Harty: Ethics, 347-381 and Dombrowski "Challenger"

Harty “A Word About Ethics” and Dombrowski “Challenger”

Dorothy Windsor- “Communication Failures Contributing to the Challenger Accident: An Example for Technical Communicators”

2 major contributions to the Challenger accident:
1) managers and engineers viewed the same facts from different perspectives
2) the general difficulty of sending or receiving bad news, particularly when sending to a superior

You must share not only information but your interpretation of it

Bad news is not passed on as often as good news, people are less likely to believe it

PHYSICAL CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT

Physical cause of the accident was the failure of a rubber seal on the solid rocket booster

Testing of the O-rings actually damaged them, causing them to malfunction

EARLY RESPONSES TO BAD NEWS: DISBELIEF AND FAILURE TO SEND UPWARD

Marshall treated O-ring problem as serious when communicating down to MTI but not serious when communicating up to NASA

Marshall only recognized it as serious when blame seemed to be on MTI

CONTINUED BAD NEWS REJECTION DESPITE CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE

MTI still believed in the backup O-ring despite contradictory evidence

A launch constraint was enacted, but focused on the wrong issue and was ultimately waived and disregarded

INTERNAL VS. EXTERNAL COMMUNICATION OF CONCERN FROM MTI ENGINEERS

MTI engineer Boisjoly sent a critical warning memo to his management

MTI’s Russell sent a memo to Marshall, but it was simply the facts and did not sound very urgent or critical as it was sent to an outsider

THE SPLIT BETWEEN MANAGERS AND ENGINEERS

MTI engineers became increasingly against launch but didn’t communicate urgently enough, they recommended postponing the Challenger launch but by this time Marshall wouldn’t listen

Managers wanted to go ahead with the launch (mainly to please their superiors) while engineers were more realistic and resisted

CONCLUSION

Managers should establish an open atmosphere in which engineers feel comfortable relaying bad information

People should realize that they are probably erring on the side of optimism, don’t stick to intellectual inertia and take responsibility if they are wrong

Darrell Huff- “How To Lie With Statistics”

Samples can have built-in bias

Every piece of information in the group should have the same chance of being selected for the sample

Truncated graphs can make data appear more impressive and drastic

Changing the ordinates of graphs can also make them appear more impressive (zooming in)

Means and medians can vary greatly, especially when discussing income, as the vast majority earn a reasonable amount and a few millionaires drastically raise the mean

You must take error and deviance into consideration and not be misled by simply reading the data (ranges of 47-87 and 15-104 both have a mean of 61)

Altering two-dimensional data can imply a greater difference between two bars/icons if the reader interprets them three-dimensionally

Decimals can make data seem very accurate, more than just an approximation

Bias of sample’s opinions must be considered (prejudiced people)

Cause and effect relationships can be misconstrued and reversed if only a correlation is noted

Dan Jones- “Determining the Ethics of Style”

Doublespeak is intentionally misleading, not careless

WHAT IS ETHICS?

The study of right and wrong conduct
what is good and bad with moral duty and obligation
Theory or system of moral values

ETHICS AND TECHNICAL PROSE

It’s not always easy to determine what’s right and wrong, many situations have multiple variables

ETHICS AND THE PROFESSIONS

Computer Ethics Institute wrote 10 Commandments of Computer Ethics

Computers bring about many ethical issues regarding intellectual property, morality of copying programs/files, creation of viruses, hacking, creation of artificial intelligence

Codes of conduct are valuable because they establish ideals and help define the character of a profession, encourage employees to act ethically

Carolyn Rude- “Legal and Ethical Issues in Editing”

Laws and codes of ethics aim to protect the good of society and individual rights

Corporate policies should establish commitment to ethical behavior, products should be reviewed by a variety of people

LEGAL ISSUES IN EDITING

Editors insure that documents do not violate intellectual property, product safety, libel, and copyright laws

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY includes any information that is in some fixed form- patents, trade secretes, artwork, writing, pictures, music- encourages people to create things that will better the quality of life

COPYRIGHT LAW protects original works of authorship so others can’t reproduce or steal work

Copyrights often lie with employers for their employees’ works

US Government work is public domain, not copyrighted

Copyrights are automatic, don’t require registration; however you can register them for maximum security
Copyrights don’t necessarily translate into other countries

Fair use allows for copying for educational and noncommercial uses

Trademarks prevent copying and use of brand names, phrases and logos

It is illegal to share trade secrets with other companies

Product Safety And Liability

Companies are responsible for even the misuse of their products

Warning labels are necessary to inform customers of potential dangers, clear instructions are necessary

Libel is a defamatory statement about someone without basis in fact that lowers their public reputation, people can be sued for it if it is proven

Editors must insure factual accuracy of negative statements

DOMBROWSKI- Challenger Disaster- Information Vs. Meaning

Values play a powerful role in shaping technical discourse

Space shuttle missions are risky, but astronauts are under the assumption that all necessary precautions have been taken- not the case with Challenger

Unwarranted assumptions of the audience rendered the “smoking gun” memo ineffective

TWO GOVERNMENTAL REPORTS

The Presidential Report (Rogers Commission) is very long and discusses some things that aren’t critical to the matter of the Challenger explosion

A large amount of information doesn’t necessarily mean a report is thorough

The report focuses disproportionately on the braking system, which was not a main cause of the explosion

The inclusion of so much almost irrelevant information tries to make the event appear inevitable rather than being due to a series of judgment errors that could have easily been fixed, is misleading

Differences Between Reports

Presidential and congressional reports used same information but came to different results and recommendations

Presidential commission uses vague, contradictory language, fails to address ethical responsibilities

Distinction between personal responsibility and procedural decision making (just following procedures, not much choice/thought)

Congressional report states that Challenger was not a problem of technical communication but of personal decision making

TWO CRUCIAL SHIFTS IN MEANING

O-ring charring shifted from a cause of concern to a sign of safety, they became accustomed to it happening and no longer saw it as dangerous- this was a shift in perception, not actual data

Engineers argued against launch at the L-1 meeting but they were overruled by managers and NASA.. Dombrowksi thinks technical communication was fine here, Harty didn’t

The burden of proof shifted- now the engineers had to prove the launch shouldn’t occur rather than simply raising doubt about safety- unclear data “didn’t support a postponement” rather than “didn’t support a launch”

SMOKING GUN MEMO

Boisjoly’s memo is the smoking gun; it is technically well-written and the blame falls on the readers not heeding his warnings

Boisjoly used powerful emotional language to convey the seriousness of his subject

If you have communicated well it is up to your audience to act

GRAPHICAL IMAGES

Data in numbers can be almost irrelevant or beside the point sometimes

People determine the meaning of data, it doesn’t determine its own meaning

ETHICAL APPRAISAL

Aristotle would say that Boisjoly acted ethically, showing honesty and courage and working toward good for others. He would encourage open debate between the two reports, as the congressional committee’s clearer report would show itself as the better one

Kant would agree that Boisjoly acted with a sense of duty without regard for personal consequences. The presidential report shows confused language and misleading conclusions so it doesn’t seem ethical

Utilitarianism would weigh the benefits to the nation with the risk of the astronauts lives, they knew they were in a dangerous situation but didn’t know the extent of it. The presidential committee might have been doing the greater good by saving the reputation of NASA, but the congressional committee acted differently

Feminist and Ethics of Care: the management was authoritarian in overriding the opinions of the engineers at the L-1 meeting, and they did not have a caring attitude toward the astronauts when they ignored the risks to their safety, and therefore it was unethical to launch

CONCLUSION

This issue shows how values and ethical judgment play a role in communicating even highly technical information.