Practicing Engineering Ethics in Global Context: A Comparative Study of Expert and Novice Approaches to Cross-Cultural Ethical Situations

Abstract

Engineers and other technical professionals are increasingly challenged by the impacts of globalization. Further, engineering educators, technical managers, and human resources staff have demonstrated great interest in selecting and training engineers who are capable of working competently, professionally, and ethically in global context. However, working across countries and cultures brings considerable challenges to global engineers, including as related to understanding and navigating local and regional differences in what counts as professional ethics and integrity. In this study, we focus on written responses to 27 assessment scenarios that involve micro- and/or macro-ethical considerations in six national/cultural contexts (China, France, Germany, India, Japan, and Mexico). More specifically, we analyze responses to open-ended versions of the scenarios. Our participants consisted of both experts (e.g., experienced engineers) and novices (e.g., undergraduate students and early career professionals). Comparing and contrasting how experts and novices responded to these ethical problems sheds light on differences in their ethical strategies and approaches. This analysis also allows us to discern what specific cultural knowledge and sensitivity were employed by experts in solving cross-cultural ethical problems, but were largely lacking among novices. Finally, we analyze and discuss challenges faced by experts and novices in responding to cross-cultural ethical situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. ABET. (2018). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2019–2020. Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, https://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/E001-19-20-EAC-Criteria-11-24-18.pdf.

  2. alZahir, S., & Kombo, L. (2014). Towards a global Code of Ethics for engineers. Paper presented at the 2014 IEEE international symposium on ethics in science, technology and engineering, Chicago, IL. May 23–24.

  3. Bashe, A., Anderson, S., Handelsman, M., & Klevansky, R. (2007). An acculturation model of ethics training: The ethics autobiography and beyond. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38(1), 60–67.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Canary, H., & Herkert, J. (2013). Assessing ethics education in programs and centers: Challenges and strategies. In F. F. Benya, C. H. Fletcher, & R. D. Hollander (Eds.), Practical guidance on science and engineering ethics education for instructors and administrators: Papers and summary from a workshop (pp. 38–43). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cech, E. (2013). The (mis)framing of social justice: Why ideologies of depoliticization and meritocracy hinder engineers’ ability to think about social justice. In J. Lucena (Ed.), Engineering education for social justice (pp. 67–84). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chang, P., & Wang, D. (2011). Cultivating engineering ethics and critical thinking: A systematic and cross-cultural education approach based on problem-based learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(4), 377–390.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chung, C. (2015). Comparison of cross culture engineering ethics training using the simulator for engineering ethics education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(2), 471–478.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2008). Ethics teaching in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 327–388.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Davis, M. (2015). “Global engineering ethics”: A case of re-inventing the wheel. In C. Murphy, P. Gardoni, H. Bashir, C. E. Harris, & E. Masad (Eds.), Engineering ethics for a globalized world (pp. 69–78). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Del Vitto, C. (2008). Cross-cultural “soft skills” and the global engineer: Corporate best practices and trainer methodologies. Online Journal for Global Engineering Education, 3(1). Retreived from Sept 4, 2019, https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ojgee/vol3/iss1/1/.

  11. Didier, C. (2010). Professional ethics without a profession: A French view on engineering ethics. In I. van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 161–173). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Didier, C., & Derouet, A. (2013). Social responsibility in French engineering education: A historical and sociological Analysis. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(4), 1577–1588.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Downey, G., Lucena, J., & Mitcham, C. (2007). Engineering ethics and identity: Emerging initiatives in comparative perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 463–487.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Evanoff, R. (2011). Intercultural ethics: A constructivist approach. Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, https://www.idrinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Evanoff-Intercultural_Ethics.pdf.

  15. Harris, C. E. (2008). The good engineer: Giving virtue its due in engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(2), 153–164.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Harris, C. E., Prichard, M. S., Rabins, M. J., James, R., & Englehardt, E. (2019). Engineering ethics: Concepts and cases (6th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hollander, R., & Arenberg, C. (Eds.). (2009). Ethics education and scientific and engineering research: What’s been learned? What should be done? Summary of a workshop. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jesiek, B., Buswell, N. T., & Zhu, Q. (2018). Global engineering competency: Assessment tools and training strategies. Proceedings of the 2018 ASEE annual conference and exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, June 23–27, 2019. Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ojgee/vol8/iss1/1/.

  20. Jesiek, B., & Woo, S. E. (Eds.). (2018). GEC project—Scenario index. West Lafayette, IN: Global Engineering Education Collaboratory. Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, https://geec.info/gec-index.

  21. Jesiek, B., & Woo, S. E. (under review). Development of a situational judgment test (SJT) for global engineering competency (GEC). Journal of Engineering Education.

  22. Jesiek, B., Zhu, Q., Woo, S. E., Thompson, J., & Mazzurco, A. (2014). Global engineering competency in context: Situations and behaviors. Online Journal for Global Engineering Education, 8(1), Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ojgee/vol8/iss1/1/.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kline, R. (2001/2002). Using history and sociology to teach engineering ethics. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(4), 13–20.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Luegenbiehl, H. (2004). Ethical autonomy and engineering in a cross-cultural context. Techné, 8(1), 57–78.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Luegenbiehl, H. (2010). Ethical principles for engineers in a global environment. In I. van de Poel & D. Goldberg (Eds.), Philosophy and engineering: An emerging agenda (pp. 147–159). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Murphy, C., Gardoni, P., Bashir, H., Harris, C. E., & Masad, E. (2015). Introduction. In C. Murphy, P. Gardoni, H. Bashir, C. E. Harris, & E. Masad (Eds.), Engineering ethics for a globalized world (pp. 1–11). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Murrugarra, R., & Wallace, W. (2015). A cross cultural comparison of engineering ethics education: Chile and United States. In C. Murphy, P. Gardoni, H. Bashir, C. E. Harris, & E. Masad (Eds.), Engineering ethics for a globalized world (pp. 189–211). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  28. NSPE. (2018). NSPE code of ethics for engineers. Retrieved from Sept 4, 2019, http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics.

  29. Wang, G., & Thompson, R. G. (2013). Incorporating global components into ethics education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(1), 287–298.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhu, Q. (2010). Engineering ethics studies in China: Dialogue between traditionalism and modernism. Engineering Studies, 2(2), 85–107.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1160455.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qin Zhu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix A. Sample Global Engineering Scenarios (Jesiek and Woo 2018)

Appendix A. Sample Global Engineering Scenarios (Jesiek and Woo 2018)

(GEC Dimension: Ethics, Standards, and Regulations; National/Cultural Context: China)

Global Engineering Scenario #16C: Suspicious User

As a sales engineer working for a U.S.-based company, you receive a large order from an intermediate distributor located in Tianjin, China. Upon receiving the order, you check to make sure that both your product and the intended end product are not banned in China or restricted by export trade policies. When you look up information about the end user online, you find that the website for the end user’s company looks suspicious and may have been created to appease you. What should you do in this situation?

Global Engineering Scenario #58: Alternate Feedstock

As a biomedical engineer employed by a U.S.-based medical device firm, you are working closely with a Chinese partner company that has been contracted to manufacture one of your firm’s new products. During a recent teleconference, you learn that the plastic feedstock originally sourced for a key component of the product is no longer available. Shortly thereafter, one of the lead production engineers from the Chinese company sends you a specification sheet and test results for an alternate feedstock from another supplier. While the extensive English-language text in these documents is poorly written and difficult to interpret, the numeric data and performance graphs look good, and your Chinese colleague insists that the material is acceptable. You are under pressure to sign off on the production plan. What would you do?

Global Engineering Scenario #72C: Shanghai Safety Glasses

Your work as an industrial engineer for a major North American OEM automotive parts supplier has landed you at a plant your firm recently acquired outside of Shanghai, China. As a member of an acquisition transition team, you are assigned to work on safety and compliance issues. For several weeks, you have been encouraging workers at the plant to wear eye protection when using certain machines. Yet even after posting signs, making safety glasses widely available, and talking to individual workers, you find that most employees continue to ignore the requirement. What would you do in this situation?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhu, Q., Jesiek, B.K. Practicing Engineering Ethics in Global Context: A Comparative Study of Expert and Novice Approaches to Cross-Cultural Ethical Situations. Sci Eng Ethics 26, 2097–2120 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00154-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Comparative study
  • Cross-cultural
  • Engineering education
  • Engineering ethics
  • Ethical strategies
  • Global engineering
  • Experts
  • Novices