Case Study 11 – Pico PC’s Manufacturing Company

ETHICAL DILEMMA SOLUTION AND ACS CODE OF ETHICS

CASE STUDY 3 – COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS

Introduction

The report illustrates about the violation of ethical principles in terms of violation of intellectual property rights. Courtney is young ambitious programmer who has been cheated by the Michael who has taken credit for her work. The national business award is offered to Michael because he did not divulge the matter to company that Courtney has actually developed the new user interface.

Ethical consideration

The behaviour of Michael raises many ethical questions. First is the honesty value that is violated by the Michael act. The honesty factor determines that public trust should not be breached. The trust of specific stakeholders should not be breached. By the act of Michael, he not only violates the value but also breeches the trust of investors, employees, management, suppliers and other stakeholders. The services provided to the aboriginal communities may not be hampered but the internal processes and trust is certainly breached. The value demands that person should reject to any inducement or bribery, not mislead client of potential clients about the product and services suitability, distinguish between the personal opinions and professional opinions, and give realistic estimates opinions, give credit to a work done by others and to attempt to enhance the reputation at the expense of others. Certainly some of these clauses are violated by the act of Michael.

The second value is competence. It says that only those work should be accepted that a person is competent to perform and do not hesitate the gain expertise from qualified personals. A person should be aware about his or her limitations and must not show false competencies. The value reflects that endeavour to offer products and services must be providing according to the operational and financial aspects of stakeholders. He should not misrepresent skills and knowledge. He must respect and protect the interests of stakeholders. He must respect and seek professional expertise from colleagues. All these clauses are violated by the act of Michael because his act not only misrepresents the fact but also deceives the stakeholders.

The third value is professional development (“ACS Code of Professional Conduct Professional Standards Board Australian Computer Society,” 2014). A person should upgrade his knowledge and skills and increase awareness about those issues that affect the professionalism factors. But this factor is overlooked by Michael. The person should encourage the colleagues, employees and students to promote their own professional development. This is also not promoted by Michael act. He should support the education, professional development and training to the organizational members. But the act of Michael suppresses the education, professional development and training to people. Certainly Courtney will have lack of motivation and lack of commitment for professional development. Therefore these findings suggest that all these clauses and values are violated by the Michael act.

There are additional factors that also need to be considered. The violation of intellectual property rights has taken place (“Intellectual property laws amendment act 2015,” n.d.). Ethical theories such as deontological theory (“Deontological Ethics,” n.d.), consequentialism theory and virtuousness theory all are violated by the act of Michael.

Conclusion and recommendations

Therefore it can be concluded that Michael act certainly violates many clauses and values of ACS code of conduct as well as many ethical theories and it is imperative for organization to inculcate the values and clauses of ACS code of conduct by offering them ethical training. Organization must monitor the behaviour of employees and must take immediate action against unethical behaviour of employees. It should recruit whistle blowers in organization and must make sure that whistle blowers should be safeguarded by the intentional harms of culprit employees. All these initiatives may assist organization to minimise unethical conduct.

References

ACS Code of Professional Conduct Professional Standards Board Australian Computer Society, (2014) Available at:https://www.acs.org.au/content/dam/acs/acs-documents/ACS%20Code-of-Professional-Conduct_v2.1.pdf [Accessed 11 June, 2017].

Intellectual property laws amendment act 2015 (n.d.) Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2015A00008 [Accessed 11 June, 2017].

Deontological Ethics (n.d.) Available at:http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~barsp59601/text/lex/defs/deontological.html [Accessed 11 June, 2017].

Ethics chapter four: ethical theories section 3. consequential or non-consequential (n.d.). Available at: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_4_Ethical_Theories/Consequential_or_NonConsequential.htm [Accessed 11 June, 2017].