The Impact of Engineering Ethics on Public Trust

#NASA & #BOEING Notes Both have experienced significant controversies & tragedies, primarily in their respective fields of aviation and space exploration. B: The Boeing 737 MAX controversy involved critical design flaws in the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which led to two fatal crashes. N: The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986 was caused by an O-ring failure in the solid rocket booster, a known design flaw that was critically exacerbated by cold weather. B: Investigations into the 737 MAX incidents revealed lapses in oversight, where Boeing reportedly downplayed the complexity and risks associated with the MCAS to regulators. N: Both the Challenger and the Columbia disaster (2003) were linked to management lapses where warnings from engineers about potential fatal issues were overlooked by higher-ups, pushing ahead with launches under risky conditions. There have been reported instances of a compromised safety culture where economic or political pressures overshadowed safety concerns. Reports and investigations post-disasters pointed to environments where the escalation of safety concerns was discouraged. B: After the 737 MAX crashes, Boeing faced intense scrutiny from the U.S. Congress, the FAA, and other international regulatory bodies, questioning the initial certification processes. N: Each major NASA tragedy led to comprehensive reviews by governmental oversight bodies, leading to significant changes in operational and safety procedures. B: The 737 MAX crashes severely damaged Boeing's reputation, leading to a financial impact, loss of trust among the public and airlines, and a halt in 737 MAX production and deliveries. N: Fatalities and the resulting investigations typically led to temporary halts in space missions, revaluations of protocols, and a long-term impact on the operational practices and safety measures within NASA. Teaching: Analyze specific cases like the 737 MAX & the Challenger disaster. Discuss ethical responsibilities of engineers + management in these scenarios. How decisions were made, including the role of economic pressure & the ethical dilemmas faced by engineers & executives. Examine how pressures for meeting schedules & budgets can compromise safety measures. Discuss strategies for creating a strong safety culture where safety concerns are prioritized and valued. Study the role of the FAA in the Boeing cases & NASA oversight committees in space shuttle disasters. Debate current regulatory practices & suggest potential improvements based on historical shortcomings. Look at the long-term changes implemented to prevent future incidents, such as changes in engineering practices, management approaches, + regulatory. How high-stress environments & high stakes can affect psychology & team dynamics. Evaluate how these incidents affect public trust in institutions. Discuss the importance of transparency and honest reporting in maintaining public trust.

🔥 A prison fire in Chile killed dozens. A supermarket fire in Paraguay ended with the same outcome. In both cases, blame fell on individuals at the scene. Guards were accused of failing to act. A store manager was held responsible for keeping people inside. But as fire safety engineer Jose Torero explained at a National Academy of Engineering and Committee on Human Rights workshop, the deeper causes were built into the #systems. Poor design, hazardous materials, and weak regulations shaped the outcome. In Chile, overcrowding and facility conditions left prison staff unable to rescue those trapped. In Paraguay, outdated safety codes allowed flammable insulation and locked exits. People had no way to escape. These instances show that #safety isn’t automatic. It depends on #engineering decisions, competent oversight, and a commitment to protect lives before such emergencies occur. "Issues at the Intersection of Engineering and Human Rights," the just-out proceedings from The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, explores how choices in #infrastructure, #design, and #education influence dignity, access, and protection. Some takeaways: 🔧 Safety is technical, but it’s also political. Fires, floods, and failures often trace back to decisions about what gets built, where corners are cut, and who is expected to cope. 🏚️ Disparities are often engineered. People living with unsafe water, poor roads, or weak buildings are often living with someone else’s decisions. 📐 Ethics alone aren’t enough. Most engineering curricula treat human rights as a side note, if at all. The result is professionals are increasingly trained to solve problems without asking whose problem it is. ♿ Design reaches further than intended. A wheelchair ramp helps more than wheelchair users. Good engineering has ripple effects. 🧠 Communities bring more than stories. They bring knowledge. When engineers treat them as vital input, the results are better for everyone. 🧭 Human rights point to what matters: who’s affected, who decides, who’s left out. 📘 Read more at: https://lnkd.in/ezkT8dZJ 👥Thanks to the crew: Leading: Charlie Bolden, Jr., Betsy Popken, Davis Chacon-Hurtado, Glen Daigger, Wesley Harris, Deb Niemeier. Contributing: Theresa Harris, Maya Elizabeth Carrasquillo, Tyler Giannini, Shareen Hertel, Muhammad Hamid Zaman, Bernard Amadei, Mira Olson, Shirley Ann Jackson, Darshan Karwat, Carlton Waterhouse, Eric Buckley, Bethany Hoy, Kimberly L. Jones, Amy Smith, John Kleba, Michael Ashley Stein, Jay Aronson, Julie Owono, José Torero, Lindsey Andersen, Alice Agogino, Tamara E. Brown, Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, Katie Shay. Staffing: David Butler, Rebecca Everly, Casey Gibson, Ana Deros, Hoang-Nam Vu, Chessie Briggs, and Joe Alper.

This article is worth your time. What's been happening at Boeing is a cautionary tale for leaders in other industries. “When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it’s run like a business rather than a great engineering firm,” said Boeing's former CEO. I don't mean to pick on Boeing--I actually don't think they're that special, which is the point in writing this post. We've seen many stories of leaders across sectors making their own profit-maximizing changes. Over the past year we saw a lot of tech companies layoff their trust and safety teams; newsrooms are laying off journalists; universities are cutting faculty and staff from their less profitable majors/departments. The impulse is somewhat understandable--there are always monetary pressures in society. But profits can't be at the center of everything we do; we lose something when we trade institutional missions for money. Those tech companies are now struggling with important ethics and safety issues; it costs our society to not have enough (local) journalists checking and holding powerful actors accountable; and on the education front I worry about our collective future when we're limiting students' opportunities to learn about aspects of society that are essential for understanding humanity and engaging in productive civil discourse. These decisions cost all of us, including the people making them. Boeing is learning this lesson the hard way. They used to have a strong reputation for safety and excellence; as the author of this article noted, people used to say “If it’s not Boeing, I’m not going.” Now they've lost that reputation for excellence, and by extension, people's trust. It turns out that losing the public's trust is costing them the very thing they shifted their strategy to pursue: money. As the article's author noted: "Putting profit over product has been bad for Boeing’s products. The irony now painfully apparent is that it’s been bad for Boeing’s profits too." This broader issue, and tension, is something for organizations to think about as they plan for the year(s) ahead. https://lnkd.in/gnahd8xr