Simon Rogerson

Verified

Simon verified their affiliation via an institutional email.

Learn more

Verified

Simon verified their affiliation via an institutional email.

Learn more

• BSc FBCS, FRSA
• Professor Emeritus at De Montfort University

The Internet-of-Things, driverless cars, smart cities and more: is it time to challenge all forms of technological determinism while accepting digital ethics determinism? In that way we might realise digital technology designed by everyone which is acceptable to and accessible by everyone.

ICT development is a global activity about which IDC periodically produces surveys. The IDC survey of 2014 (Avram, 2014) found that there were, worldwide, 11,005,000 professional software developers and 7,500,000 additional hobbyists of which a large proportion were students. Of the total of 18,505,000, 19.2 per cent or 3,552,960 resided in the USA. The latest published membership statistics taken from the websites of each professional body reveals that ACM has 94,000 members [65,000 professional members and 29,000 student members]; Australian Computer Society has 23,000 members; and BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT has 71,025 members. Even if all ACM members resided in the USA, which is not the case, ACM membership represents a paltry 2.6 per cent of software developers in the USA. Furthermore, the combined membership of ACM, ACS and BCS represents only 1.0 per cent of the global total. This suggests that, on the basis of statistics, professional bodies allied to ICT and their adopted codes of ethics have little influence on practical ICT. Of course, this argument does not take into account the nature and importance of the systems developed and who is developing them. Indeed, it would be a fascinating research project to investigate the developer demography in relation to professional bodies.

Nevertheless, from these statistics, it is clear that a large global population needs to engage in a new form of dialogue regarding the ethics of practical ICT. This might include, for example, accessible exemplars of good and bad practice, interactive case analyses of failed systems, and a universal charter for computing which would be the foundation of computing education from the start of a child’s education through to becoming an ICT practitioner.

Codes of ethics are important as they provide the detail on which sound ICT strategies can be planned and implemented. However, to suggest these alone can be used to resolve unethical ICT practice is folly. A new approach which engages all members of society is needed. Why? – because, society is now ICT-dependent and anyone can develop ICT systems which might be used by thousands, if not millions, of people. Impacts, whether positive or negative, spread rapidly and are very difficult to reverse.

This Scenario describes a potential conflict of interest that occurs when Nancy receives a job offer from one of her employer’s clients.

Quality Technology Solutions (QTS) was a major well-respected computer hardware and software vendor. Nancy Johnson worked as a user-support software engineer at the QTS regional centre in the middle of the country. She communicated with her customers mainly by telephone and email. Reported program bugs were passed on to technical support agents, and Nancy provided software patches to her customers over telephone lines, usually via a computer-to-computer connection.

In addition, whenever Nancy heard about difficult software problems, she visited the customer personally. Until last year, her on-site support and occasional training were provided as part of the customers’ maintenance contracts. As a result of Nancy’s expertise, this service became very popular and thus very costly for QTS, so the on-site support service was split from maintenance and billed separately.

During a recent economic recession, QTS’s fortunes declined. As a result, salaries were frozen for 18 months. After that, times continued to be difficult, and people were losing their jobs. Nancy believed that it was only a matter of time before she became a casualty. She knew, however, that she was still valuable to QTS, and her boss had said that she would be the first to get a pay raise when it became possible.

One of QTS’s largest customers, and one of Nancy’s most important clients, was District Benefit (DB) with offices throughout the country. Over a period of time she had established a close relationship with many key employees at DB offices, and there were several offices where employees needed a lot of technical help and training. DB preferred to enter into a contract with QTS, rather than develop its own in-house expertise. Nancy had been working closely with Mike Williams in the Information Services Department of DB, and they know each other well and had high professional respect for each other.

Last week, Mike telephoned Nancy at home.

‘Nancy, I have a proposition you might be interested in.’

‘What is it?’

‘The main office needs someone to help them with their new system. It’s the new BENEFIT-p system that QTS installed six months ago and they desperately need support and training. It is the sort of thing you’re expert at. Do you want to take it on?’

‘It sounds interesting. Just send some details to the office and I’ll put the wheels in motion.’

‘Let me explain. We don’t want QTS to handle the job; we want you to do it personally. If we go to QTS, it will take ages to set it up, and what’s more we will have to pay QTS’s overhead.’

‘I’m not sure, Mike. You’re offering to pay me for the type of work which QTS pays me for and that feels like a conflict of interest.’

‘I don’t think so, and we want you to do the job, not some other consultant who might be allocated by QTS. DB is important to QTS, particularly the work at the main office. I’m sure if we explained the situation to your management they would agree to go along with the arrangement.’

‘Why don’t we then? What’s the rush? Put a proposal to them and maybe they can sort something out in a couple of weeks.’

‘Nancy, you don’t understand. We can’t wait that long! BENEFIT-p was installed to rectify serious problems that we were having in managing the complex benefits package. We simply have to have it working in the very near future. We won’t ask you for any time that would interfere with your normal work schedule at QTS. We’ll fit in with your schedule because we know you’ll do a great job. To make it worth your while, we’ll pay you 25% above the normal rate and give you a 30% bonus on completion of the job. Please come and work for us on this one job.’

Nancy said nothing. She was pleased that her reputation was so good, and she was overwhelmed by the size of the financial offer. It would certainly provide some extra funds if she were to be let go by QTS. But she wondered about the consequences if QTS were to find out, and she was undecided about what to do.

Discussion

What would you do in Nancy’s position?

Does it make any difference that there is uncertainty about Nancy’s current job?

Who does Nancy have a responsibility towards? Does she have a responsibility towards herself and her family?

The global action plan called Future Vision is proposed as an initiative to address the serious fragmentation of work in and between academia and industry related to so-called ICT Ethics. We need to identify what and where progress has been made, what problems or barriers exist and where is the future potential. The aim of Future Vision is to regenerate the relationships across the wider community so that ICT will be developed and utilised in an ethical and socially acceptable manner. It is not simply an academic initiative but a whole-world initiative which will lead to an improvement in practice.

In my paper Future Vision in the JICES special issue, I discuss the ETHICOMP odyssey and suggest where we should now go. I argue that our link with the wider community needs to be regenerated. I write, “There has been much detailed observation and analysis but still the transformation of this into widespread practical positive action remains elusive.” (Rogerson, 2015, p348) In our world both content and political insight are equally important. One without the other results in minimal impact at best but usually no impact at all. Important messages and key findings will be lost in the virtual dust of a digital library. The research community must address both if it is to continue to make a difference beyond academia.

Similar to all organizations, HEIs (Higher Education Institutions) are reliant on information to operate, report and provide services. There are unique relationships between the institution, the academic and the student. The success of the HEI depends on this relationship trinity and the existence of trusting relationships within it. The trinity is sustained through creating, communicating and consuming information that is increasingly electronic in form. See my paper in Reseachgate “The integrity of creating, communicating and consuming information online in the context of Higher Education Institutions”

I am trying to set up a network of those academics who have a practical experience/interest in ensuring that ICT applications are developed and operated in a socially acceptable manner. If you have suggestions of those who could be the future leaders of this field please let me know.