The Vocational Aspect of Education

ISSN: 0305-7879 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjve19

Professional ethics and education: A study of

Mechanical Engineers

J.A. Moon

To cite this article: J.A. Moon (1970) Professional ethics and education: A study of
Mechanical Engineers, The Vocational Aspect of Education, 22:52, 113-121, DOI:
10.1080/03057877080000181

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057877080000181

Published online: 30 Jul 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 7320

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjve20
The Vocational Aspect of Education (Autumn 1970) Volume XXll, No. 53, pp. 113-121
Professional Ethics and Education:
A Study of Mechanical Engineers*
By J. A. MOON
Principal Training Officer, Engineering Industry Training Board
Posing questions about status and ethics
In the last ten years there has been considerable
comment and discussion about the s~atus of
engineers in society. Many engineers have them-
selves complained that their status is unreasonably
lower than that of other professional groups,
taking into account the length of time and the
difficulty involved in their education and training.
One study [ 1 ] has shown that sixth-form students
held engineering in much lower esteem than some
other professions. Another researcher [2] came to
the conclusion that the image and status of
engineers might in fact be deserved. Some writers
also think that the trend of sixth-form students to
study arts subjects is associated with a contempt
for the materialism of the age. Few of these views
are likely to commend themselves to engineers,
many of whom feel the profession is undervalued
by the teaching profession generally.
At the same time, many leading figures in the
industry are placing emphasis now in their public
statements on the social responsibilities of
engineering and it may weU be that here lies the
true and proper evaluation of status. One argu-
ment is well summarized in the statement:
' . . . young people who choose careers in science
and technology, must as an integral part of their
education, have their minds opened to the socio-
logical implications of scientific and technologi-
cal progress and to their special responsibilities
in that connection.' [ 3 ]
It is of interest to note that similar comments can
also be found in articles of other engineering
institutions and the question about social responsi-
bility is clearly not just confined to mechanical
engineers.
There is, of course, no doubt that British
engineers have made significant contributions to
society over the last two hundred years. The
names of British engineers are particularly
* The research upon which this article is based was
carried out in a private capacity by myself, and not in my
official capacity.
113
prominent in Armytage's survey of engineering
history. [4] The history of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers also contains names of some
of the most famous engineers who made important
contributions to society by their work. [5] Contri-
butions to all forms of locomotion and power
generation are two which come immediately to
mind. However, impressions suggest that many of
the engineering solutions are presented to the
public as technical problem-solving exercises and
the means are presented as ends in themselves.
By comparison, the situation of the doctor is
not presented to the public as a problem solving
one but as a h u m a n one in which science is a
means not an end.
It is open to debate whether the problem
solving role of the engineer is not only the primary
one, but also the only one. It is suggested that the
majority of engineers are probably conditioned to
this role as there is no social or moral role in
engineering or at best it is a limited one. There are
many examples which illustrate the point. The
whole effect of noise upon operators and the
general environment is a particular case. [6] There
is also the example of Singleton's ' m a n ' to fit the
controls of a standard capstan l a t h e - t h e result was
a dwarfish humanoid with shoulders two feet wide
and an eight feet arm span. Studies of the history
of safety in engineering will also show that whilst
some engineers have had safety factors in mind, it
has often taken the force of public opinion to lead
to changes in the design of equipment. Writing on
the subject of safety [7], HM Senior Engineering
Inspector of Factories pointed out that 'the
engineer has the ability to improve existing
standards of safety; the need is to convince him
that his responsibility in many cases is an over-
riding one.' These and other examples suggest that
the effects of the design or operation of equip-
ment on society do not form a significant part of
the engineer's moral outlook. It can of course be
objected that new knowledge and techniques have
only made possible a better understanding of the
interplay between technical and social factors in
1 14
recent years, but although this may seem at first
sight to be an attractive explanation it does not
bear close inspection since much of the knowledge
and techniques have been understood and written
about for many years.
Having suggested that perhaps the sense of
responsibility of engineering is carried out within
limited boundaries, it may be useful to look at
how the engineer views his own work and the
work of his Institution. One recent study [8] of
both scientists and engineers showed that the
professional associations concerned themselves
largely with educational and qualifying functions.
The study found, however, that .the 'qualification
bestowed by the professional association is much
more like a University degree than a licence to
practice. It is merely a status attribute'. The same
research also revealed that it was the technical
study function that the members wished to see
strengthened. It seems that the Institutions acted
more like learned societies, and that other profes-
sional matters did not attract major attention.
They were able to exert an influence on curricula
but did not emphasize sufficiently these matters
touching upon professional conduct. The study
suggested that this situation was acceptable to
professional mechanical engineers and also noted
that the greater majority of members of the
Engineers' Guild were satisfied with the use of
their skill and knowledge but worried about
questions of status.
The picture which this presents is of the
engineer as engaged primarily in technical problem
solving; and that this role is endorsed by his
professional association and, in the main, accepted
by the members. This is n o t to suggest any
question of right or wrong. Examples of engineer-
ing work can, of course, be looked at entirely from
the viewpoint of technical competence. On the
other hand, if designers had been conditioned to a
code of ethics, perhaps some of their designs
would have been different.
Engineers, unlike doctors, are not in the main
self employed. Hutton and Gerstl's survey of
nearly 1000 engineers [9] indicated that only 4
per cent were engaged in consultancy work and
that the majority were in organizations which
employed over 1000 people. This has led one
writer to conclude [ 10] that 'since a professional
engineering qualification is solely a hallmark of
competence, the application of a code of conduct
means little more than is required of them as
employees and that the threat of dismissal is more
real than the threat of expulsion from the
Institution.' In this case, the engineer is in a
difficult position if he is to act as a professional
Professional Ethics and Education
person when his views are in direct conflict with
his employer. The fact that he is a professional
person may condition him to certain concepts and
attitudes. The fact that he is an employee involves
him in quite a different set. If, however, engineers
in subordinate positions always accept the values
of their employers, their power is given authority.
This may result in the engineer having much more
loyalty to management, as a status ideology, than
to his profession. It can also be argued that, as the
majority of engineers are employees, there is little
that can be done about setting standards for the
profession as a whole. One alternative way might
be to support a body such as the Engineers' Guild
and apply a code of ethics. Some have suggested
that the Institution should change its present role
and adopt such a code, and one research worker
goes as far as to suggest that a moral code is the
basis of professionalism.
The comment about engineers as employees is,
however, not entirely convincing when one con-
siders that some engineering companies are run by
engineers. More important, however, is that
Hutton and Gerstl showed that about half the
professional mechanical engineers became
managers by the age of 55. Presumably, therefore,
they can exercise considerable authority or influ-
ence over their subordinates, both in the fields of
technical competence and of integrity.
It is important to consider the impact of the
professional engineer's education on his profes-
sional role and c o n d u c t - p e r h a p s his education
conditions him to a particular set of values. The
curricula of most Universities tend to lay emphasis
on the technical aspects of mechanical engineering.
This is understandable and logical but .the balance
of subjects and the time devoted to them in the
curricula can be criticized. Thus, H u t t o n and
Gerstl [ 1 1] came to the conclusion:
'that whilst present courses at Universities seem
broadly satisfactory in their technical context,
they are not producing any breadth of educa-
tion in either non-technical fields or even in
technical communications. The ability to
understand men should be taught much more
than it is.'
More recently, Kenedi [ 12] has emphasized that,
in designing courses in biomedical engineering, 'a
reasonably clear idea should exist of its aim.
Education should assist the bioengineer . . . to
meet the ethical and social problems associated
with medicine, some of which arise due to the very
applications of the technology with which he is
concerned'.
It seems to be believed that curricula orienta-
J.A. MOON
tion and teaching method have considerable
impact on attitudes and beliefs. If the curriculum
in engineering is solely technically-centred, this
may suggest the role of the engineer to be solely
that of technical decision making. Furthermore,
students will tend to follow a technically centred
role since this is the only one to which they have
been motivated. It is doubtful whether one can be
motivated towards considering moral, ethical and
social concepts of engineering unless both the
curricula and methods associated with it are
concerned with an intellectual evaluation of these.
Engineers may have attitudes, for example, to-
wards certain types of conduct, but find them-
selves in difficulty because as private individuals
they have other attitudes. In other words, they
may have to operate dual standards of conduct.
Researchers into medical education [13] have
come to the conclusion that the effective acquisi-
tion of values by students is not only important in
its own right, but can also lead to the more
effective provision of health care. For this reason
medical students are systematically exposed to
values and norms which are more exacting and
rigorously disinterested than those found in the
run of medical practice. Peers and superiors in the
teaching hospitals continually serve in what
amounts to the role of monitors of medical
practice.
There appears to be a case, therefore, for higher
education to debate values for engineers. Whether
college staff or industrial tutors should help
elaborate a defined code is arguable. The applica-
tion of such a code of conduct might be of limited
benefit, if it had not been preceded by a study of
ethical and moral principles for engineers. There is
also doubt whether all engineers 'will be united in
support of one ethical system'. Although a code
might develop a sense of integrity in the indi-
vidual, it might also provide a formula to hide
behind in order to maintain status or bargaining
power. And it might lead to conflict in a situation,
for example, where an engineer might consider it
ethically necessary to advise a potential customer
that a competitor's equipment gave better value.
With these questions in mind it was thought
that the usefulness or practicability of having a
code could best be established by checking how
engineers saw their own role, the types of problem
which they face and their attitudes to them.
Codes of conduct
In 1933 Carr-Saunders and Wilson [14]
declined attempts at defining a profession
beyond limiting their enquiries to that group of
callings bearing some resemblance to the profes-
115
sions of law and medicine. Twenty years later,
Lewis and Maude [15] concluded their writings
without a hard and fast definition, although they
gave suggestions about the nature of professional
spirit which included attitudes to work, pay, self
esteem, colleagues, clients and the general public.
They noted also that most emphasis in defining pro-
fessionalismhas been laid upon standards of conduct.
Reviewing the codes of conduct (or rulings by
the Bar Council for lawyers) of seven professional
groups in 1967 does not lead to different con-
clusions. [16] One could reinforce the writings of
Lewis and Maude by saying these particular codes
infer recognition of the importance of responsi-
bility and of service transcending personal interest.
However, to make this effective there has to be an
assurance of collective agreement about standards
and suitable disciplinary machinery to maintain
these standards within the professions themselves.
An additional conclusion or a point of major
emphasis is that attitudes generally appear to be
more important than the rules themselves.
It could be objected, of course, that a review of
codes of conduct does not necessarily mean that
an individual profession necessarily sees its collec-
tive responsibilities in a wide setting. Thus
barristers are enjoined to 'fearlessly uphold the
interests of clients without regard to any un-
pleasant consequences either to himself or to any
other person'. [17] Abel-Smith and Stevens in
their sociological study of the English Legal
System [ 18] have pointed out, on the other hand:
' . . . that the courts have failed to adjust to the
need of the modern state and of a modern
economy' and 'in its cohesion the Bar . . . has
been a mighty force for resisting changes which
would be damaging to its pecuniary interests.'
' . . . Lawyers were still reluctant to regard
themselves as providing a service to consumers,
let alone a social service for consumers.'
More recently, Lees [19] has questioned many
of the underlying statements and beliefs about
professional activity. He suggests that the profes-
sional's claim 'to be custodians of consumer
welfare would cut more ice if their associations
expelled members for incompetence. But they do
not do so, preferring to act like any club by
protecting their o w n . . . ' . And he concludes:
'the attempts to mark off the professions from
other forms of economic organization by
appeals to "credat emptor" for the difference
of their services turn out to be unconvincing or
unfounded. The spread of the professional idea
means a retreat to mercantilism and a serious
brake on the emergence of new and more
116
efficient forms of organization'. 'The gains (to
professional people) take the form of status and
a quiet life as well as money income.'
Recently Pappworth [20], a Consultant Physi-
cian, has also suggested that:
' . . . teachers in our medical schools are often
more interested in research than in the clinical
care of patients. As a result those whom they
teach are easily affected with the doctrine that
what matters first is science and what comes
second is the patient'.
Pappworth also postulates the need for an Act of
Parliament to control human experimentation by
doctors. Both points suggest limitations to the use
of codes.
There is no doubt that the development of
professions has been associated with moderniz-
ation in the c o m m u n i t y and control of standards
of competence for these groups. As professional
groupings developed they have usually written
codes of conduct. Whilst there is no single defini-
tion of a profession, the concept of service before
personal interest may be inferred from the codes
of conduct of some professions. However, the
effectiveness of service and of codes of conduct
depends more upon attitudes to them than upon
the rules themselves. There is also doubt whether
codes of conduct may be effectual for salaried
employees. Professional groups have helped to
develop valuable skills by insistence on standards
of entry and competence and this has helped to
reduce uncertainty facing consumers. Nonetheless,
the nature of the difference of the service offered
by professional groups compared with non-
professional groups is not clear, other than being
status centred.
The code of conduct of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers
The original Rules and Regulations of the
Institution of Mechanical Engineers did not con-
tain a code of conduct [21]. It is of interest to
note that its objects covered ' . . . improvements in
the various branches of mechanical science, to
increase their knowledge and give an impulse to
inventions likely to be useful to the c o m m u n i t y at
large'.
The Institution was raised from ' . . . its legal
status of a mere limited company to its rightful
position as the recognized embodiment of the
profession' by Royal Charter in 1930 [22]. At the
time of its Petition of Incorporation, the objects
and purposes included the encouragement of
invention and research, the holding of meetings,
the publishing of papers, and co-operation with
educational bodies to further education in
Professional E th ics and Education
engineering science or practice. No official code of
conduct was included in the Bye-Laws although
the Council was empowered to remove members
from the Register who 'have been found guilty of
such conduct as shall have rendered him unfit to
continue to belong to the Institution'. [ 23]
There has been no fundamental change in the
stated purposes and objects of the Institution since
that time. However, in 1957 a change was made in
the Bye-Laws and a special section was devoted to
the Conduct of Members. This states that
' . . . in order to facilitate the advancement of
the science of mechanical engineering by pre-
serving the respect in which the community
holds persons who are engaged in the profession
of mechanical engineering, every member shall
so order his conduct as to uphold the reputa-
tion of the Institution and the dignity of the
profession of Mechanical Engineer, and shall, in
whatever capacity he may be employed, act in a
strictly fiduciary manner towards clients and
employers, towards others with whom his work
is connected and towards other members.' [24]
In September 1967, the Institution held a
Special Meeting to amend many of its Bye-Laws as
a result of the emergence of the Council of
Engineering Institutions. [ 25 ] The proposed major
alteration to the Conduct Bye-Law was the
addition of the phrase ' . . . in his responsibility to
his employer, to clients and to the profession he
shall have full regard to the public interest and
shall discharge his duties with integrity'. The
amendment was not approved at that time
although it has been the subject of debate subse-
quently.
It is of interest to note that the Institution did
not and does not attempt to give specific meaning
to phrases such as 'fiduciary' or 'public interest' or
to illustrate the actual conduct to be observed,
whereas the seven professional groups previously
referred to, indicate specific acts which may or
may not be carried out. Thus it could be said that
the Institution o f Mechanical Engineers leaves
conduct to be decided by its members in the
context of their own moral code. In this context,
it appears that the Institution acts much more like
an extension of the Universities, rather than like
other professional bodies which emphasize par-
ticular conduct roles for their members.
Testing ideas about status and ethics
The effectiveness of the conduct role of the
Institution was the subject of an enquiry based on
a questionnaire sent to members. The questions
used were evolved by considering issues raised by
the survey of literature. Two exploratory studies
J. A. M O O N
were set up and questionnaires were completed by
27 professional engineers. Since it was desirable to
get a wide coverage of representative members,
direct interviews were rejected in favour of a
postal survey to establish group attitudes. Direct
objective questions were used for the survey,
although a small number of open-ended questions
were included. It was interesting to note that
whilst the respondents were guaranteed
anonymity, some openly revealed themselves, in
reply, to by people of distinction in the profes-
sion, both in industry and in the universities. Since
a postal survey was used the questionnaire was
kept short but the sample size was chosen as 2 per
cent of the corporate members. The sample was
taken from the last published list of the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers. [ 26 ] The questionnaire
was sent out to 725 people. For convenience,
members living overseas were not written to. After
four weeks a reminder was sent out to those who
had not replied. Successful replies as a percentage
of the live register allowing for those who had
changed address, died, etc., was 67.7 per cent.
Since non-respondents constitute half the number,
it cannot be claimed that there is no bias in the
results. However, the general similarity between
some of the information in Hutton and Gerstl's
survey and this one suggests that the replies are
representative. Particular similarities exist in the
percentage employed in consultancy, educational
routes followed and type of work undertaken.
For convenience, an abbreviated form of the
questionnaire is attached.
Comparisons between replies of graduates and
non-graduates
The majority of degree holders (4 out of 5)
studied on a full-time basis, but slightly less than 1
in 5 of non-degree holders studied full time.
Both groups had a similarity in employment
among major functions and rated technical
administration as important. Teaching and
research and development tended to figure more
prominently in the work of degree holders whilst
design figures more prominently amongst non-
degree holders. Technical administration is more
prominent as a factor amongst those completing
education more than 10 years ago in both groups.
Both groups in almost equal percentages take
major decisions, or influence significantly
decisions about money, costs and people. Most of
them have subordinates. About two-thirds of each
group are employed in firms with over 500
employees. There is virtually no difference in the
percentage that is self-employed. The percentag e is
in any event very small (3%-4%). A majority in
117
both groups state that function, cost and satisfying
the customer are the three most important factors
used in judging their work. They also consider
these as the three most important factors by which
they would like their work to be judged. The
effects on society and on operators do not appear
to be very significant factors by which work is
judged or by which they would like it to be
judged.
A small but significant minority in each group
encounters frequent conflicts between their
employer's interest and the customer/clients'
interest. Costs and money matters are the
dominant factors in this conflict.
Almost the same percentages were recorded for
the groups of people who have most influenced
their outlook and behaviour as professional
engineers. Employers and their professional
engineering colleagues dominated the replies.
Engineering teachers and tutors are rated almost
the same by both groups as the first influence in
only about 1 in 10 of the replies. However, a
majority in both groups included the influence of
tutors and teachers amongst the first three (65 per
cent of graduates and 57 per cent of non-
graduates).
Whilst engineering education had not helped a
majority of respondents to form concepts about a
personal philosophy, professional behaviour, or
the public good, those with degrees appear to have
been more influenced in their education in this
respect than those without degrees. This is
examined in more detail later on.
A large minority in each group is unaware of
the code of conduct of the Institution (48 per cent
of degree holders and 46 per cent of non-
graduates). On the other hand, a majority in both
groups thought that a code of conduct would not
improve the effective practice of mechanical engin-
eering. Where suggestions were made for items for
including in a code of conduct, status and
standards of work were nominated as the items
most likely to help. Similar replies were received
from each group.
Almost the same percentage of each group (60
per cent of degree holders and 58 per cent of
non-graduates) reported that they had a personal
philosophy of engineering: benefitting society was
mentioned consistently by each group as the most
significant item in that philosophy.
Conclusions
The first fact to note is that the majority of
professional mechanical engineers work in com-
panies employing more than 500 people and only
118
3 to 4 per cent are self-employed. This emphasizes
the dependency of engineers on their superiors for
the purpose, direction and methods of their work.
It also shows the dilemma in which the engineer
may find himself when there is a conflict of
interest.
Whilst the tasks in which engineers are em-
ployed are diverse, they tend to cluster round
technical administration, research and develop-
ment, teaching and design. This underlies the
importance of the decisions they take both for the
immediate future and for posterity. The majority
of engineers also exercise direct or indirect
responsibility for people, money and costs. It
follows that the effective control of resources,
both human and physical, should form part of the
discipline of the engineer. He should also be able
to form concepts about the purpose of his work
and should be motivated to consider these as well
as the policies of his employer.
The majority of engineers appear to be satisfied
with the way in which their work is judged.
Function, costs and satisfying the customer are
rated amongst the first three criteria by which
work is judged and by which they would like it to
be judged. The effect on society or on the
operators and users of equipment does not figure
significantly in their work. This suggests a narrow
view of the engineer's responsibility. Whilst 'bene-
fitting society' emerged as the commonest item
mentioned by those with a personal philosophy of
engineering, it still only constituted a factor in 49
of 312 replies from graduates and 37 of 146
non-graduates.
There is also little evidence that British univer-
sities or colleges include subjects in the curriculum
which enable students to form v i e w s about
engineering purpose, although the technological
universities (formerly the colleges of advanced
technology) usually include subject matter in their
curricula for mechanical engineering which meets
the examination requirements of the Institution,
especially for the Part III examination. In general,
however, the subject o f engineering tends to be
treated amorally. The emphasis in the curriculum
suggests, in fact, that the value system of engineer-
ing depends almost solely on its technical subjects.
At the same time, one must take into account
the relative lack of influence, at present, of
engineering teachers and tutors in developing
attitudes, outlook and behaviour for intending
professional engineers. This may be explained
partly by the fact that with the exception of
CNAA courses, there is sometimes limited contact
between colleges and industry once the young
student engineer completes his formal studies.
Professional Ethics and Education
Until recently most universities have n o t con-
sidered the morality of engineering. The general
absence of subject matter in the curriculum about
engineering responsibility and purpose results in
this subject being left primarily to industry.
This idea is reinforced by the fact that a
majority of engineering students found no help in
their education in forming concepts about a
personal philosophy, about professional behaviour
or the public good. On the other hand there is a
widely held belief that students gain an insight
into these aspects, or attributes of so-called liberal
education by the general ethos of the university,
although there is no guarantee of this. In practice,
it s e e m s that attitudes to professional behaviour
are more likely to be developed in employment.
Ideas and beliefs may in fact harden round
day-to-day practice, rather than a considered
morality of, or for, engineering, which has been
developed as a result of study in the education
system. This does not necessarily mean that the
beliefs of professional engineers about their profes-
sional role are wrong. It does mean that it is
probably ill-considered or limited and it may
depend strongly on the attitudes of the employer
and other professional colleagues.
This fact is also relevant to the effectiveness of
the Institution Bye-Laws on conduct. As a signifi-
cant minority of respondents were unaware of the
code of conduct, its usefulness is in doubt.
Furthermore, a majority felt that a code of
conduct was either irrelevant to, or would not
help, the effective practice of professional
engineering. This suggests that the present code
may, for many, be little more than an exhortation
to a general morality.
Amongst the Suggestions made for hellJing the
effective practice of professional engineering,
status and standards of engineering work were the
items most frequently mentioned. Integrity was
mentioned by only 28 respondents. It may be
claimed that standards are subject to the law of
supply and demand and those with unsatisfactory
standards will eventually fail. On the other hand,
the engineer encountering a conflict of interest
about engineering standards with his employer (as
some respondents clearly did) does not have
recourse to the Institution for moral or legal
sanctions against the employer.
In any event it is difficult to see how the
practising engineer can always act in a 'fiduciary'
manner towards a number of groups when their
interest may be different. He may have to judge
between priorities as to whose interest shall
prevail. It seems that education has a responsibility
to help him understand the principles affecting
J. A. M O O N
such situations and the criteria he can apply to
reach his decision. It also seems that this is
fundamentally much more important than a code
of conduct itself. 'Codes of moral behaviour and
ideals are [in any case] necessarily related to
circumstances; they may become irrelevant not
only because of moral progress or regression, but
also as a result of changes in the facts to which
they are related.' [ 27]
What appears to be the most important fact of
the survey is that a large number of engineers have
no personal philosophy of engineering-40 per
cent of respondents did not have a personal
philosophy of engineering. Within the use of the
term 'philosophy of engineering', the benefits to
society, and social and moral considerations were
most frequently mentioned by those with a
personal philosophy. This implies ethics and
morality. However, since the majority have not
been motivated by education to consider ethical
and moral problems of engineering, which might
form part of a personal philosophy, their engineer-
ing may invariably be concerned with how to do
things, but contains little thought as to whether it
is worth doing. The evidence suggests that educa-
tion has failed to help students consider principles
and develop ethical judgements, and that there is
not a large difference in basic attitudes in this
respect between t h o s e whose education was degree
based or non-degree based.
Some suggestions about educational requirements
It would seem that there is a need to include
ethics for engineering in the education of profes-
sional mechanical engineers. Professor Thring [28]
has suggested classifying projects on a moral
spectrum, as shown below:
(1) Machines that increase possibility of enjoy-
ing satisfactory life
(2) Machines that provide necessities of life
(3) Cosmetic machines that serve human vanity
only
(4) Machines for killing and torturing humans
Professor Thring has also suggested the need for
the universities and engineering institutions to
teach social responsibilities to the trainee engineer
(and of the possibility of setting up a Hippocratic
Oath for Engineers).
It seems that the educational problem should
be looked at from the viewpoint of curriculum
content and particularly from the viewpoint of
methods such that the student gains insight into
subjects and forms his own values for engineering.
It is unlikely that the student will be able to find a
119
single set of principles to resolve some of the
moral dilemmas in engineering:
'An important element of behaviour charac-
terized by valuing is that it is motivated, not by
the desire to comply or obey, but by the
individual's commitment to the undedying
value guiding the behaviour.' [29]
Education in this setting should therefore enable
the student, not only to be knowledgeable, but
also to make judgements about the things or ideas
he values in engineering.
It is suggested therefore that the approach to
curriculum should be firstly through an attempt to
formulate questions about engineering values.
Some questions which might be considered are:
(1) What is the purpose of engineering?
(2) What is the engineer's responsibility to the
profession, to the customer, and to
society?
(3) What is the engineer's responsibility to
posterity?
(4) What are the present effects of engineering
on individuals, on working groups, on
society at large?
(5) What is the likely effect of present
engineering on posterity?
(6) How can one define 'results' in an
engineering activity?
(7) How can one define engineering 'results'
for society at large, for the customer/-
client, and for the production of wealth in
economic terms?
(8) What measurements can be applied to
these results?
(9) What constitutes 'good' engineering?
(10) Can one define ethical standards for
engineering?
(11) Do I have a personal ethic for engineering?
It is also suggested that the approach to
developing judgement will be through discussion
leading to increased awareness. One researcher has
pointed out that not only is authority to be
questioned, but o n e s e l f - t h e validity of one's own
judgements. [29] The evidence available suggests
that lectures do not exert influence on students to
make them think critically so much as group
discussion does.
It is not claimed that the approach outlined is
necessarily the right or only one. It is, however,
suggested as one way of viewing the educational
problem of studying ethics for engineering, and of
providing a basis for further discussion and
research.
120
References
1. Hutchings, D. G. (1963). Technology and the
Sixth Form Boy, Institution of Education,
Oxford University.
2. Heywood, J., Pollitt, Joan and Mash, V. (April
1966). Studies in Higher Education, Centre
for Study of Higher Education, University of
Lancaster.
3. Jackson, Sir Willis (March 1964). 'Scientific,
technological and technical manpower',
Chartered Mechanical Engineer.
4. Armytage, W. H. G. (1961). A Social History
o f Engineering, Faber and Faber.
5. Parsons, R. H. (1949). History of the Institu-
tion of Mechanical Engineers 184 7-1947, The
Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
6. Singleton, W. T. (November 1962). Ergo-
nomics for lndustry-A study of a standard
capstan lathe, Department of Scientific and
Industrial Research.
7. Hodgson, E. W. (April 1966). Chartered
Mechanical Engineer.
8. Prandy, K. (1965). Professional Employees, a
study o f Scientists and Engineers, Faber, p.
177.
9. Hutton, S. and Gerstl, J. E. (May 1964). 'The
effects of background and training on success
in engineering,' Chartered Mechanical
Engineer.
10. - - v. 8 above, p. 82.
11. V. 9 above.
12. Kenedi, R. M. (January 1967). 'Biomechanics
in the Modern World,' Chartered Mechanical
Engineer.
13. Merton, Reader and Kendall, (1957). The
Student Physician, introductory studies in the
sociology o f medical education, Harvard
University Press.
14. Carr-Saunders, Alexander and Wilson, P. A.,
(1933, reprinted 1964) The Professions,
Frank Cass and Co., Ltd.
15. Lewis and Maude (1952). Professional People.
16. British Medical Association (Members Hand-
book). (1965). Medical Ethics; Boulton, W. W.
(1965). Conduct and Etiquette at the Bar,
Butterworths; Council, RIBA. (1953). Code
o f Professional Conduct, The Charter, Supple-
mental Charters and Bye-Laws o f the R.LB.A ;
NUT. Professional Conduct, Form 169;
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (May
1964). Statement upon Matters o f Profes-
sional Conduct; British Dental Association
Professional Ethics and Education
17. - - V. 16 above, Boulton, p. 5.
18. Abel-Smith, Brian and Stevens, R. (1967).
Lawyers and the Courts, a sociological study
o f the English Legal System 1750-1965,
Heinemann.
19. Lees, D. S. (1966). Economic Consequences
of the Professions, Research Monograph, The
Institute of Economic Affairs, 1966, pp. 30,
31, 46.
20. Pappworth, M. H. (1967). Human Guinea
Pigs-Experimentation on Man, Routledge and
Kegan Paul, pp. 217,208.
21. Institution of Mechanical Engineers (Birming-
ham 1847). Rules, Regulations and List of
Members. (Original in library of HQ Institu-
tion of Mechanical Engineers, London).
22. Parsons, R. H. (1949). History o f the Institu-
tion o f Mechanical Engineers, Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, p. 66.
23. Petition by Institution of Mechanical
Engineers for a Royal Charter of Incorpora-
tion, Royal Charter and Bye-Laws. (1932).
Paragraph 7 of Royal Charter, Paragraph 34 of
Bye-Laws.
24. Bye-Laws of Institution o f Mechanical
Engineers. (1957). Paragraph 34.
25. Notice of Special Meeting of The Institution
of Mechanical Engineers to review Bye-Laws
dated 12th July 1967.
26. List o f Members published by the Institution
of Mechanical Engineers Corrected to 3rd
August 1965. (Corporate members totalled
36, 259.)
27. Cobban, Alfred (1960). In Search of
Humanity, The role o f the enlightenment in
modern history, The Alden Press, p. 244.
28. Thring, Meredith W. (September 1967). The
Advancement o f Science, The Next Thirty
Years in Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 119.
29. Krathwohol, D. R., Bloom, B. S. and Masion,
B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of Educational
Ob/ectives, Handbook H: Affective Domain,
Longmans, Green, London, p. 180.
30. Beard, Ruth M. (September 1967). Research
into Teaching Methods in Higher Education,
Monographs, Society for Research into Higher
Education, p. 32.
(October 1964). Ethical and Legal Obligations
o f Dental Practitioners; Institution of Civil
Engineers (March 1963). Rules for Profes-
sional Conduct.
J. A. MOON 121

APPENDIX

Summary of Questionnaire

1. Do you take major decisions, or influence
significantly major decisions about money and
costs?
Yes
No
2. Do you take major decisions, or influence
significantly major decisions affecting people?
Yes No
3. How many employees are responsible to you?
None
Up to 5
5 to 25
26 to 50
Over 50
4. What size of firm do you work for?
Under 100 employees
100-500 employees
Over 500 employees
5. Rank in order the following criteria, if they
are used in judging y o u r work.
Meeting functional requirements
Meeting economic and cost criteria
General effect on public and society
Effects on operators and users of
equipment
Satisfying the customer
6. Rank in order the criteria by which you
would like your work to be judged.
Meeting functional requirements
Meeting economic and cost criteria
General effects on public and society
Effects on operators and users of
equipment
Satisfying the customer
Other (please list)
7. Do you frequently encounter major conflicts
of interest between y o u r employer's interest
and the client/customer's interest?
Yes
No
If yes, give brief examples
8. Rank in order the following groups which
have most influenced y o u r attitudes, outlook
and behaviour as a professional engineer.
Employer
Professional engineering colleagues
Engineering teachers and tutors
Fellow students
Family
Professional Institution
Other (list)
9. Did y o u r College/University education help
you significantly to develop attitudes and
concepts about
A personal philosophy
Professional behaviour
The Public Good
10. Are you aware of the definition of profes-
sional responsibility and d u t y in the Bye-Laws
of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers?
(Please do n o t refer to it.)
Yes
No
11. Would a code o f conduct help to improve the
effective practice of professional engineering?
Yes
No
Irrelevant
12. If yes, list two items in which it would help.
13. Do y o u have a personal philosophy of
engineering?
Yes
No
14. If yes, please describe it briefly.

(Script received: February 1970}