case study

PE_Assignment1_Set A - Jan 2017

Program: Professional Year Program Course: Professional Environments Assignment: 1 Topic: Ethics, Professionalism and Governance Available: Week 3 open Due: Week 4 close (Saturday midnight AEST)

Read the 3 Case Studies below and select ONE as the basis of your analysis and discussion.

Please indicate clearly which Case Study you have chosen

Case Study 3 – Copyright and Intellectual Property Considerations

Courtney is a young ambitious programmer working for a small company developing software for

web-based services in the health area, with a focus on supporting remote aboriginal communities.

To further her career Courtney undertakes additional tertiary study, with support from her manager

Michael.

This study includes topics covering computer ethics, and issues related to the impact of ICT on

different communities. On her current project, Courtney develops a new user interface, which has a

strong focus on accessibility for remote communities, especially considering the type of technology

likely to be used. She also pays special attention to the use of cultural images in the interface to

avoid those which may be distressing or offensive to aboriginal users.

The new system is a great success and Courtney’s contribution is recognised by her company,

through an Employee of the Month Award. The company also receives a national business award for

its contribution to the positive use of ICT in aboriginal communities.

Michael takes all of the credit for this, and Courtney receives no acknowledgement for her efforts.

Discuss briefly the ethical issues related to this case. As a result of your discussion, you should be

able to make some recommendations as to how this ethical problem may be resolved. Be sure to

support any recommendations with reasons, informed by your research and thinking on the ethical

issues identified in your discussion.

Case Study 8 – Conflict of Interest

Harshal works for the IT section of a very large Federal government department. His role is mostly

database management and coding associated with that. He is always looking for ways to get ahead

PE_Assignment1_Set A - Jan 2017

so on his own initiative he gained accreditation as a SFIA consultant even though the Department

has not yet adopted it.

He receives a very interesting offer direct from Alice, the head of the IT Section. Alice wants him to

submit a proposal to do a full SFIA analysis of the skills of all 10 staff in the IT Section's Business

Analysis Unit as a pilot project for bringing SFIA into the whole Section. This is great news for Harshal

because he has long been interested in moving into business analysis. The BA Unit has been

considered a very successful unit for a long time, but for some reason it's profile has dropped

considerably recently.

Harshal 's proposal is accepted by the IT Head very quickly and with almost no consultation with

other staff. When Harshal meets John, the leader of the BA Unit, John immediately hands over a

schedule of first interviews with most of the BA Unit staff. However he also passes across 2

documents which appear to be SFIA matrices already filled-out for John and Freda, one of the senior

consultants. John explains that it won't be necessary for Harshal to interview either himself or Freda.

He explains that he himself is too busy and that Freda has just come back from extended stress

leave, so it's not really appropriate for her to be interviewed.

John is very welcoming and to Harshal 's surprise he adds that if his report is well-received, he will

make sure that Harshal is short-listed for any upcoming positions in the Unit, should he be interested

in applying for them.

Harshal is actually somewhat shocked by this because he did not know that John knew of his interest

in joining the unit. He also now has a problem. How can he fulfil his responsibility to interview and

document everyone in the Unit as agreed in the project brief?

Case Study 11 – Pico PC’s Manufacturing Company

Pico PCs has decided to begin manufacturing tiny processors for use in the manufacture of wearable

technology.

During manufacture, 64 gold wired, each much finer than a human hair, must be soldered from the

chip to the pins of the processor. Robots were trialled for the soldering, but the error rate was

unacceptable high. One single mistake in positioning a wire or soldering it, ruined the chip. The

robots were also not only prohibitively expensive. But required frequent and expensive calibration.

Kushlani, the IT Production Manager was asked to carry out trials using human technicians for the

work. The trials clearly demonstrated that humans had a much lower error rate and were less

expensive than robots, but the technicians complained that constantly staring through a microscope

at a brightly illuminated object gave them headaches and was harmful to their eyes.

She reported back to management that she believed the trial had failed.

The CEO was very disappointed, because he thought that the solution was good, and ‘worth a few

headaches’. He asked Kushlani to get a professional medical opinion.

PE_Assignment1_Set A - Jan 2017

Kushlani discussed the issue with two senior doctors, who confirmed that this work could

permanently damage a person’s eyesight in as little as 5 months, and could lead to blindness in as

little as 18 months.

The company’s legal advisors confirmed that this was clearly in breach of the Work Health and

Safety Act in Australia, so they could not go ahead. The CEO was really angry.

Next morning the CEO called Kushlani into his office. Kushlani was surprised to find him quite

cheerful. The CEO said that he had discovered that there was an Island in the Pacific that does not

have health and safety laws, and so it would be quite legal for people of that island to solder the

processors. And, better still, they were willing to work for one tenth of the wages of Australians. He

said that this was a ‘win win’.

What do you think that Kushlani should do?

PE_Assignment1_Set A - Jan 2017

Assignment Task

From what you have learned during Week s 3 and 4 of your Professional Environments Course,

discuss ethical, professional and legal issues which you consider arise from this scenario. Make some

recommendations of actions which could be taken to resolve the situation and/or to minimise the

chance the scenario may recur. Support your answers with relevant references (as well as the Codes

and Laws).

Things to Consider in Your Assignment:

• You should list at least 3 values from the ACS Code of Ethics and up to 5 clauses from the

ACS Code of Professional Conduct, you think are specifically relevant in deciding how to

resolve the situation. Make sure that you refer to the most up to date ACS Codes which are

available on the ACS website – www.acs.org.au.

• You should also list any relevant Australian legislation that you think applies to this scenario.

• Your analysis, discussion and recommendations should use the framework you selected in

Week 3 – Solving an Ethical Dilemma.

Your assignment should be 500 - 800 words in length (excluding your code lists, legislation list and

references).

You may need to undertake a small amount of research, however, most information you will need is

available via the seminars and their references. Also,

• use a cover page – as per the suggested template,

• use in‐text referencing,

• use complete Harvard Notation, submit in “Word” format or equivalent format that can be

readily opened in MS Word, keep your formatting simple: Arial 11pt, 10pt after paragraph,

single line spacing, headings in bold, maximum 2 indent levels/bullet levels. Do not use page

borders, word art, page backgrounds or similar extraneous decoration

• Your uploaded file name should identify you as part of its name – e.g.

PE_Assignment1_William_Smith.

Marking Guide

Marks will be awarded using the following guidelines.

• 15% meeting the procedural requirements, including, spelling, grammar, number of words,

document formatting,

• 30% how logically and thoroughly you identified and described professional ,ethical and

legal issues arising in the scenario,

• 30% how well you developed your recommendations and supported them with relevant,

correct referencing,

• 20% how well you convinced the reader that you understood the issues,

• 5% did the material generate interest in the reader?