Determine and define the concern to be addressed

A. Is there a problem that requires action?

a. Engineer is told by management to skip safety protocols and sign off safety

procedure without the safety engineer to quickly resume drilling operations

B. Is there a legal question at issue?

a. Yes, it is illegal to not follow operational procedure in some countries

b. No, It is not illegal to skip operational procedure in some countries and is regulated
within the company itself.

C. Is there any conflict of interest that needs to be considered before proceeding?

a. Yes, Personal interest of the management to save time and cut operational cost
adversely puts other people at risk.

Identify existing codes or standards that may be relevant to the situation.

A. IEEE & NSPE code of ethic - engineers responsible hold paramount the safety health
and welfare of public

B. NSPE section III.2.b "Engineers shall not complete, sign or seal plans and/or
specifications that are not of a design safe to the public health and welfare and in
conformity with accepted engineering standards. If the client or employer insists on such
unprofessional conduct, they shall notify the proper authorities and withdraw from
further service on the project."

C. IEEE (point 1: to accept responsibility in making decisions consistent with the safety,
health and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger
the public or the environment)

D. NSPE section II rules of practice point 2b (Engineers shall not affix their signatures to
any plans or documents dealing with subject matter in which they lack competence, nor
to any plan or document not prepared under their direction and control.) and point

Brainstorm on options and alternative actions.

A. Follow instructions and sign off documents without safety engineer and proceed with
drilling.

B. Request to management to delay the job for safety engineer to come back and have him
do the safety checks.

a. Alternative Actions

1. Call the safety engineer to cut short his/her leave and immediately come back.

2. Have the management to sign a Letter of responsibility to take accountability if

something goes wrong if drilling operations proceed without safety protocol.

3. Inform higher authorities on the corruption and unsafe practices

Evaluate Options using the Flow chart above

A. Follow instructions and sign off documents without safety engineer and proceed with
drilling

a. Outcome : Is it harmful? If no, Will the decision have a more beneficial

outcome than any other alternatives?

1. Yes, Skipping safety procedures may result in accidents if something goes

wrong

 b. Transparency : Would you be concerned if this decision becomes top story

news?

1. Definitely, especially If such decisions leads to accidents or loss of life.

c. Rationality: Can it be accepted if you try to justify your decision to others?

1. No, Putting others at risk is unacceptable

d. Switching Place: Can you accept the consequence if you are the subject of the
decision?

1. No, I wouldn’t want my life to be at risk for the sake of hastening operations
and forgoing safety checks.

e. Values : Is the decision consistent to standard organisational values and

Mission?

1. No, It is dishonest and unsafe to sign off documents that you are not
competent in. It is the responsibility of the Engineer to Ensure the safety of the
company assets and employees

A. Request to management to delay the job for safety engineer to come back and have him
do the safety checks.

a. Outcome : Is it harmful? If no, Will the decision have a more beneficial

outcome than any other alternatives?

1. No, This decision would have saved the company’s assets and employees if
they were to find something wrong after doing the proper safety checks.

2. Yes, Financially, this decision would mean more operational cost which could
also lead to lost of job for employees.

b. Transparency : Would you be concerned if this decision becomes known to the

public?

1. No, Such decisions to delay the job for safety sake is well accepted by the
public.
c. Rationality: Can it be accepted if you try to justify your decision to others?

1. Yes, Especially if such decisions leads to accidents or loss of life.

d. Switching Place: Can you accept the consequence if you are the subject of the
decision?

1. Yes I wouldn’t want my life to be at risk for the sake of hastening operations
and forgoing safety checks.

e. Values : Is the decision consistent to standard organisational values and

Mission?

1. Yes, Organisations must be responsible and honest in caring for the safety of
the employees

A. Call the safety engineer to cut short his/her leave and immediately come back.

a. Outcome : Is it harmful? If no, Will the decision have a more beneficial

outcome than any other alternatives?

1. No, This decision would have saved the company’s assets and employees if
they were to find something wrong after doing the proper safety checks.

2. Yes, This may cause inconvenience to the safety engineer if he/she is on

vacation.

b. Transparency : Would you be concerned if this decision becomes known to the

public?

1. No, This decision would have saved the company’s assets and employees if
 they were to find something wrong after doing the proper safety checks.
c. Rationality: Can it be accepted if you try to justify your decision to others?

1. Yes, Especially if such decisions involves the life’s of people

d. Switching Place: Can you accept the consequence if you are the subject of the
decision?

1. No, I am on leave which is my right given to me as an employee, Why can’t

they wait until I come back?

e. Values : Is the decision consistent to standard organisational values and

Mission?

1. Yes, Organisations must be responsible and honest in caring for the safety of
the employees.

A. Have the management to sign a Letter of responsibility to take accountability if

something goes wrong if drilling operations proceed without safety protocol.

a. Outcome : Is it harmful? If no, Will the decision have a more beneficial

outcome than any other alternatives?

1. No, This decision would not put the engineer responsible for the negative
outcomes of the drilling

2. Yes, Safety checks will still be skipped and may risk the life’s of the employers
and assets

b. Transparency : Would you be concerned if this decision becomes known to the

public?

1. Yes, This will show that the company is willing risks its employees which is bad
for company image
c. Rationality: Can it be accepted if you try to justify your decision to others?

1. No, even if there is a legal shift of responsibility, the negative outcome if it were
to happen will still be the same.

d. Switching Place: Can you accept the consequence if you are the subject of the
decision?

1. No, I wouldn’t want my life to be at risk for the sake of hastening operations
and forgoing safety checks.

e. Values : Is the decision consistent to standard organisational values and

Mission?

1. No, It is dishonest and unsafe to put employees at risk

A. Inform higher authorities on the corruption and unsafe practices

a. Outcome : Is it harmful? If no, Will the decision have a more beneficial

outcome than any other alternatives?

1. No, This decision would have saved life’s of the employees and prevent a major
incident and ensuring the company will adhere to safety regulations

2. Yes, Company image will be affected, Operational license will be terminated

and causing loss of jobs.

b. Transparency : Would you be concerned if this decision becomes known to the

public?

1. Yes, This will show that the company is willing risks its employees which is bad
for company image
c. Rationality: Can it be accepted if you try to justify your decision to others?

1. Yes, The management needs to be accountable for its unsafe actions

2. No, People can lose their jobs and there are other ways to handle such
 situations internally

d. Switching Place: Can you accept the consequence if you are the subject of the
decision?

1. Yes, I would want my company to change their ways for the better

2. No, I can lose my job if the company loses its operational license

e. Values : Is the decision consistent to standard organisational values and

Mission?

1. No, It is dishonest to whistleblow to a third party. Employees are to keep

confidential of the company’s intellectual properties and operational situation.