TABURA, SYLVIA MARIE A. ASSIGNMENT NO.

2
Why Engineering Ethics?

Engineering is not really a scientific profession, as everybody assumes. Of course, it is scientific, but not
in the way most people believe. It's about taking all the scientific knowledge and using it to solve people's needs
and concerns. Therefore, it is also a humanistic profession, since it is important to understand people profoundly
before an engineer can truly understand their problems, and even more so before they seek to solve them. That said,
engineering has a direct effect on society, and it is important to know its ethical aspects.
Engineering ethics should be studied, both by engineering students and professionals alike, because it is
important in contributing to safe and useful technological products and in giving meaning to engineers’ endeavors.
It is also complex, in ways that call for serious reflection during a career, starting with a degree. Engineering ethics
plays a crucial role in the decision-making process, taking into consideration the personal and social responsibilities
that lie beyond the contractual obligations to which engineers are often bound.

According to Martin & Schinzinger (2010), the scope of engineering ethics includes:
a) moral reasoning and ethical theories; e) promoting responsible conduct;
b) ethical dilemmas; f) rights of engineers;
c) engineering as social experimentation; g) micro and micro issues; and
d) engineer's responsibility for safety; h) technological development.

A Case Study on New York’s Citicorp Center

Scope: Ethical Dilemmas and Civil Engineer’s Responsibility for Safety

Taking a cue from engineering codes, one might define the goal of engineering as holding paramount the health,
safety, and welfare of the public (Code of Ethics, Canon 1). In order to do this, civil engineers must be morally
responsible and prepared to cope with the ethical dilemmas they face. Moral responsibility is a concept that extends to
individual engineers, groups of engineers, and companies in which most engineers work.

• Structural engineer Bill LeMessurier faced a big challenge when they

worked on the plans for New York’s fifth highest skyscraper, Citicorp
Center. He designed the tower to be supported by four massive columns
114 feet (35 meters) high.
• The columns are positioned as follows: one at the center and the other at
the center of each side of the tower and not at the corners of the towers
(as per usual). This was because of a corner of the plot belonged to a
church, St. Peter’s Lutheran Church, and the church had to be
accommodated there.

Completed in 1977, the Citicorp

Center appears as shown. The new
church building is seen below the
lower left corner of the raised tower.

• LeMessurier recalculated the wind loads on the building, this time including quartering winds case (c). This
recalculation revealed that with a quartering wind, there was a 40% increase in wind loads, resulting in a 160%
increase in the load at the chevron brace connection joints.
• The original design for the chevron load braces used welded joints. During construction, however, Bethlehem
Steel was allowed to use bolt joints to save labor and material costs. LeMessurier's firm approved the change,
although this was not known to LeMessurier himself. Recalculation was not done to check what the
construction change would do.
• Wind Tunnel Tests proved that the diagonal wind loading, which could occur in New York every sixteen (16)
years - can lead to the failure of the critical bolted joints and therefore the building.
 • LeMessurier faced an ethical dilemma involving a dispute between his responsibility to ensure the safety of his
building for the sake of the people who use it, his obligations to various financial entities, and his self-interest,
which could be served by remaining silent.
• He then realized that reporting what he had learned could place both his engineering reputation and the financial
status of his firm at substantial risk. Nevertheless, he acted quickly and decisively. LeMessurier drew up a plan
for correcting the problem, estimated the cost and time needed for rectifying it, and immediately informed
Citicorp owners of what he had learned.
• Citicorp’s response was equally decisive. LeMessurier’s proposed course of action was accepted and corrective
steps were immediately undertaken. A retrofit plan was agreed on: The wind braces would be strengthened at
critical locations “by welding two-inch-thick steel plates over each of more than 200 bolted joints.”
• Although correcting the problem cost several million dollars, all parties responded promptly and responsibly.
Faced with the threat of increased liability insurance rates, LeMessurier’s firm convinced its insurers that
because of his responsible handling of the situation, a much more costly disaster may have been prevented. As
a result, the rates were actually reduced.
• In acting responsibly, LeMessurier saved lives and maintained his integrity, and his professional reputation was
enhanced rather than tarnished by the episode. His act of altering Citicorp to the problem inherent in his own
design is now used as an example of ethical behavior in several engineering textbooks.

The Citicorp case is a strong example of how the standard engineering procedure of compliance with the code
specifications might not be sufficient. It was to LeMessurier's credit that he discovered the problem. Once the flaw was
discovered, he realized that he needed to do something about it, overcoming his ethical dilemma.
Responsibility has to do with accountability, both for what one does in the present and future and for what one has
done in the past. Technical skill and morally good judgment must be combined to solve ethical dilemmas, and, in general,
to engage in responsible engineering practice.

The study of engineering ethics makes both engineers and engineering students more altruistic and conscientious,
and therefore enhances their moral intelligence (knowledge of what is right) when they are under pressure in real-life
circumstances. A good engineer is not the one who knows everything about the field, but the one who really uses his or
her expertise to solve people's problems and needs without making new ones.

References
Harris, C., Pritchard, M., & Rabins, M. (2009). Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases (4th ed.). Belmont: Cengage Learning.
Martin, M., & Schinzinger, R. (2010). Introduction to Engineering Ethics (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.