“When I told my doctor I couldn’t afford an operation, he offered to touch up my X rays.” – Henny Youngman
Year: 2011
Development team ethics, Part II – The Cesspool
I won’t stoop to an Anthony Weiner tie-in. I won’t stoop to an Anthony Weiner tie-in. I won’t I won’t I won’t I won’t …
Oh, hello there. Welcome to Part 2 of our review of a moral cesspool. No, not that cesspool. We’re talking about project management as described by Scott Ambler in his recent article, “Survey Shows Unethical Behavior Rampant Inside IT Development Teams,” (Dr. Dobb’s Journal, 5/3/2011).
Last week’s column set the stage by reviewing three relevant ethical principles and distinctions:
- Deontologism vs Consequentialism: Whether to judge ethics based on the action itself or its consequences.
- Corporations as moral entities: They aren’t. They’re presumptively amoral (not immoral) entities whose “ethical” guideposts are profits and shareholder value, and whose ethical boundaries are whatever the law and applicable regulations allow.
- Employee ethics: When acting as employees, human beings are their employer’s agents, subordinating their own ethical code to that of their employer. This includes how they work with their employer.
Now we’re ready. Mr. Ambler lists four areas of questionable ethical practice: Budgeting, scope management, scheduling, and quality.