Function and Management of Machine and Machine Parts - Essay Example

Ethics in Mechanical Engineering- The Ford Pinto Car Case Name Course Instructor Date Introduction Mechanical engineering is the field of study that deals with the design, function and management of machine and machine parts. These machines, which range from small individual parts to large industrial machines, undergo modifications frequently to either improve their functionality or cost effectiveness. In carrying out the design, maintenance and management of machines, mechanical engineers consider a variety of factors which are viewed to be beneficial to both the client firm which theywork for, and the market at large. The firms would always love to have the machines designed at a cost effective price that would enable them beat competition, while customers would also love a superior quality and pocket friendly machine. These two scenarios requires mechanical engineers to come up with designs that are effective and efficient enough to satisfy both parties, and in the course of making this decision, ethical issues arise. Types of ethical issues in mechanical engineering One of the most popular ethical issues in this field concerns the cost- benefit analysis of the production of a machine. Just like in most of the other fields, mechanical engineers try to design products of superior quality regardless of the cost. The mechanical engineers code of ethics requires that the health and safety of the general public be taken into consideration by mechanical engineers as they perform their duties. Compromising this value however, are the company managers who give the various product specifications that they require mechanical engineers to adhere to during the manufacture of the machines, (Cording, 2002.p212). These constraints by managers, which are based on the expected cost of the product, is one of the issues that can push mechanical engineers to the manufacture of cheap machine parts that miss the vital elements as they try to avoid costs. Another ethical issue that arises in this field concerns the provision of all relevant and material facts about the operations of the machines produced and informing the consumers of any defect therein. The engineering field might be compromised by the managers, who would sometimes not like to have these facts uncovered. The important features of the machines, its functioning, what to do and what not to do while operating it should all be given to consumers as a package when they purchase these products. Some firms would however try to bar the engineers from providing such vital information for the fear of a reduction in sales in case of a faulty part or side effect. The firms might also be avoiding to incur the extra costs that come with the repair, modification and maintenance of the faulty parts and would therefore not heed the engineers advice. Ethical issues in this field are relatively same globally; hence mechanical engineers are faced with the same moral issues even in the international setting. In some parts of the globe, like the United States, the mechanical engineers have a strict code of ethics that is outlined by the American society of mechanical engineers, to act as a guideline to resolution of the ethical issues and requires strict adherence. This is as a result of the several lives lost and the damages incurred during the technical failures of the ford pintos in the 1970’s. Emerging economies and growth markets such as China are majorly profit oriented economies that give very little thought to human safety. Working in these two environments would still pose the same ethical issues which require the engineers to decide upon. Analysis of the ethical issues In handling ethical dilemmas, engineers are required to use certain tests to arrive at the most amicable decisions. The tests include prudence test, the cost/benefit test, rights test and the golden rule test. The prudence test requires one to justify the manufacturing or production effects of a commodity. Whose interest is best served by the product and is it just right because it serves the interest of a particular group? In the pinto car case for, example, the interest of the managers was best served while the consumers’safety was at risk, (NSPE, 1995.p39). The engineers went against the paramount canon of engineering as stated by the NSPE which requires that as engineers fulfill their duties, the health safety and welfare of the public was put at risk. Another important rule, which is the golden test enables the mechanical engineer to put themselves on the receiving end of their invention and test whether they would like the impact of the technology or not. This way, they only do what they know they would bear if they were the consumers. As mentioned earlier on, some managers try to force mechanical engineers to work within given specifications so as to minimize the cost of production, (Cording, 2002. p224). For example in the ford pinto car case, the managers designed the weight and cost features to be met by the engineers, which was a serious challenge. The engineers however, tried their knowledge in designing the car, and during its car crushing tests, a serious problem was discovered, whose fixing would require a change in the specification earlier given by the managers, i.e. an increase in both the cost and weight. The managers therefore ignored the engineersadvice and proceeded with the release of the pinto into the market. This ignorance is what led to the injury and death of hundreds of the American citizens and the erosion of the ford reputation and image. The engineers should have however tried to resolve these mechanical issues of the pinto before its release into the market. To arrive to an amicable resolution, engineers consider the overall impact of the specification given, and the safety of the cars, if the fuel tanks were not modified, even though this would put their jobs at risk. The provision and use of engineering materials and machine parts that don’t meet specifications is illegal and is a guideline that should be used by mechanical engineers while making decisions. Based on the code of ethics, engineers should try to go beyond reasonable means to minimize as much as possible the number of dangers and accidents posed by machines produced by them and that includes the pinto cars. Withholding of any vital information on the functionality or defect of a given machine by any team of engineers from the general public is a serious legal offence and a violation of the body’s professional ethics. In the pinto car case however, the mechanical engineers had informed the management of the defects in the fuel tank and its vulnerability to crush. The engineers did not however try to stop the release of the cars to the market, and neither did they inform the general public of the defects of the car. The engineers should have tried to convince the management with arguments that state the benefits and costs that the firm would enjoy and incur incase it produced an effective fuel tank. For example, the engineers could inform the ford co. of the possible lawsuits it could face if they did not try to avoid the accidents, the qualified and experienced engineers who would want to be employed by ford if the pinto was a success, and lastly, the production of pinto with a high safety standard specification would improve the reputation of the firm. These forms of arguments would also enable the engineers to satisfy their higher level of professional responsibility. In the event that these arguments fail, engineers have the responsibility to report the matters to any relevant authority. The various solutions provided in cases where there is a conflict of interest between the shareholders and the engineers are ethical solutions which would work well for the benefit of all the parties involved. The consumers are assured of the safety that comes with the use of the machines, the managers would still have the machines produced efficiently and competitively, while at the same time, the engineers will also have a boost of their professional ethics. Cultural diversity can however destabilize this equilibrium, this is because though the international setting is a global market that has standard rules and code of ethics for the engineers, the differences in economic/business cultures across the globe brings with it certain challenges, (World Federation of Engineering Organizations, 1993). Working with the Chinese customers/clients for example, would require engineers to focus on the financial beneficial side of the projects. This is because most of the Chinese firms put profits before other things and would give very minimal concern to the safety of the users. This is evidenced by the numerous fake machines which do not have warranties and pose threats to users in the Chinese markets as well as in the global markets. Though cultural difference is a function of ethical issues, human safety is a major priority and no compromise should be made while trying to derive ethical solutions globally. Moral issues and current practice Since most of the machines designed by mechanical engineers are used directly by the individual or commercial consumers, engineers should take diligent care in design, functionality and management of these machines to ensure consumer safety. This is the major constituent of mechanical engineers moral responsibility. Though conflicts may arise while trying to be morally responsible, the engineers should follow the code of ethics laid down to come up with the most appropriate ethical decisions. The code of ethics coupled up with individual/personal conscience would certainly enable me to carry out my duties in a morally acceptable way. The corporate world is entrepreneurial in nature and therefore aims at minimizing the cost of production while making good profits. It focuses more on the profits and the social responsibility part of the business is an obligation that most of the firms would wish to evade. The corporate culture focuses more on the on the least cost method of incurring costs, for example in the automobile industry, both the R&D and the corporate shareholders debate greatly on what between styling and engineering should precede the other, (McGregor,1960.p117). As many would say, market survey and preliminary engineering studies should come first. This is however not the case in the corporate culture; here, the style comes first and the engineering follows next. This is one of the factors that put engineers to the moral test, and is a culture that engineers should strive hard to help the corporate agents shed off. The agents should be able to understand that once the quality is compromised, usage and safety are compromised too. Engineers must try to make informed decisions, by first making clear interpretations of factual matters or values that underlie contradicting moral viewpoints. In order to be viewed as a morally upright mechanical engineer, one must possess three vital qualities which include; honesty, truthfulness and reliability. These qualities prompt engineers to provide accurate and complete technical knowledge of their capabilities. Ethics require that an engineer be familiar with the engineering principles as they try to give facts and opinions to consumers. Deceiving a client into purchasing a given machine is a serious offense. The above three qualities are what hold value in engineering. Ethics also require that engineers explain the defects of a product that it does not well know its consequences. References Code of Professional Engineering Ethics, World Federation of Engineering Organizations, 1993 Http://www.coe.ttu.edu/ethics/nafta.html Humphreys, K. K 1995, National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE): NSPE Code of Ethics,What Every Engineer Should Know About Ethics. McGregor, D 1960,The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company. Werhane, P.H., and Cording, M 2002, Ethical Issues in Business: a philosophical approach. 7th.edn.NewJersey: Prentice Hall Read More

Analysis of the ethical issues In handling ethical dilemmas, engineers are required to use certain tests to arrive at the most amicable decisions. The tests include prudence test, the cost/benefit test, rights test and the golden rule test. The prudence test requires one to justify the manufacturing or production effects of a commodity. Whose interest is best served by the product and is it just right because it serves the interest of a particular group? In the pinto car case for, example, the interest of the managers was best served while the consumers’safety was at risk, (NSPE, 1995.p39). The engineers went against the paramount canon of engineering as stated by the NSPE which requires that as engineers fulfill their duties, the health safety and welfare of the public was put at risk.

Another important rule, which is the golden test enables the mechanical engineer to put themselves on the receiving end of their invention and test whether they would like the impact of the technology or not. This way, they only do what they know they would bear if they were the consumers. As mentioned earlier on, some managers try to force mechanical engineers to work within given specifications so as to minimize the cost of production, (Cording, 2002. p224). For example in the ford pinto car case, the managers designed the weight and cost features to be met by the engineers, which was a serious challenge.

The engineers however, tried their knowledge in designing the car, and during its car crushing tests, a serious problem was discovered, whose fixing would require a change in the specification earlier given by the managers, i.e. an increase in both the cost and weight. The managers therefore ignored the engineersadvice and proceeded with the release of the pinto into the market. This ignorance is what led to the injury and death of hundreds of the American citizens and the erosion of the ford reputation and image.

The engineers should have however tried to resolve these mechanical issues of the pinto before its release into the market. To arrive to an amicable resolution, engineers consider the overall impact of the specification given, and the safety of the cars, if the fuel tanks were not modified, even though this would put their jobs at risk. The provision and use of engineering materials and machine parts that don’t meet specifications is illegal and is a guideline that should be used by mechanical engineers while making decisions.

Based on the code of ethics, engineers should try to go beyond reasonable means to minimize as much as possible the number of dangers and accidents posed by machines produced by them and that includes the pinto cars. Withholding of any vital information on the functionality or defect of a given machine by any team of engineers from the general public is a serious legal offence and a violation of the body’s professional ethics. In the pinto car case however, the mechanical engineers had informed the management of the defects in the fuel tank and its vulnerability to crush.

The engineers did not however try to stop the release of the cars to the market, and neither did they inform the general public of the defects of the car. The engineers should have tried to convince the management with arguments that state the benefits and costs that the firm would enjoy and incur incase it produced an effective fuel tank. For example, the engineers could inform the ford co. of the possible lawsuits it could face if they did not try to avoid the accidents, the qualified and experienced engineers who would want to be employed by ford if the pinto was a success, and lastly, the production of pinto with a high safety standard specification would improve the reputation of the firm.

These forms of arguments would also enable the engineers to satisfy their higher level of professional responsibility. In the event that these arguments fail, engineers have the responsibility to report the matters to any relevant authority. The various solutions provided in cases where there is a conflict of interest between the shareholders and the engineers are ethical solutions which would work well for the benefit of all the parties involved.

Read More