Explain Your Reasoning - Code of Ethics Review
As engineering practitioners, we possess knowledge and skills on which others rely. You will note that under Value 1 in the Guidelines on Professional Conduct an additional obligation has been included requiring members to ‘be prepared to explain your reasoning and be prepared to seek peer review, where appropriate’.
Inclusion of this obligation has arisen out of discussions at the various workshops about professionalism in engineering practice and how we might reasonably expect clients and others to sometimes ask us to justify or explain our work and/or seek a second opinion. It also picks up on the messages on pages 5 and 6 of the 2000 Code of Ethics relating to interaction with clients, employers and colleagues. While it is intended that these messages will be captured in the ethics awareness program, it has been suggested that the sentiment ought to be captured in the guidelines on conduct.
When clients or others question your reasoning, or otherwise request an explanation, there is an expectation that you will be willing and able to explain why you have arrived at your particular outcome, especially as checking and justifying what we do are embedded in the way the engineering task develops.
The notion of explaining one’s reasoning and seeking peer review is thought by many to be fundamental to professional integrity, but in no way denies the appropriateness of legitimate differences of reasoned opinion arrived at in a proper and professional manner. Indeed, the concept of peer review (often referred to as technical review) is nothing new. It has been part of the ISO 9000 quality systems from the start and anyone who is working in a quality assured environment will (or should be) doing it as a matter of course.
I would be interested to receive your comments on the proposed wording.
To visit the Code of Ethics Review website please click here
