Engineering Ethics Reimagined Scenarios

Please read the Engineering ethics scenario (with two different versions) on Professional Communication and Reputation [Source] and evaluate your reasoning. Your responses will remain anonymous and will not be saved.

Complete the following two steps:

  1. First, read the Non-LLM Published Version and evaluate your ethics reasoning.
  2. Then, read the LLM-Enhanced Version (Human-Reviewed) and re-evaluate your ethics reasoning.

Version A: Non-LLM Published

You are an engineer working on a project that requires expertise from another region.

To find a suitable professional, you contact a representative from a regional engineering society, who recommends a qualified engineer.

You proceed to hire this recommended engineer.

During the project, you become dissatisfied with the engineer’s performance due to:

Instead of raising these concerns directly with the engineer, you:

Later, the engineer you hired contacts you and expresses strong dissatisfaction, stating that your concerns were shared without giving them an opportunity to respond or improve.

Reference: Source

What would you do in this situation?





Version B: LLM-Enhanced (Human-Reviewed)

You’re leading a distributed engineering project with contributors across multiple countries.

One engineer—recommended by a regional society—has been missing updates and delivering work that doesn’t quite align with expectations.

You’re frustrated.

Instead of addressing it directly, you message the recommending contact:

“This isn’t working—we may need someone else.”

A day later, the engineer messages you:

“I wish you had spoken to me first.”

You realise:

Reference: This scenario was enhanced using ChatGPT version 5.3

What would you do in this situation?