Design of the New Bayswater Shopping Complex - Case Study Example

Case Study - Whose Drawings? Table of contents 1. Executive Summary : page 3 2. Introduction : page 4 3. Identification of the Problem : page 4 4. Problem Analysis : page 5 5. Legal/contractual issues : page 5 6. Management issues : page 6 7. Ethical issues : page 6 8. Recommendations/Solutions/Implementation issues : page 7 9. Conclusions : page 8 10. Works Cited : page 9 Executive Summary Introduction Identification of the Problem In the given case, the real problem is the design of the new Bayswater Shopping complex. Tim has noticed two problems associated with the design developed for new Bayswater Shopping complex. First, it was a stolen design. Secondly, it was the property of his earlier employer. In other words, legal, management and ethical issues were involved in the above case. The above problems occurred because of the shortage of qualified draftsmen or designers in Tim’s new firm Grand Star. Some of the experienced draftsmen resigned recently and their vacancies were not filled yet which forced Grand Star designers to steal the property of Bailey Brothers Consultants. Tim felt it as a problem since he was familiar with the design. Otherwise he may not be aware of the unethical actions of the employees of his design department. Moreover, Tim was a loyal professional who like to keep some ethical standards in his professional life which forced him to perceive the above case as a problem case. Most of the other engineers may not take the above case as a problem since they will always try to impress their management using any means. So, whether the above case is a problem or not may depend on the perception and integrity of the professional who analyses it. Problem Analysis Lack of staff in the designing department and the willingness to adopt all possible means to complete a project in time along with the motivation to impress the top management forced the designing staff to adopt such an unethical behaviour. The above problem can be analysed through three perspectives; legal/contractual, management and ethical. Legal/contractual issues On December 1, 1990, President George H. W. Bush signed into law the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act ("AWCPA"). The AWCPA resolved an important dispute in U.S. intellectual property law, extending copyright protection to architectural designs embodied in three dimensional building structures. An alleged infringer is prohibited from not only copying the architectural plans but also re-creating the building design even if the original architectural plans are not used (MacMurray) Many of the US architects and other design professionals are still unaware of the intellectual property laws regarding the industrial designs. The given case is a legal violation as far as US intellectual property laws are concerned. Grand Star may fell in deep trouble if they proceed with the stolen design. The legal disputes may affect the image of Grand Star and their future business prospects Management issues Management of a project based on a stolen design is difficult. Designers at the time of designing a project may identify lot of probable issues which can occur at the implementation stage. These probable issues might help the engineers while managing the project at the implementation stage. On the other hand when a project is managed with the help of a stolen design, the construction managers may not get such help from the designers and their job would be more complicated. Only the designer can suggests options when expected or unexpected problems arises at the implementation stage. Another management issue associated with the stolen design is whether to report the top management of Grand Star about the stolen design or not. Tim was not sure whether the design was stolen with the knowledge of the top management or not. So he must consider informing the management about the stolen design and the possible management difficulties in managing a project using a stolen design. Ethical issues As per the views of Kantians, “What a person should do and what a person wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what one wants to do would usually bring immediate gratification/happiness, but might not benefit the person in the long run” (Maccarelli). Kant believed that reasons are subjective in most of the cases (Rockmore). When we analyse the given case with respect to Kantian ethics, we can conclude that Tim should not proceed with the stolen design. Such stolen designs may bring temporary gains to Grand Star, but in the long run such design will retard the growth of Grand Star. The designers of Grand Star will copy or steal the designs of others in future also which will reduce the creativity of Grand Star designers. Moreover, the company’s image would be damaged among the public which will affect their business also. Utilitarian judge an action based on the utility of the action. As per the arguments of utilitarian, actions are right only if it promote happiness (Mill, p.6). Moreover, Utilitarianism explains the question; “What ought a man to do?” Its answer is that he ought to act so as to produce the best consequences possible (Utilitarianism). In the given case, we can see that the Grand Star designers have not done anything to produce the best possible consequences. Instead of working overtime for producing a new design they, have adopted the shortcut which may not promote happiness either to the Grand Star management or their competitors. In short, the actions of Grand Star designers cannot be justified with respect to any of the ethical theories. Recommendations/Solutions/Implementation issues Tim must meet the top management of Grand Star immediately and should make them aware of the stolen design and the consequences of using it. He should explain all the legal/contractual, management and ethical issues which may arise if Grand Star proceeds with the stolen design. Since he was directly involved in the development and usage of the stolen design earlier, he should tell the top management that he was not ready to proceed with such a stolen design. He should convince the Grand Star management that such stolen designs may adversely affect the reputation and future business prospects of the company. Tim should also discuss the possibilities of filling the existing vacancies in the design department with the management. The shortage of workforce and the overload of works may force the limited number of existing staff in the design department to go for shortcuts. Shortcuts will reduce their development of creativity and will affect the company’s abilities to develop independent design in future also. Another point which Tim needs to bring the attention of the Grand Star management is the management issues which may arise at the time of implementation of such stolen designs. Only the creator knows about the secrets of creations and those who trying to alter or modify the creations other than the creator may invite troubles. The engineering or the architecture of the creation is well known only to the creator. In other words, the management of a project is easy if the construction managers get proper guidance from the designer. Conclusions Being a person who wanted to keep high level of ethical standards and integrity in profession, Tim must inform the Grand Star management about his unwillingness to proceed with the stolen design. Tim’s explanations, strong professional approach and attitudes based on morals may force the Grand Star management to reconsider their decision to proceed with the project with a stolen design. If Tim failed to convince the Grand Star management, he must consider staying away from the project or resignation from the company. Tim can easily join his earlier organization if his current organization fails to accept his arguments. Works Cited 1. MacMurray Rashida Y.V. 2005. “Trademarks Or Copyrights: Which Intellectual Property Right Affords Its Owner The Greatest Protection Of Architectural Ingenuity?”. 26 January 2010. 2. Maccarelli, Sarah.2006. “The Ethical Theory of Kantianism”. 26 January 2010. 3. Mill, John Stuart. 2004. “Utilitarianism”. 26 January 2010. 4. Rockmore, Tom. 2000. “German Idealism, and Neo-Kantianism” Publisher: Humanity Books (May 2000) 5. “Utilitarianism”. 2009. Encyclopædia Britannica. 26 January 2010. Encyclopædia Britannica Online: Read More