One purpose of the mini-project is to give you practice doing this sort of project. Another is to give you information that you want to have, and give you experience in getting it. For your mini-project you will have 7 minutes to present your mini-project, if you are working alone. If you are working with other students you will have 5 additional minutes for each additional person.

For your Final Project project you will:

1. Develop a brief (300-400 word) hypothetical scenario and questions in which you, as an engineer or scientist face an ethically significant practical problem. You may do your major project on any topic listed on the course syllabus or any other ethical problem that might arise for you in the technical workplace or in graduate school.

2. Present the scenario to people who have experience in the sort of work environment that you wish to examine, whether a corporation, university or research facility, and explore with them the best way for an engineer in their organization to respond to the scenario you present. For your major project you will take one scenario to different people, people outside of MIT (and, perhaps some MIT people as well). We have an extensive list of corporate representatives. You may wish to interview both one of these representatives and a recent MIT graduate working at this corporation, for example.

3. In the oral reports you (or your team, if you work together) should begin by distributing your scenario or displaying it on an overhead and reading it aloud. Display but do not read your questions. Each person (member of your team) will give a brief report on the interviews that s/he conducted and the conclusions that s/he drew on the basis of the interview. If you work in a team, the team will then present a brief comparison of the team's interview experiences in any way that seems appropriate.

4. The instructor will work with you on refining your scenario and choosing interviewees for your final project. You will have 12 minutes to present your final project if you are working alone. If you are working with other students you will have 8 additional minutes for each person over one in your group. You will submit a written version, as well as present an oral version of your final project. The oral version of your final project will be graded by your fellow students. The written version will be graded by the course instructor.

What Makes A Good Scenario?

1. Written from the position of an engineer who is actually experiencing the problem. Be sure to describe your (the engineer's) position and experience. Ask what resources would be available to you to help resolve the problem. Get as much specific advice as you can, e.g., whom do you approach first? When should you speak with people and when should you put things in writing (you can expect a great variation among companies on this point) and when or whether to send copies of your memos to other individuals? Remember this is project is primarily about responsible ways of addressing ethical problems, and secondarily about the procedures that are customary in an organization or in an industry for seeing that safety or other problems never arise. Knowing something about how procedures work is relevant to being responsible and formulating wise responses, so the secondary focus is relevant to the first, but don't get lost in the details of procedures.

2. Raises an issue you care about, so you can really put yourself in the place of the engineer in the story - perhaps because something like it happened to you or a friend or relative. The more you can empathize with the engineer, the easier it is to conduct a good interview. The scenario does not have to be particularly novel. The point is to give you practical experience in raising real concerns, not to entertain the instructor or audience.

3. Open-ended - Don't tell a complete story. Don't specify too much of the organization's response, e.g., don't specify that all the officers of the corporation refuse to listen to the engineer. Leave the representative room to tell you the best way to proceed in his or her organization.

4. Realistic - Present the kind of situation that you might actually face on the job. The scenario is more plausible if you do not make out anyone to be extraordinarily stupid or corrupt. For example, in case of a risk under special circumstances, such as very cold temperature, it is more reasonable for a manager to decide to at least warn users/customers, rather than totally ignore the problem. However, because many people do not read or heed warnings, an engineer would be justified in wanting further action taken. Although there certainly are some very stupid or corrupt people in the world, but for each of those there are many more who do pretty well most of the time and just make some avoidable errors and occasionally have moral lapses.

The details of scenario can be negotiated with the representative of the organization whom you will interview, so although you should try to make your scenario realistic, you do not have to anticipate exactly what would happen at the organization that you interview.

What Makes a Good Interview?

• Select an issue and organization about which you are genuinely curious, or at least one that is representative of the kind of organization you might join (as an employee or graduate student) after you graduate from MIT.

• Call your interviewee as soon as possible. Leave your name and number and times at which you will be at that number, if you have to leave a message. You may want to send a written copy of your scenario without questions to the representative. This is a good idea if your scenario is long or complicated.

• Interview your subject in person, if possible or, failing that, by phone. Avoid conducting a written interview, since then you will have fewer signals to judge the candor and sincerity of your informant.

• Listen carefully to what the interviewee actually says.

• Phrase your questions in a way that is courteous, specific about concerns, open-ended about possible company responses, and does not allow a simple yes or no answer, e.g., "How would a new employee know what to do in this situation?" rather than, "Does the company have a handbook for new employees?"

Here are Sample Questions & Topics for an interview with someone in industry about responding to a safety problem:

• What would be the best way for me to resolve this problem if I were working in your company (were a graduate student in your department)? If the representative says that what you have described could not happen at her organization, ask what is the closest scenario that could happen there. Get as much information as you can about their idea of the best way to do things, e.g., whom do you approach first? How and when? In writing? By phone? By E-mail? In person? In private? At meetings? There is a great deal of difference between companies on when you should put things in writing.

• How long has this office/procedure/policy been in place? If it was put in or substantially changed within the last fifteen years, what led to those changes? Some policies and procedures are relatively new and were stimulated by safety incidents or government anti-fraud measures.

• How would an engineer know or learn to do this?

• What would be the likely repercussions for the engineer for taking this action.

• When, if ever, should an engineer report his or her safety concerns to those outside the company? Is there any particular agency that oversees safety in this area? (Most representatives will give you a good problem-solving response to this question. Occasionally, one will give a condemnation of whistle blowing.)