91.9k views
1 vote
Description : Appraise actions taken in a software development context using a code of ethics or law.

Scenario : Mike and his team have been contracted to update a loan application evaluation program for a regional bank. the loan evalaution program uses a formula that was provided by the bank to score loan applications. the score that the program provides is used as a starting point for the loan officers at the bank in determining credit worthiness. Ike, a member of Mike's taem took some initiative, browsed around the bank's servers, and after reviewing some historical loan data on the bank's servers mades some adjustments to the bank's scoring formula. Ike noticed that some information collected by the web server on a user's browser, OS and IP location correlated fairly well with loan defaults. Ike went ahead and incorporated this change to the formula into update and believes the changes will result in a more useful score. Ike just let Mike know about the change to the formula. Mike has been in regular contact with the regional bank about the progress on the updates for the previous eight weeks. Since he didn't know about the changes Ike was making or the resources that Ike was accessing, none of this was relayed to the bank. Based on team updates, Mike was ready to deliver the updated software to the bank next week. At this point, Ike cannot easily roll-back the changes he made to the formula. Mike does not plan on reporting the changes to the regional bank since it will reflect well on his managerial skillsa nd the changes should benefit the bank. Mike plans on delivering the updated software as scheduled.

Using the ACM code of ethics and our workable ethical frameworks evaluate the actions of Mike and Ike within 250 words.

User Bronsoja
by
7.2k points

1 Answer

5 votes

Code breached, data's dark dive, Ike tweaks the bank's loan sieve. Mike hides the needle, praise in sight, but shadows lengthen, conscience bites. Act now, confess, transparency's grace, reclaim trust, mend the ethical space.

Ethical Analysis of Mike and Ike's Actions:

Ike's Actions:

  • Browsing bank servers: This likely violates principles of privacy and security. Accessing data beyond permitted scope is unauthorized and potentially illegal.
  • Altering scoring formula: Modifying a key decision-making algorithm without authorization or informing stakeholders violates professional competence and honesty.
  • Data analysis: While using available data for improvement can be ethical, using sensitive information like browser and IP data raises concerns about fairness and discrimination, especially without due diligence or transparency.

Mike's Actions:

  • Lack of oversight: Not properly supervising his team and allowing unauthorized data access breaches the principle of responsibility.
  • Concealing information: Withholding knowledge of unauthorized changes from the bank is dishonest and violates public interest.
  • Motivated by self-interest: Prioritizing personal gain over transparency and ethical conduct goes against moral virtues.

Overall:

Both Mike and Ike's actions raise serious ethical concerns under the ACM Code of Ethics, particularly:

  • Principle 1. General moral imperatives: Actions should uphold the highest professional standards and not harm public welfare.
  • Principle 2. Social responsibility: Consider the impact of work on society and stakeholders.
  • Principle 3. Honesty: Strive for honesty and truthfulness in all professional interactions.
  • Principle 4. Fairness: Avoid bias and discrimination, ensuring fair treatment for all.
  • Principle 5. Respect for property: Respect intellectual property and data privacy.

Recommendations:

  • Immediate disclosure: Both Mike and Ike should formally disclose their actions to the bank, prioritizing transparency and minimizing potential harm.
  • Ethical review: An independent review of the scoring formula and data usage is crucial to assess fairness and potential bias.
  • Stakeholder consultation: The bank should engage with relevant stakeholders to address concerns and discuss potential remedies.
  • Disciplinary action: Appropriate disciplinary measures might be necessary to uphold ethical standards and prevent future transgressions.

Conclusion:

While Ike's technical initiative might have had good intentions, the means employed were unethical and potentially harmful. Mike's attempt to cover up the changes further aggravates the situation. Prioritizing ethical conduct and open communication with stakeholders is paramount to rectify the situation and regain trust.

User Sam Buckingham
by
8.4k points