This paper reviews and compares three prominent engineering ethics codes: the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Code of Ethics, the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) Ethical Guidelines, and the Institution of Engineers Australia Code of Ethics. The analysis examines how each organization structures its ethical principles, the level of detail provided for implementation, and the unique features of each code. Key topics addressed include public safety and welfare, conflicts of interest, solicitation of contracts, whistleblowing, and professional conduct among colleagues. The paper finds that the three codes vary significantly in depth and specificity, with Engineers Australia offering the most comprehensive guidance.
Three engineering ethics websites were reviewed for this analysis: the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Code of Ethics (IEEE), the American Council of Engineering Companies Ethical Guidelines, and the Institution of Engineers Australia Code of Ethics. All three websites cover a wide assortment of ethical issues, including conflicts of interest, unfair and dishonest appraisal of projects, incompetent performance, and improper solicitation of work, among others. Of the three, the IEEE website contains very little information regarding its ethics code, while both the American Council and Australia websites go into specific detail about their general ethical principles.
The IEEE, which approved its code in August 1990, lists ten general principles that comprise its overall ethics code. These principles are briefly stated and address a variety of far-reaching matters, ranging from IEEE's commitment to the safety, health, and welfare of the public, to its support of co-workers and colleagues in their professional development. One unique aspect of the IEEE code is that, unlike the other codes reviewed, it explicitly mentions bribery and the need to reject it. Other than listing these principles, however, IEEE appears to make no further attempt at providing specific guidelines for implementing them.
The American Council of Engineering Companies ethics code, adopted in October 1980, initially lists five general principles known as fundamental canons. It then provides specific details regarding these canons; the details are known as rules of practice and describe ways in which members can implement the canons. For example, under the canon stating that members must ensure the public's safety, health, and welfare, the code specifies that as a rule of practice, engineers who feel their concerns about potential dangers to the public's well-being are not being taken into consideration must immediately notify the proper authorities.
Though the fundamental canons are generally similar in principle to those found in other organizational ethics codes, the council's rules of practice are often unique and varied. For example, under the canon stating that consulting engineers should avoid improper solicitation of contracts, one rule of practice specifies that members should not make any political contribution exclusively for the purpose of influencing the award of contracts by public agencies.
"Two-tier code with examples and scenarios"
Besides providing detailed interpretations of its principles, the Australia code also addresses several ethical issues that were noticeably absent from the other codes reviewed. These include whistleblowing and serving as an expert witness. The code concludes by discussing how the organization handles members who allegedly breach it — another topic not addressed by the other ethics websites reviewed.
You’re 56% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.