Case Study $7-5$

Arthur is the chief engineer in a components house. As such, he sits in meetings concerning bidding on contracts. Company executives

are attending a meeting held by NASA to discuss an upcoming procurement. NASA presents specifications for components that are to

be several orders of magnitude more reliable than the current state of the art.

The components are not part of a life$-$support system yet are critical for the success of several planned experiments. Arthur does not

believe such reliability can be achieved by his company or any other, and he knows the executives feel the same.

Nevertheless, the executives were interested in bidding on the contract without questioning the specifications. Arthur discusses the

matter privately with the executives and recommends that they review the seemingly technical impossibility with NASA and try to

amend the contract.

The executives say that they intend, if they win the contract, to argue mid$-$stream for a change. They remind Arthur that if they don't

win the contract, several engineers in Arthur's division will have to be laid off. Arthur is well$-$liked by his employees and fears the

layoffs would affect some close friendships.

a$.$ What should Arthur do$?$

b$.$ What NSPE Code of Ethics References support your response $($name at least three$)?$