Computer professionals work in environments that are often unstructured — which makes it hard to manage responsibilities to multiple parties at once.
Employer · Client · Society · Professional peers — "Every Computer Scientist Produces (responsibilities for all four)"
A software engineer at a company has responsibilities to: their employer (deliver code on time), their client (build what was requested), society (make sure the software is safe and legal), and their colleagues (don't steal their ideas or take bribes).
• Treat each other with respect — not merely as a means
• Neither party exploits the other
• Employee must be honest about qualifications
• Employer must provide decent wages and a safe environment
• Protect trade secrets gained during employment
• May be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA)
• May sign a non-compete clause — no working in the same area for a set time after leaving
Imagine you work at a tech startup and learn their secret algorithm. When you leave, you cannot share that algorithm with competitors — that's a trade secret. You may also be barred from joining a competitor for 1 year. This is legally enforced.
Students often think loyalty means blind obedience. Wrong — loyalty means supporting your employer's legitimate goals, but not covering up wrongdoing. An employee who refuses an unethical order is being more professionally ethical, not less loyal.
This is a formal contractual relationship covering scope, time, finance, and location. But how decisions are made differs by model.
Paternalistic · Trust · Agency — "Professionals Trust Agents"
| Model | Who Decides? | Trust Level | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paternalistic | Professional only | Client trusts professional fully | Medical emergencies |
| Trust | Both together | Mutual, shared | Architecture, consulting |
| Agency | Client only | Professional as pure executor | Finance, law instructions |
Students confuse Paternalistic and Agency. Remember: Paternalistic = Professional controls. Agency = Agent (client) controls. The names feel like they mean the opposite — so lock this in!
This relationship is shaped by law. When society licenses a professional body, that body takes on major obligations.
Serve society · Not harm society · Maintain itself · Due care · End users considered · Protect through legislation
- Serve the interests of society in general — not just paying clients
- Must not harm society under any circumstances
- Must maintain itself — uphold professional standards
- Must take due care based on the special knowledge the profession holds
- End users and anyone affected by the technology must be considered during system development
- Protect society through legislation and proper governance
A software engineer building a healthcare app must ensure it's safe and private for patients — even if the client (the hospital) doesn't ask for it. Due care means going beyond the minimum because your work affects the public.
- Members must maintain standards of conduct among peers
- Show loyalty to other members of the profession
- Must not take bribes, not lie about qualifications, not falsify results
A senior engineer should not lie in a performance review to sabotage a junior colleague, nor should they claim credit for someone else's code. Professional loyalty means lifting each other up, not tearing each other down.
Students forget that "professional–professional" obligations exist. Exams may describe a scenario where a colleague asks you to fudge test results — the answer involves both the employer–employee AND professional–professional obligations. Both apply simultaneously.
- A whistle-blower breaks ranks with the organization to disclose harmful information
- This happens only after authorized channels have been tried and ignored
- It is an act driven by conscience — a belief that the harm must be stopped
You work at a food company and discover the product labels show false expiry dates. You tell your manager — nothing happens. You then contact the food safety authority. That's external whistle-blowing. You tried internally first.
Whistle-blowing is not the first step — it happens after internal channels are exhausted. If you go straight to the press without trying internally, that raises questions about motive.
- Reported within the organization
- Goal: fix the problem quietly, no bad press
- Also called "internal whistle-blowing"
- Lower risk to the reporter
- Preferred — shows you gave the org a chance
- Goes to the press, government, or public
- Happens when internal reporting fails or is punished
- Means serious problems for the organization
- High risk for the whistle-blower personally
- Often triggered by conscience, not just complaint
The Challenger disaster (1986) is the classic example. Engineers warned internally that the O-rings were unsafe in cold weather. Management ignored them. The shuttle exploded, killing 7 astronauts. Had external whistle-blowing happened in time, lives could have been saved.
Unavailable resources · Hostile culture · Toxic leadership · Lack of justice — "Unhealthy Habits Trap Loyalty"
Altruist · Avenger · Organization Man · Alarmist · Bounty Hunter — "All Agents Often Alert Bosses"
Good motives (Altruist, Alarmist, Org Man) = morally praiseworthy. Questionable motives (Avenger, Bounty Hunter) = the act may still be useful, but the motive affects the moral judgment of the whistle-blower.
Students often say all whistle-blowing is "good." Exams may ask you to evaluate morality — the act AND the motive both matter. A Bounty Hunter and an Altruist can report the same thing for very different reasons. That difference is examinable.
- Bad publicity — media coverage
- Ruined careers of accused managers
- Erodes team spirit — mutual suspicion
- Legal costs and lawsuits
- Suffer retaliation (revenge attacks)
- Estranged from co-workers
- Labeled as "troublemakers"
- Long-term career prospects damaged
Knowing these consequences helps explain why internal reporting is so often suppressed. People are afraid — rationally so. This is why strong organizational ethics culture and legal protection for whistle-blowers both matter.
Communication structures · Implement protections · Make ethics core · Leaders model integrity · Principle-based decisions — "Companies Improving Morality Love Principles"
| Approach | Question Asked | Problem With It |
|---|---|---|
| Kantianism / Social Contract | "Should we do it? Does it violate a moral rule?" | Can be rigid — but morally safer |
| Utilitarianism | "How much of it can we do without causing too much harm?" | Gradually shifts the threshold — enables escalating wrongdoing |
Students think utilitarian ethics is always the "safe" choice because it weighs outcomes. But the chapter argues that using utilitarian thinking in organizations is dangerous — it reframes "should we?" into "how much?", enabling a slippery slope of harm.
Role · Causal · Legal · Moral — "Really Careful Lawyers are Moral"
Students often say "I just wrote the code, I'm not responsible for how it was used." This is a classic error. Moral responsibility cannot be delegated. You wrote it — you bear some moral responsibility for the consequences, regardless of who made the final decision.
Your team builds a facial recognition system. The marketing team uses it to target vulnerable people. Even though you "just built it," you share moral responsibility for the harm — especially if you knew how it might be used and said nothing.
A professional code of ethics states the principles and core values essential to a profession's work. Most organizations have their own internal code of practice.
Symbolises professionalism · Defines external standards · Protects group interests · Codifies members' rights · Expresses ideals · Gives guidance in grey areas — "Some Doctors Protect Careful Ethical Guidelines"
- Not passed by legislative bodies
- Not intended to encourage lawsuits
- May help resolve certain disputes, but not binding law
- Cannot cover every ethical question
- Values within it can conflict with each other
- Ethics requires deliberation and judgment — not a step-by-step algorithm
- Dangerous to treat it as a checklist to "run through"
Students often say a code of ethics "tells you exactly what to do." Wrong — it provides beliefs and viewpoints to consider, not prescriptive rules. It guides judgment; it doesn't replace it. Exams love testing this nuance.
Inspiration · Education · Guidance · Accountability · Enforcement · Tool — "I Expect Good Accountability, Enforced Today"
ACM Code of Ethics — acm.org/constitution/code.html
BCS Code of Conduct — British Computer Society
IEEE-CS/ACM Software Engineering Code — for software engineers specifically