A postmortem is a common task in engineering. It formalizes the process of learning from past experience. The post-mortem analyzes a project once it has ended and identifies what went well and what went poorly to improve the next project. This writing assignment asks you to write up a post-mortem of a well-known case of engineering failure, including not only the technical details of the failure but the ethical lapses that contributed to the failure.
The Writing Task -
Your post-mortem write up should explain how ethical lapses contributed to the engineering failure. Describe the actions, as an engineer, that should be taken (should have been taken) to come to grips with the failure, utilizing one of the ethical frameworks you have learned about as a guide in influencing or determining your course of action. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the actions you propose and provide justification using one of the ethical frameworks as a guideline in the analysis process.
Audience
Identify an audience for your post-mortem write up this can be either a government regulatory agency such as the NTSB or the FDA, the companys board of directors, etc. and write your post-mortem analysis to that audience, including information and analysis that would be of most interest and of most use to them. The audience you are addressing must be clearly specified in your paper.
Researching and Analyzing the Case -
Choose one of the cases of engineering failure most related to your future career or professional interests. First, read about the case and understand the complex issues surrounding the case, including the parties in the case (corporate, government, etc.) and the various components including engineering, management, regulatory, socio-technical and ethical. Second, decide what the major issues surrounding the engineering failure are. Also, consider which of the ethical frameworks you have learned best explains the ethical lapses in this engineering failure case.
Your postmortem should follow this structure:
1)Abstract: A short summary of the engineering failure, its consequences, why it happened, and what should be done to prevent future problems. Your abstract should also clearly identify your audience. This can be either a government oversight committee, a companys board of directors, etc. Be sure that you write your postmortem to that specific audience, including nformation and analysis that would be of most interest and use to them.
2)Background: The body of your postmortem should begin with a narrative about what happened (the engineering failure) and what its consequences were.
3)The Engineering Failure: This section should explain what technical, engineering, management, regulatory, and/or other socio-technical factors led to the engineering failure.
4)Ethical Analysis: The section should analyze the ethical lapses (i.e. stakeholders actions, decisions or interests, principles adopted or flouted, risks ignored and reasons for doing so, etc.) that contributed to the engineering failure. Try to brainstorm similar questions that apply to your own topic, and then answer them using at least one of the ethical frameworks you learned about in class to discuss the engineering failure. You might use this model to inspire your own ethical analysis (using duty ethics and/or utilitarianism and/or virtue ethics).
5)Recommendations: Drawing on at least one of the ethical frameworks, this section should first propose general ideas and then proceed to very specific recommendations about how to prevent similar failures from occurring in the future. What should have been done? What needs to be done in the future? Dont make simple arguments (i.e. there needs to be more or better regulations); instead, specify what regulations should be imposed (and by whom), what the parameters of such regulations should be, and how they might be enforced (and by whom). Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the actions you propose and provide justification, again using at least one of the ethical frameworks.
6)Conclusion: Your conclusion should address what we have learned (or should have learned) from the engineering failure you discuss. What progress, if any, has been made to prevent similar failures in the future? What remains to be done?