Doing ethics technique

An explanation of the Doing Ethics Technique Graham R Seach

Simpson, C. R., Nevile, L., & Burmeister, O. K. (2003). Doing ethics: A universal technique in an

accessibility context. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 10(2), 127-133.

The 'Doing Ethics' technique (DET) is a process for analysing ethical issues in any scenario. It doesn't

guarantee that what you come up with will be the best solution, but it does help you to think

ethically. That said, I understand that the technique may seem a little vague and perhaps lacking

guidance. To that end, the following might help you to understand how to apply the technique in

order to better understand ethical analysis.

To gain the most from the technique, you must explore and answer all eight questions in the order

in which they are posed. Each question stands alone and you cannot take the view that because you

have given information in response to one question that you can omit the same information from

subsequent questions.

Q1. What's going on?

This is a synopsis of what the case is all about. It is written in your own words, and can be taken from

a variety of perspectives, for example, from the perspective of a person raising a complaint, in which

case, it is a synopsis of the complaint. It can be taken from the perspective of an uninvolved

observer, in which case, it is an outline of what was observed, without going into too much detail.

Where you see multiple perspectives, you should describe them here. This question should target a

reader who has no knowledge of the case at hand, and is a brief outline of the case.

Q2. What are the facts?

This is a descriptive list of all the facts of the case. It doesn't just describe the case, but lists all the

facts as they are known (from all sources and perspectives), and also what one might reasonably

consider to be possibilities. For example, if a person was raising a complaint, Question 1 would

outline their complaint, and Question 2 would provide the detailed facts and the evidence to both

support and refute the claims (facts). All facts listed here must be supported by credible evidence, of

which the case itself is one source. If you choose, you may optionally assign a credibility weighting to

each fact, to help with later analysis.

Q3. What are the ethical and non-ethical issues?

This is a list of ALL the issues that are involved in the case, whether they be ethical, legal, social or

otherwise. In Question 5 we extract only the ethical issues for further analysis, but for now, simply

list and describe every relevant issue you can think of. This is probably the most difficult and

important question to get right, because Question 5 can only include the ethical that you have raised

here in Question 3. Therefore, this question must be a complete and comprehensive list of ALL the

issues.

Q4. Who is affected?

This is a list of all the stakeholders (people and entities) involved in the case. You should not restrict

the list to those stakeholders specifically named in the case; moreover, you must consider who/what

else might be affected by the issues listed at Question 3, and include them regardless of the degree

to which they may be affected. In this question, you must describe how each stakeholder is affected,

both positively and negatively, and you may optionally comment on the degree of effect. In

answering this question, you must think broadly to arrive at a comprehensive list of stakeholders.

Q5. What are the ethical issues and implications?

For this question, you must extract only the ethical issues identified at Question 3. You cannot add

any issue that was not listed at Question 3. Discuss the ethical issues in terms of classical ethical

theory, relevant codes of ethics/codes of conduct, and discuss the implications of each issue on the

nominated stakeholders, relevant industries, and on the community in general. You must ensure to

support any statement or claim you make with credible evidence.

Q6. What can be done about it?

This question elicits a general idea of what can be done to resolve the case, whether those ideas are

practical, possible, or not. Describe in your own words generally what kind of resolutions there

might be. You need not go into great detail to answer this question, as its purpose is to provide a

basis for answering Questions 7 and 8, but you do need to think broadly and laterally to come up

with several alternatives - at least four. Be creative; the most obvious courses of action are not

always the only ones.

Q7. What are the options?

This question requires that you list and describe (in detail) all the possible