PROFESSIONAL ETHICS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Neil Beeraspat
October 2019
COEM 6009 – Contract Management and Construction Law

Department of Civil with Environmental Engineering

Faculty of Engineering
St Augustine Campus

i
 ABSTRACT

Professional Ethics in the Construction Industry

Neil Beeraspat

The construction industry is one that involves various professionals and participants that need to
work together to achieve a common goal on a project. However, in recent times there has been a
major decline in ethical conduct amongst engineers when utilizing the various procurement
methods which has caused many issues to arise in projects due to malpractices by our engineers.
It is of paramount importance that our engineers conduct themselves ethically by following strong
code of conduct to allow for smooth flow to projects. This paper assesses the various procurement
methods, their advantages, disadvantages and determines causes of unethical behaviour amongst
engineers.

Keywords: Ethics, procurement, engineers.

ii
 CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................................... ii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF CASES ..................................................................................................................................... v
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Aim ............................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Objective ...................................................................................................................................... 2

1.4 Research Question ....................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Law of Contract ........................................................................................................................... 3

2.2 Law of Tort .................................................................................................................................. 4

2.3 Conditions of Contract ................................................................................................................ 5

2.4 Procurement................................................................................................................................. 6

2.5 Professional Ethics ..................................................................................................................... 11

2.6 Unethical Behaviour .................................................................................................................. 11

3.0 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 13

4.0 DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................... 14
5.0 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 18
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................... 19
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 20

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Building contract relationships…………………………………………………….. (10)

iv
 LIST OF CASES

Case 1: (National Soc. Of Professional Engineers v. United States 1978)…………………… (19)

Case 2: (Johnston and Gudergan 2007)……………………………………………………….. (22)

v
 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Ethics is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as comprising the moral principles which guide
a person. However, in construction, it is the degree of trustworthiness and integrity which
companies and professionals conduct their business (Mason 2009). For Construction professionals,
the invaluable price of human life demands the highest moral considerations from those who may
risk it otherwise (Vee and Skitmore 2003). In many countries around the world, code of ethics has
been introduced for all professionals to comply with to provide high standard work but it is the
individual’s responsibility to know these codes and make informed decisions. (Ehsan, Anwar, and
Talha 2009).

Procurement is defined as the process of finding and agreeing to terms and acquiring goods and
services through a tendering or competitive bidding process. Legislations in most countries require
construction contracts to be procured by the use of a formal, competitive tender process to select
the most suitable contractor (Scott 2006). The lowest bidder is the one who usually gets awarded
the contract despite many issues involving the lowest bid system that are discussed later in this
paper.

In the Caribbean, there are three main methods of procurement used by government agencies
namely: Design-Build (DB), Design-Bid-Build (DBB) and recently Public Private Partnerships
(PPP). Engineers, Architects and other professionals need to analyze the needs of the project and
all its contents before selecting a project delivery method (Al Khalil 2002).

This paper seeks to determine the causes of unethical conduct amongst engineers when using the
above-mentioned procurement methods in the construction industry. It is intended to highlight the
need for a stronger code of ethics amongst our engineers in the constructing industry to provide
the highest standard of works for all the beneficiaries involved.

1
1.2 Aim

I. To determine the causes of unethical conduct amongst engineers in the construction

industry.

1.3 Objective

1. To analyze the different procurement methods.

2. To determine causes of unethical behaviour.
3. To make recommendations to help alleviate unethical behaviour.

1.4 Research Question

What causes unethical conduct amongst engineers when utilizing the various procurement methods
in the construction industry?

2
 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Law of Contract

A Contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties which comprise of the
Agreement, Letter of Acceptance, Letter of Tender, Conditions of Contract, Specifications,
Drawings, the Schedule and all other documents listed in the Contract Agreement (Bunni and
Bunni 2005).

The Law of Contract can be viewed as a means of enforcing contractual obligations (promises),
regulating the market in the provision of goods and services and to facilitate exchange. These form
the roots of the law of contract (Stone and Devenney 2017).

Enforcing Promises

Once a contract is legally binding it can be enforced by law to protect the welfare of the parties in
honouring their contractual obligations to either side. Contract law includes the principle of
common law ‘bargain theory’ which simply states: bargained-for contracts are enforceable while
nonreciprocal contracts are not. However, this does not apply to real-life situations in today’s
society. This principle is linked to corresponding sanctions that are used to determine the level of
enforceability of a said promise (Goetz and Scott 1979).

Regulating the Market in Providing Goods and Services

The Law of Contract states fundamental legal rules governing market transactions. This part of the
law describes basic regulations of key economic institutions as the sale of goods, employment
relations and provision of professional services. The law of contract supports these actions by
making it legally enforceable and also place restrictions on obligations allowed and limit the extent
to which a party can enforce an agreement (Collins 2003).

Facilitating Exchange

The Law of Contract plays a central role in restricting traders from breaching contracts, reduce
transaction cost and therefore facilitating exchange. Contracts entered by parties include goods
and services provided in exchange for monies as stipulated in the contract. Some situations that
don’t involve exchange are still considered contracts by law, e.g. Transfer of property that is

3
effected through a formal deed. As it relates to facilitating exchanges, the courts are keen to utilize
approaches in lines with the intentions of the parties in enforcing exchange agreements (Stone and
Devenney 2017).

2.2 Law of Tort

A tort can be described as wrongdoing done by one party against another. In tort law, it stipulates
rules as to how the common citizen may or may not treat each other and how they may be expected
to be treated by others. The law of tort is built around conceptions of ‘wrongs’, ‘rights’ and ‘rights
of action’ (Zipursky 1998).

There are various types of torts:

I. Intentional Tort- The general theory of intentional tort created by Frederick Pollock and
Oliver Wendell Holmes which later became known to the courts as the ‘prima facie tort
doctrine’ which summarizes as intentionally inflicting harm onto another with no
justification. Modern-day tort law defines intentional torts as a situation where a defendant
acted with intent to injure the plaintiff, examples of intentional torts range from assault,
false imprisonment, etc. (Vandevelde 1990).
II. Negligence Tort- Negligence is defined as a breach of duty of care by an unintended act
which resulted in injuries to another person. The courts usually employ a form of cost-
benefit analysis to determine if the party is negligent of the breach. Therefore, the law
imposes negligence liability to ensure the defendant makes the correct choice that
maximizes social welfare (Simons 1996).

III. Strict Liability Tort- Strict liability is a case where a defendant is held responsible for
their actions without the plaintiff having to prove negligence or fault. There isn’t any room
for consideration once allegations that the defendant intended to harm the plaintiff, where
it could have been avoidable if reasonable care was used (Epstein 1973).

4
2.3 Conditions of Contract

In FIDIC, Condition of Contracts (for building and Engineering Works designed by the Employer)
are guidelines to help professionals effectively manage construction contracts. These are specific
guidelines set out for The Employer, The Engineer and The Contractor which will be the focal
point of this discussion.

The Employer

The Employer in FIDIC contracts is defined as the executing body of the contract i.e. The Client.
Outlined in the general conditions of contract are basic rules the Employer must follow to allow
for a smooth passage of the construction activities.

The Employer has a responsibility for accuracy and consistency of the Contract Documents that
are to be used by the Contractor, all documents need to be clear and consistent with all contract
requirements. The Employer is expected to assist the Contractor in firstly providing a right of
access to the project site for the Contractor to mobilize all necessary machinery for the execution
of the works and very importantly, to provide prompt approvals that are required by the Contractor
to not delay or obstruct the flow of the works. The Employer shall always act unbiased and in good
faith toward the Contractor to allow for the continuous progress of the project (Robinson 2013).

The Engineer

The Engineer, just like the Employer, is bounded by the general conditions of contract laid out by
FIDIC. These guidelines pave the way how the Engineer is expected to operate in for the entirety
of the contract.

Firstly, the Engineer is defined as the person appointed by the Employer to act as their advisor by
safeguarding the Employer’s interest. The Engineer also acts as the mediator between Contractor
and Employer, hence the Engineer must act unbiased and without favour to one side although
employed by the Employer in dissolving any disputes and disagreements that may arise during the
project duration. In issuing any instructions and or modifications to drawings to suit the current
site conditions, the Engineer is expected to give a timely and detailed response to the contractor to
keep the flow of the contract intact (Lina 1997).

5
The Contractor

The Contractor is defined as the party that enters the contract to execute the works by following
the specifications of the contract. The Contractor is expected to provide the Engineer with all
necessary documentations; a list of manpower, equipment and methodologies that shall be utilized
in the execution of the works as laid out in the contract.

All safety procedures and regulations shall be carried out by following the laws that govern the
area of the site. The contractor is expected to also follow all instructions put forward by the
Engineer to produce works that are complying with the specifications of the contract. The
Contractor shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of the environment to limit
the damages and nuisance caused by the works done to affected residents. All progress shall be
detailed in the monthly reports issued by the Contractor detailing all aspects of the works and the
respective progress made for the specified period (Robinson 2011).

2.4 Procurement

As mentioned earlier, this research will examine the three listed project delivery methods: Design-
Build (DB), Design-Bid-Build (DBB) and Public Private Partnerships (PPP) and their respective
advantages and disadvantages.

Design-Build (DB) Contracts

Design-Build are contracts where the design and construction procedures are contracted to a single
contractual person i.e. the contractor. These types of contracts usually require minimal design work
that is completed by the Employer after which the contractor takes over and develops the given
design. However, the contractor can procure the services of a design firm to complete the designs
if he so chooses. The charts below illustrate the effects of design-build contracts, which is to move
the consultant from the gap position between employer and contractor and place them under the
authority of the contractor whom they advise (Turner 2014).

6
Figure 1: Building contract relationships

Source: Turner (2014, 4)

Advantages and Disadvantages of Design-Build Contracts

As stated by (Konchar and Sanvido 1998), when comparing different project delivery methods in
the United States, “advantages of Design-Build contracts mainly include significantly improved
cost and scheduled advantages”. Also, these projects provide equal and at times improved quality
performance when compared to Design-Bid-Build. They also minimize legal entanglement. There
are mainly two parties involved i.e. the employer and the contractor. Since one party is entrusted
with developing and building the project, legal battles can be minimized once the employer
conveys to the contractor his expected end product clearly before the final pricing of the works.

However, this is only achievable through a comprehensive procurement process. Types of

procurement for Design-Build contracts that are analyzed in this research are as follows; Sole
Sourcing Method, Qualification-Based Method, Best-Value Method and Low-Bid Method.

7
Sole Sourcing Method

This method is used in special circumstances and cases of emergency works. It involves the
employer directly selecting a contractor based on past work experience, technical experiences need
and established relationships built through previously working on projects together (Beard,
Loulakis, and Wundram 2001).

Qualification-Based Method

In this approach, proposals of qualifications are received after which they are shortlisted by a
selection panel i.e. the procurement department. After which the shortlisted offerors submit
technical and price proposals and the contract is awarded to the offeror who is deemed to have the
best qualifications at the best price (Molenaar and Gransberg 2001).

Best-Value Method

Very similar to the Qualification-Based Selection, this method allows design-build teams to submit
technical project proposals along with the projected cost of execution. A weighing criteria
evaluation is done where the employer adjudicates points to select the appropriate team for the
works based on the Employer’s demands of the design-build team (Molenaar, Sobin, and Antillón
2010).

Low-Bid Method

In this method, the employer selects the design-build team solely on the project value and the cost
submitted by the design-build team. The different teams submit both the technical aspects and their
respective costs attached and the employers select the team that has the lowest cost to perform the
works (Eriksson and Westerberg 2011).

As previously stated, for the Design-Build contracts to be effective there must be a comprehensive
procurement method applied. If there are procurement errors and wrong selections are made, this
can adversely affect the project throughout the duration of the contract. A major disadvantage of
this method of contracts is the potential loss of professionals i.e. engineering and architectural
firms who in this case act as consultants. In the traditional contractual approach, the engineers/

8
architects are the ones employed by the employer to give advice and are responsible for developing
the project to meet the expectations of the employer (Yates 1995).

Design-Bid-Build Contracts

Design-bid-build are contracts where the employer i.e. the client hires a consultancy/ design firm
that produce a design based on requirements provided by the client. The consultancy/design firm
produces plans and specifications for the construction of the project. The documents provided are
then used by the client to entering into a separate contract with a construction firm. Many methods
are used in awarding contracts but the common practice is to solicit bids from various contracting
companies. (Hale et al. 2009).

Advantages and Disadvantages of Design-Bid-Build Contracts

While Design-Build projects are generally the preferred choice by clients in the USA due to the
cost savings and scheduling advantages over the design-bid-build method, it all comes down to
the skill and experience of the project management team and that too of the contractor, which has
great effects on the project performance when using design-build contracts. An advantage of
design-bid-build contracts is shown by (Konchar and Sanvido 1998), “DB projects unit cost are
6.1% more than DBB projects”. In DBB contracts the client entrusts an A/E firm with the task of
producing the designs and to layout specifications necessary for the execution of the contract to
the expectations of the client. This method also keeps the professionals i.e. the consultants (A/E
firms) more functional and in constant contact with the Employer giving technical advice on issues
during the conceptual phase of the project.

This small advantage does however come at a disadvantage when compared with the performance
of DB projects in the USA. On a study conducted by (Shrestha, O’Connor, and Gibson Jr 2011)
on a performance comparison on large DB and DBB Highway projects across the USA, “the
findings from the research DB projects incurred a -4.2% average schedule growth compared to
4.6% for DBB projects which result in the average DBB project cost to be ($18.9 million)
compared to DB having ($18.4 million)”. From these studies, it shows that the cost performance
in DB projects are better than those of DBB projects hence the reason why DB projects are the
preferred choice over DBB projects in the USA.

9
Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)

The newest form of project delivery that has gained significant popularity over the past two
decades in many different countries is Public-Private Partnership projects. Established in the
1990s, PPPs as commonly called are joint ventures in which private companies and government
cooperate; each applying its strengths to develop a project to deliver to the public in a more
efficient or otherwise better approach than what a government could achieve on its own.
Significant synergies are required by combining public and private sector resources while
safeguards are needed to ensure no abuse of close working arrangements and relationships
(Akintoye, Beck, and Hardcastle 2002).

Advantages and Disadvantages of PPP’s

One of the main advantages of PPP projects is it affords government entities to save resources in
many ways. By having private funding, the government can concentrate its resources on other
aspects of development which are to be embarked upon to ensure improved quality of public
facilities and services (Tang, Shen, and Cheng 2010).

A further advantage is a shared risk between the public and private sector. PPPs involve various
risks throughout the lifetime of the project, as a result, governments use PPPs to not only develop
projects but to transfer some of the risks involved to the private sector (Zhang 2005).

PPPs have also been shown to reduced lifecycle costs since the government can spread capital
investments over the duration of the project which leads to the guaranteed rate of returns on its
investment (Li et al. 2005).

Although PPPs are perceived as a method of creating public infrastructure at little to no cost to the
public, this is not the case. There are many instances where PPP ventures ran into cost overruns in
which virtually all cases the government shoulders the excessive cost involved (Grimsey and
Lewis 2007).

Political obligations by formulating special policies for individual PPPs are also major obstacles
for PPP projects. In most instances, governments exhibit resistance to amend legislation or simply
formulate new policies because the development of PPP projects are not well understood (Rosenau
1999).

10
2.5 Professional Ethics

As mentioned earlier, Ethics is defined as the moral principle by which a person is guided, in
construction, it is measured by the degree of trustworthiness and integrity which companies and
professionals conduct their business. The basic properties of professional ethics as listed by
(Abbott 1983) are as follows:

1. Nearly all professionals have some kind of formal ethical code of conduct. Most instances
unwritten, they are still considered formal codes which professionals need to adhere to.
2. Compliance with ethical codes. There should be a level of conformity with ethical codes
both on a normal and situational basis for all levels of professionals.
3. Proper enforcement of formal ethics. A stern enforcement procedure needs to be adopted
to combat the instances of unethical behavior from professionals. This is a key property of
ethics and if not done can lead to the growth of unethical behaviour
4. Application of ethical codes to individual professions. Professional ethical codes need to
be profession specific to tailor to the demands the field of work to guide persons with the
right code of conduct.

2.6 Unethical Behaviour

Unethical behaviour amongst professionals in the construction industry has in recent times
increased with many instances being made public and this is a growing concern for all stakeholders
involved. According to the bad apple argument, “one attributes individual unethical behaviour to
the personal characteristics of the said individual”. (Brass, Butterfield, and Skaggs 1998).

Over the years there has been much research into the causes of unethical behaviour in companies
and businesses. Although having a strong code of ethics has shown positive impacts on the actions
of employees, the work of (Christabel and Vincent 2003) shows that the method of diffusion of
these ethical codes is crucial in assessing the impact of these codes. The relationship between
supervisor and employee in disbursing tasks and responsibilities is of key importance in
maintaining ethical standards.

Although ethical behaviour is a moral obligation of the individuals, there are instances where
situational misconduct occurs. As shown by (Tow and Loosemore 2009), in situations where

11
employees feel that ethical programs set forth by management are just a false display used to
protect top management from potential lawsuits, this can cause employees to develop negative
attitudes towards them. Ethical standards can also suffer when management is not open-minded to
bad news and asks the employees to produce excellent results in their daily activities.

Ethical downfall can occur when companies make personal gains a priority ahead of corporate
goals and the needs of the customers. Such companies are likely to trade ethical practice in one
area for unethical practice in another (Treviño et al. 1999).

Unethical behaviour is not just caused by management’s desires but it also caused by the
individuals’ lack of self-control. Self-control is defined as the ability to change one’s actions in
response to undesirable behavioral aptness and desist from acting on them. As shown by (Gino et
al. 2011), self-control involves three main components: standards, monitoring and strength.
Standards are rules and goals that are responsible for the individuals’ behaviours regarding moral
actions. Monitoring consists of keeping track of one’s actions so they can achieve their intended
goals. Strength simply refers to the willpower disapprove of any behaviour conflicting with
personal standards and goals. Individuals who lack any of the components just mentioned are likely
to display unethical behaviours since they aren’t equipped with the executive resources necessary
to identify moral issues in circumstances they may be faced with.

Many companies and businesses have taken different approaches to lower the likelihood of
unethical conduct amongst its employees. Research by (Fraedrich 1992) highlights various
approaches taken by different companies in an attempt to eradicate unethical practices amongst its
employees. Firstly, companies need to establish guidelines that all employees shall adhere to in
order to set the bar for ethical conduct in the company.

Companies also need to develop a corporate code of ethics. These codes should have specific
guidelines to assist all levels of employees i.e. entry-level and senior staff deal with all ethical
dilemmas they may be faced with daily. Its scope should be general yet specific in its usage. These
code of ethics should also detail all penalties and enforcement methods used against employees
who act unethically. Another method used by companies is implementing periodic ethical reviews
with all employees in the form of case and moral evaluation tests. This help sharpen the ethical
decision-making process of the employees.

12
 3.0 METHODOLOGY

The methodology adopted for this research is in the form of a desk study. Theses published by
various authors on issues of professional ethics, the law of contract and tort, conditions of contract
and methods of procurement were reviewed. Also various case studies were assessed and books
on the topics previously mentioned were focused on in the compilation of this research paper.

13
 4.0 DISCUSSION

In the construction industry, there are many key personnel that are involved in the day to day
decision-making process for different stages of a project. Many of these decisions are crucial in
the overall progress of the project. For this reason, there needs to be strict adherence to company
policies and code of ethics amongst engineers for projects to run smoothly. In the various
procurement methods used i.e. Design-Build (DB), Design-Bid-Build (DBB) and Public Private
Partnerships (PPP) there are many instances where the engineers have been found of breaching
code of ethics for various reasons.

Engineers act unethically for reasons of self-interest and greed. As shown earlier there are many
advantages concerning time and quality of works in Design-Build contracts in the USA. However,
those results are only possible through a stringent procurement process. Herein lies the loopholes
for unethical conduct. As listed earlier, there are four types of procurement used in DB contracts;
Sole Sourcing Method, Qualification-Based Method, Best-Value Method and Low-Bid Method. It
is the responsibility of the procurement team to act unbiased and without favour in selecting the
best-suited contractor for the job. However, in acts of self-interest, the engineers select contractors
whom he/she has personal relationships with or reveals classified information about the project
which gives that contractor an unfair advantage above others in the bidding process.

(National Soc. of Professional Engineers v. United States 1978) argues the fact of competitive
bidding for engineering projects amongst contractors. The District Courts interpreted submission
of any pricing information to prospective bidders gives them the unfair advantage amongst other
bidders and finds this act by engineers of the Society unethical. The Society’s Code of Ethics thus
“prohibits engineers from both soliciting and submitting such price information. Moreover, the
practice of awarding engineering contracts to the lowest bidder, regardless of quality, would be
dangerous to public health and safety”. For those reasons, the Society claims that its Code of Ethics
was not an unreasonable restraint of interstate trade or commerce.

The case above clearly indicated the need for stringent adherence to ethical codes in the
procurement process in awarding engineering contracts to contractors. The engineer is not to act
in self-interest but in the interest of their client and the general public who are the beneficiaries of
the works that are to be executed.

14
In Guyana, Design-Bid-Build contracts are the most common type of contracts used. The majority
of contractors specialize in mainly executing projects after the designs and specifications have
been produced by a consultancy firm who was hired by the employer. Guyana being a developing
state has many infrastructural contracts being executed yearly, which are all FIDIC contracts and
although the FIDIC conditions of contract provide our engineers with guidelines as to properly
execute one’s duties, there is still a major increase in unethical practices amongst our engineers.

A major cause for such unethical conducts in Guyana is our policymakers i.e. politicians play a
significant role in the execution phase of most of our major projects. An example of politics
causing unethical behaviour in Guyana was on a very prominent project which started in 2011; the
project had two contractors and a joint venture consultancy between two consultants and it was
slated to be completed in 18 months. However, due to many delays and a change in administration,
it was eventually completed in 2016. The initial cost of the project was $3.6 billion Guyana dollars
however the final cost of the project amounted to $4.1 billion. During the course of the project, it
was heavily documented in the media of peculiar changes to the project by political directives and
the engineers approving of works that were either contrary to the contract or entirely not in the
scope of works.

Self-interest by the engineers on the project also contributed to unethical practices that were
documented in the media and known to the general public. Large sums of money were paid for
jobs that were not completed and not done to specifications. As a result of this, the project and all
parties involved came under the spotlight by the media and general public which led to many audits
being conducted afterward which found many irregularities in the disbursement of funds.

Currently, in Guyana, a large international contractor is in the final stages in completing works on
a major road project and there have been instances where engineers from the contractor’s side
acted unethically in trying to get substandard and rejected works approved and payed for by
offering bribes to the consultants. These acts of self-interest were also made public by different
media houses. Many tactics were deployed to get the consultants to approve dissatisfactory works
that would allow the contractor to cut costs. In the tendering process, this international firm was
the lowest bidder which was awarded the contract but due to negligence and poor management on
their part, their cost expounded to the point they were trying to implement measures to save on
cost in some areas; some were allowed but the majority was rejected.

15
Public Private Partnerships are a relatively new form of project delivery method that is being
implemented in the Caribbean and worldwide. Although still relatively new to most Caribbean
nations, more knowledge is still required for Public sector parties to better formulate policies that
would allow for the public to fully benefit from the project while at the same time allowing for
shared financial and social risks between both parties.

Work done by (Johnston and Gudergan 2007) highlights a case study of a PPP project in Australia
involving the government and four contractors (three national and one international). It was a
Design-Build-Own-Operate-Transfer project for the Cross City Tunnel (CCT) in Sydney. The total
capital for the project was at $AUD846 million to which the private companies bore all the
financial risk due to the no-cost policy set forth by the government. Toll charges were the
responsibility of the companies and in 2004, a signed amendment deed gave the companies the
right to increase tolls if they were required to do additional works and input additional funds. The
companies had commercial return-on investments which led to the toll rates being set at a price
higher than that the general public was prepared to pay. This created a major problem as the public
was unwilling to pay the high tolls set by the companies. After many consultations between both
parties, the tolls were reduced after a toll-free period was implemented to encourage use. Reviews
of the initial contracts were made and it was recommended to Government that right-to-operate
payments no longer be a part of PPPs.

This case shows that while PPPs have many financial benefits to Public Sector, the placing of
financial burden and risks squarely on the shoulders of the private sector can be a breathing
grounds for unethical behaviours in the interest to regain invested funds at the shortest time. All
PPPs should also have shared risks amongst both public and private sectors that would arise over
the duration of the project and policies need to be set forth as to disallow Governments to put all
the financial risks in the hands of the private investors as shown in the case study above with the
Government setting a no-cost policy in the contract but in exchange gave the private investors to
right to set and amend tolls which resulted in the public having to burden the higher than advertised
toll charges.

Having analysed the information above, it can be appreciated that the causes of unethical
behaviours vary from project method and can be the fault of the individual and also that of
management. In the interest of self-gaining engineers have conducted unethical practices and

16
management in the form of governments can also set policies that would be conducive to unethical
behaviours amongst the parties involved.

17
 5.0 CONCLUSION

Presently in the construction industry, there has been a sharp decline in ethical standards amongst
the professionals in the field and in particular the engineers. In the act of self-interest by engineers
and poor-policy making by governments, the net effect of unethical behaviours has led to many
issues in projects that arise during the procurement phase and construction phase. This alarming
fact calls for a stronger code of ethics amongst our engineers to better equip them in handling daily
ethical situations they are faced with. By implementing more vigorous code of ethics and
enforcement policies, this will help reduce the level of unethical behaviour and set incipient
standards for professional ethics in the construction industry.

18
 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. A stronger code of ethics needs to be established in the workplace with stringent

enforcement systems to deal with any breaches in these codes.

2. Better tender evaluation and selection processes are needed to ensure the best contractor is
selected based on being the most suitable bidder in a fair process.

19
 REFERENCES

Abbott, Andrew. 1983. "Professional ethics." American journal of sociology 88 (5): 855-885.
Akintoye, Akintola, Matthias Beck, and Cliff Hardcastle. 2002. Public private partnerships. Wiley
Online Library.
Al Khalil, Mohammed I. 2002. "Selecting the appropriate project delivery method using AHP."
International journal of project management 20 (6): 469-474.
Beard, Jeffrey, Esq Michael Loulakis, and Edward Wundram. 2001. Design-build: Planning
through development. McGraw Hill Professional.
Brass, Daniel J, Kenneth D Butterfield, and Bruce C Skaggs. 1998. "Relationships and unethical
behavior: A social network perspective." Academy of management review 23 (1): 14-31.
Bunni, Nael G, and Nael G Bunni. 2005. The FIDIC forms of contract. Vol. 284. Wiley Online
Library.
Christabel, Ho Man-Fong, and Ng Chi-Wai Vincent. 2003. "Quantity surveyors' background and
training, and their ethical concepts, conceptions and interests considerations." Construction
Management & Economics 21 (1): 43-67.
Collins, Hugh. 2003. The law of contract. LexisNexis Butterworths.
Ehsan, Nadeem, Sohail Anwar, and Muhammad Talha. 2009. "Professional ethics in construction
industry of Pakistan." Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering.
Epstein, Richard A. 1973. "A theory of strict liability." The Journal of Legal Studies 2 (1): 151-
204.
Eriksson, Per Erik, and Mats Westerberg. 2011. "Effects of cooperative procurement procedures
on construction project performance: A conceptual framework." International journal of
project management 29 (2): 197-208.
Fraedrich, John Paul. 1992. "Signs and signals of unethical behavior." Business Forum.
Gino, Francesca, Maurice E Schweitzer, Nicole L Mead, and Dan Ariely. 2011. "Unable to resist
temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior." Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes 115 (2): 191-203.
Goetz, Charles J, and Robert E Scott. 1979. "Enforcing Promises: An Examination of the Basis of
Contract." Yale L. J 89: 1261.
Grimsey, Darrin, and Mervyn Lewis. 2007. Public private partnerships: The worldwide revolution
in infrastructure provision and project finance. Edward Elgar Publishing.
Hale, Darren R, Pramen P Shrestha, G Edward Gibson Jr, and Giovanni C Migliaccio. 2009.
"Empirical comparison of design/build and design/bid/build project delivery methods."
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 135 (7): 579-587.
Johnston, Judy, and Siegfried P Gudergan. 2007. "Governance of public—private partnerships:
lessons learnt from an Australian case?" International Review of Administrative Sciences
73 (4): 569-582.
Konchar, Mark, and Victor Sanvido. 1998. "Comparison of US project delivery systems." Journal
of construction engineering and management 124 (6): 435-444.
Li, Bing, Akintola Akintoye, Peter J Edwards, and Cliff Hardcastle. 2005. "Perceptions of positive
and negative factors influencing the attractiveness of PPP/PFI procurement for
construction projects in the UK: Findings from a questionnaire survey." Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management 12 (2): 125-148.
Lina, Chen. 1997. "Role of engineer under FIDIC form contract." Journal of Professional Issues
in Engineering Education and Practice 123 (2): 48-50.

20
Mason, Jim. 2009. "Ethics in the construction industry: the prospects for a single professional
code." International Journal of Law in the Built Environment 1 (3): 194-205.
Molenaar, Keith R, and Douglas D Gransberg. 2001. "Design-builder selection for small highway
projects." Journal of Management in Engineering 17 (4): 214-223.
Molenaar, Keith R, Nathaniel Sobin, and Eric I Antillón. 2010. "A synthesis of best-value
procurement practices for sustainable design-build projects in the public sector." Journal
of Green Building 5 (4): 148-157.
National Soc. of Professional Engineers v. United States. 1978. In US: Supreme Court.
Robinson, Michael D. 2011. "A Contractor’s Guide to the FIDIC Conditions of Contract."
---. 2013. An Employer's and Engineer's Guide to the FIDIC Conditions of Contract. John Wiley
& Sons.
Rosenau, Pauline Vaillancourt. 1999. Introduction: The strengths and weaknesses of public-
private policy partnerships. Sage Publications.
Scott, Sidney. 2006. Best-value procurement methods for highway construction projects. Vol. 561.
Transportation Research Board.
Shrestha, Pramen P, James T O’Connor, and G Edward Gibson Jr. 2011. "Performance comparison
of large design-build and design-bid-build highway projects." Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management 138 (1): 1-13.
Simons, Kenneth W. 1996. "Deontology, negligence, tort, and crime." BUL Rev. 76: 273.
Stone, Richard, and James Devenney. 2017. The modern law of contract. Routledge.
Tang, LiYaning, Qiping Shen, and Eddie WL Cheng. 2010. "A review of studies on public–private
partnership projects in the construction industry." International journal of project
management 28 (7): 683-694.
Tow, D, and M Loosemore. 2009. "Corporate ethics in the construction and engineering industry."
Journal of legal affairs and dispute resolution in engineering and construction 1 (3): 122-
129.
Treviño, Linda Klebe, Gary R Weaver, David G Gibson, and Barbara Ley Toffler. 1999.
"Managing ethics and legal compliance: What works and what hurts." California
management review 41 (2): 131-151.
Turner, Dennis F. 2014. Design and build contract practice. Routledge.
Vandevelde, Kenneth J. 1990. "A History of Prima Facie Tort: The Origins of a General Theory
of Intentional Tort." Hofstra L. Rev. 19: 447.
Vee, Charles, and CMartin Skitmore. 2003. "Professional ethics in the construction industry."
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 10 (2): 117-127.
Yates, JK. 1995. "Use of design/build in E/C industry." Journal of Management in Engineering
11 (6): 33-38.
Zhang, Xueqing. 2005. "Critical success factors for public–private partnerships in infrastructure
development." Journal of construction engineering and management 131 (1): 3-14.
Zipursky, Benjamin C. 1998. "Rights, wrongs, and recourse in the law of torts." Vand. L. Rev. 51:
1.

21
22
23
24
25