Background Ethical issues can sometimes be complex and require more in-depth considerations as to the best course of action. This assignment involves practice in applying the net-goodness analysis (NGA) approach discussed in class to evaluate consequences associated with different options and to decide on the best course of action. Scenario Anony Moose Data Corporation (AMDC) recently hired Gator Engineer (GE) as a software engineer. AMDC’s projects include important governmental initiatives. GE’s first assignment from the supervisor was to write software that provides security for documents emailed within the company. After completing the project, GE reads about another company that made similar software available to overseas clients. That company was now under investigation by the U.S. Government because of U.S. laws precluding transfer of such software overseas, due to national security concerns. GE then discovers that the IT department previously sent the AMDC software abroad to their corporate offices. GE informs the supervisor who responds, without the benefit of consulting legal counsel, that there is no problem since AMDC is U.S.-based and not a threat to national security and the company will be using software solely for internal corporate purposes and not for profit. GE agrees but later learns that one of the company’s overseas offices has been permitting contractors to use the software to exchange secured email documents. So what does GE do? RUBRICS FOR GRADING This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Question 1 - Key Points 12.0 pts EXCELLENT Makes some connections between the ethical dilemma and 4 principles in the fundamental canons of the NSPE Code of EthicS This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Question 2 – Key Points 12.0 pts EXCELLENT Identifies and clearly discusses at least 4 viable options or sub-options for consideration Question 5 10.0 pts Discusses results and identifies best course of action This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Mechanics (Structure, Grammar, Spelling, etc.) 16.0 pts EXCELLENT Concise, well-crafted responses, reflecting good structure, and proper grammar, spelling, etc. in conveying the ideas Assignment Requirements 1.     Identify GE’s main ethical dilemma in the context of the applicable Fundamental Canons in the NSPE Code of Ethics. GE’s main ethical dilemma here, is that they are faced with a national security threat since the software that GE created is now in foreign hands.  This issue affects both, the interest of the company (GE) and public safety since it might be used as a decoding tool from foreign corporations. When GE was hired by AMDC to create this tool they entered in an agreement under the NSPE Code of Ethics in which each employer had to trust each other for this work and AMDC’s IT department broke this trust when sending it abroad. They put the safety of the public at risk by sending out the software.  Now they must depend on one another to try ...

1. Background
Ethical issues can sometimes be complex and require more in-
depth considerations as to the best course of action. This
assignment involves practice in applying the net-goodness
analysis (NGA) approach discussed in class to evaluate
consequences associated with different options and to decide on
the best course of action.
Scenario
Anony Moose Data Corporation (AMDC) recently hired Gator
Engineer (GE) as a software engineer. AMDC’s projects include
important governmental initiatives. GE’s first assignment from
the supervisor was to write software that provides security for
documents emailed within the company.
After completing the project, GE reads about another company
that made similar software available to overseas clients. That
company was now under investigation by the U.S. Government
because of U.S. laws precluding transfer of such software
overseas, due to national security concerns. GE then discovers
that the IT department previously sent the AMDC software
abroad to their corporate offices.
GE informs the supervisor who responds, without the benefit of
consulting legal counsel, that there is no problem since AMDC
is U.S.-based and not a threat to national security and the
company will be using software solely for internal corporate
purposes and not for profit. GE agrees but later learns that one
of the company’s overseas offices has been permitting
contractors to use the software to exchange secured email
documents.
So what does GE do?
RUBRICS FOR GRADING
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Question 1 - Key
Points
12.0 pts
EXCELLENT Makes some connections between the ethical

2. dilemma and 4 principles in the fundamental canons of the
NSPE Code of EthicS
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Question 2 – Key
Points
12.0 pts
EXCELLENT Identifies and clearly discusses at least 4 viable
options or sub-options for consideration
Question 5
10.0 pts
Discusses results and identifies best course of action
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Mechanics
(Structure, Grammar, Spelling, etc.)
16.0 pts
EXCELLENT Concise, well-crafted responses, reflecting good
structure, and proper grammar, spelling, etc. in conveying the
ideas
Assignment Requirements
1. Identify GE’s main ethical dilemma in the context of the
applicable Fundamental Canons in the NSPE Code of Ethics.
GE’s main ethical dilemma here, is that they are faced with a
national security threat since the software that GE created is
now in foreign hands. This issue affects both, the interest of
the company (GE) and public safety since it might be used as a
decoding tool from foreign corporations. When GE was hired by
AMDC to create this tool they entered in an agreement under
the NSPE Code of Ethics in which each employer had to trust
each other for this work and AMDC’s IT department broke this
trust when sending it abroad. They put the safety of the public
at risk by sending out the software. Now they must depend on

3. one another to try to solve this in the most responsible way
possible. Another issue that arose was when GE informed the
supervisors they were under the assumption that the software
was going to be used internally and for non-profit purposes; in
which they later found out that they had been deceptively
permitting contractors to use the software. Not only did the
corporation didn’t behave honorably but they broke the law and
now must work to fix this dilemma.
Applicable fundamental canons
1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public
2. Avoid deceptive acts.
3. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically,
and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and
usefulness of the profession.
*Note: The issue was addressed perfectly but I encourage to
quote and discuss each applicable canon from the NSPE code of
ethics. I wrote some that in my judgment applied. This is the
link that has all the canons
https://ufl.instructure.com/courses/387305/files/folder/Addition
al%20Materials?preview=46606133
2. Identify and briefly discuss all the viable options, or sub-
options as applicable, that you see available to GE to address
the issue.
There are several things that could have been done to prevent
this from happening in the first place. GE should have asked
AMDC to sign a contract in which they are not to share the
software abroad. During the process of receiving word that
AMDC had sent the software abroad they should’ve addressed it
with them immediately instead of assuming that they would use
it exclusively internally.
On the other hand, now GE is faced with the dilemma of fixing
their mistakes. The obvious choice is to reach out for legal help
which might create a tense environment between the two
companies. Following this option, they would be provided a
safe way for GE to walk away from the issue unscathed.

4. Nevertheless, this would deteriorate the relationship that they
had created with AMDC and probably will not lead to any
future business.
Another way would be to reach out to AMDC management and
propose a meeting in which both parties would discuss a way to
recall the software from the foreign offices. A way to do this
might be to investigate foreign companies that might provide
similar cybersecurity software for the office abroad to use.
Thus, providing a feasible solution for AMDC to pursue instead
of only asking them to remove the software. Subsequently, it is
also important to inform them about the possible legal and
safety consequences that having this software abroad might lead
to. This way both companies are in the same page as of what
would happen if word of this gets out and they are faced with
the issue of dealing with the US government.
Lastly, they could release an update to the software without
consulting AMDC in which they must agree to sharing their IP
address. Once GE has access to their IP address, they can block
any use outside the US and therefore making the software
useless outside the US. The downside to this would be that there
are ways to work around this.
*Note: Really good ideas but I would like if we can clearly
identify what are the options and the sub-options. I classify
them but feel free to change them.
· Options 1: Legal approach
. Contract of privacy and exclusivity
. Legal assistance to correct the company’s actions
· Option 2: Bipartite agreement
. Negotiate with the oversea companies to remove user’s right
· Option 3: Software update
. Updating the software the IP address can be limited only to
users inside the U.S.
3. Prepare an event tree that clearly identifies the
consequences related to each of the options/sub-options for
addressing the ethical dilemma. An attachment to the

5. assignment document showing the event tree is fine, if that
works best..
4. Fully evaluate each of the options using the NGA approach
discussed in class. Prepare a data table summarizing your NGA
evaluation. A second attachment to the assignment document
showing the data table is fine, if that works best. This is a non-
numerical application process. Clearly show all steps of the
evaluation process used.
NGA ----------> Net-goodness analysis
*I create a table you guys can use as a temple, you can add
and delete rows and columns. You must write the position in
each perspective observing the positives and negative outcomes
Standard
Positive paradigm
Negative paradigm
Utilitarianism
Rights/Duties
Common good
Virtue
Justice/Fairness
5. Discuss the results and identify the best course of action
based on the NGA evaluation results.

6. Another Approach to Ethical Analysis
and Decision-Making
ethics
Ethical Evaluations
Whitbeck, 2011. Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research
are judgments “about the extent to which the object of the
evaluation is good or bad, ethically speaking. A variety of
criteria
are relevant to the ethical evaluation of an act or course of
action. A
reasoned judgment about whether (or the extent to which) some
act (or course of action) is morally justified will mention some
or all
of the following:
Ethical Evaluations
Whitbeck, 2011. Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research
are judgments “about the extent to which the object of the
evaluation is good or bad, ethically speaking. A variety of
criteria
are relevant to the ethical evaluation of an act or course of
action. A
reasoned judgment about whether (or the extent to which) some
act (or course of action) is morally justified will mention some

7. or all
of the following:
its
(virtues) or negative ones (vices)”
So, Let’s Apply a Simple Grid Analysis
Approach
-consequences
event tree (or list or table)
ed in assessing how well each
option complies with the criteria, and then
rated
options based on how well they meet criteria
So, Let’s Apply a Simple Grid Analysis
Approach
ns-consequences

8. event tree (or list or table)
option complies with the criteria, and then
rated
rank
options based on how well they meet criteria
back to Ed Gee’s dilemma
Scenario for Application Example
What does Ed do?
NGA Application Example

9. 8 +/-
8 +/-
8 +/-
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-
making/
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-
making/Another Approach to Ethical Analysis and Decision-
MakingEthical Evaluations
Whitbeck, 2011. Ethics in Engineering Practice and
ResearchEthical Evaluations
Whitbeck, 2011. Ethics in Engineering Practice and ResearchSo,
Let’s Apply a Simple Grid Analysis ApproachSo, Let’s Apply a
Simple Grid Analysis ApproachScenario for Application
ExampleNGA Application ExampleSlide Number 8Slide
Number 9Slide Number 10Slide Number 11Slide Number
12Slide Number 13Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide
Number 16
NGA Example
ethics

10. Scenario for Application Example
* Adapted from National Society of Professional Engineers
Board of Ethical Review
case summaries
Scenario for Application Example
What does Ed do?
Application Example
Application Example
Application Example
Application Example
Application Example
Application Example

11. Application Example
Application Example
Application Example
Application Example
NGA ExampleScenario for Application ExampleScenario for
Application ExampleApplication ExampleApplication
ExampleApplication ExampleApplication ExampleApplication
ExampleApplication ExampleApplication ExampleApplication
ExampleApplication ExampleApplication Example
Ethical Analyses and Decision-Making
ethics
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Allow 1 minute for a brief welcome statement.
T=1
First, the 1-35W Bridge Video

12. ethics
Seebauer Ethical Decision-Making Process
* Adapted from “Fundamentals of Ethics”, 2001. E.G. Seebauer
and R.L. Barry
ethics
Seebauer Ethical Decision-Making Process
Involves:
(event diagram) to
represent a methodical
way of identifying the
options and sub-options
being considered and the
consequences that can
result
-goodness
analysis (NGA) about the
consequences of the
actions
* Adapted from “Fundamentals of Ethics”, 2001. E.G. Seebauer

13. and R.L. Barry
NGA Math Analogy
Net goodness of consequences from an option ~
∑(goodness) x (importance) x (liklihood)
(1) (2) (3)
• (1) with respect to how the consequence squares with the
virtue(s)…good or bad…
• (2) how good or bad the outcome is, as viewed by an outside
impartial observer…high, moderate, low
• (3) qualitative assessment as to probability (cumulative) of
occurrence…high, moderate, low
The net goodness of all the consequences from the option are
“summed”
to arrive at the overall net goodness for each option….and
overall net
goodness for options are subsequently compared to arrive at the
best
choice
* Adapted from “Fundamentals of Ethics”, 2001. E.G. Seebauer
and R.L. Barry
NGA Math Analogy
Net goodness of consequences from an option ~
∑(goodness) x (importance) x (liklihood)

14. (1) (2) (3)
• (1) with respect to how the consequence squares with the
virtue(s)…good or bad…
• (2) how good or bad the outcome is, as viewed by an outside
impartial observer…high, moderate, low
• (3) qualitative assessment as to probability (cumulative) of
occurrence…high, moderate, low
The net goodness of all the consequences from the option are
“summed”
to arrive at the overall net goodness for each option….and
overall net
goodness for options are subsequently compared to arrive at the
best
choice
* Adapted from “Fundamentals of Ethics”, 2001. E.G. Seebauer
and R.L. Barry
NGA Math Analogy
actions (not including the role of intention)
than others and some might be far more likely than
others
consequences from an action considering both
importance and likelihood

15. -benefit analysis
is sometimes done (later classes)
taken literally through “quantification of moral
variables”
* Adapted from “Fundamentals of Ethics”, 2001. E.G. Seebauer
and R.L. Barry
References
Slide
Number
2
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/H
AR0803.pdf
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/H
AR0803.pdfEthical Analyses and Decision-MakingFirst, the 1-
35W Bridge VideoSlide Number 3Slide Number 4Seebauer
Ethical Decision-Making ProcessSeebauer Ethical Decision-
Making ProcessNGA Math Analogy NGA Math Analogy NGA
Math Analogy References