Phil
Read case study 29: Pulverizer and discuss the three scenarios presented of Fred's possible courses of actions. How do you think Fred should respond in this case? Why is your suggestion the best alternative?
1. From the first scenario Fred redesigning Model 1 Pulverizer and solving the plugging problem in an affordable way should be a decision I believe the legal staff should follow since that’s an engineer’s job. Legally the legal staff in the interest of the company is doing their part in protecting the company through their legal suggestions but should understand or trust Fred since he knows more about the Pulverizer. After all those suggestions won’t be certain by the legal staff if there’s a tendency the Pulverizer would plug. 2. Fred keeping quiet and following the legal staff suggestion to me is wrong since there is the tendency that the Pulverizer can plug. Morally and ethically, he should inform the legal staff about this tendency since they are all working in the interest of the company. 3. It would depend on the management’s decision to agree with Fred and his colleagues in redesigning the Pulverizer since the engineering company wants the best or faultless equipment for their customers. If financially the company can afford such amount then it would be an idea they should think about. The third suggestion sounds more decisive since as an engineer it’s your job to create or design efficient equipments or solutions taking in regard people’s safety. Efficient engineering products can decrease accidents and increase the sale of that product when it’s not that risky in using
1. From the first scenario Fred redesigning Model 1 Pulverizer and solving the plugging problem in an affordable way should be a decision I believe the legal staff should follow since that’s an engineer’s job. Legally the legal staff in the interest of the company is doing their part in protecting the company through their legal suggestions but should understand or trust Fred since he knows more about the Pulverizer. After all those suggestions won’t be certain by the legal staff if there’s a tendency the Pulverizer would plug. 2. Fred keeping quiet and following the legal staff suggestion to me is wrong since there is the tendency that the Pulverizer can plug. Morally and ethically, he should inform the legal staff about this tendency since they are all working in the interest of the company. 3. It would depend on the management’s decision to agree with Fred and his colleagues in redesigning the Pulverizer since the engineering company wants the best or faultless equipment for their customers. If financially the company can afford such amount then it would be an idea they should think about. The third suggestion sounds more decisive since as an engineer it’s your job to create or design efficient equipments or solutions taking in regard people’s safety. Efficient engineering products can decrease accidents and increase the sale of that product when it’s not that risky in using