Ethics in IT — Week 1 · Ch. 1
Overview of Ethics
The frameworks, the decisions, and the field.
13 slides ~15 minutes ETH-01 · The Factionless
By the end of this module, you will distinguish morality, ethics, and law; apply four major ethical frameworks; walk a 5-step decision process; and analyze a real-world IT ethics failure (VW emissions).
Slide 2 of 13
Morality, Ethics, & Law
Three related but distinct domains. Conflating them is the most common ethical mistake in technical work.
Morality
What: Personal beliefs about right and wrong, formed by upbringing, culture, and experience.
Enforced by: conscience — internal.
Scope: the individual.
Ethics
What: A code of behavior defined by a group — profession, organization, community.
Enforced by: peer pressure, reputation, employment.
Scope: the group.
Law
What: Formal rules established by government authority, codifying minimum behavior society requires.
Enforced by: fines, injunctions, incarceration.
Scope: all of society.
Key distinction: the law is not an ethical ceiling. Professional codes often demand more than the law requires. Something can be legal but unethical, ethical but illegal, or any combination.
Slide 3 of 13
The Three-Zone Overlap
Morality, ethics, and law overlap — but never perfectly. The work is in the gaps.
The gaps matter most: the regions OUTSIDE the overlap are where ethical decisions actually live. "It's legal" is not a defense; "everyone does it" is not a code.
Slide 4 of 13
The Legal × Ethical Matrix
Four quadrants. Most IT ethical work happens in the bottom-right: legal but unethical.
The hard quadrant: the law evolves slower than technology. The ethical question for an IT professional is rarely "is this legal?" — it is usually "is this right?"
Slide 5 of 13
Four Major Ethical Frameworks
No single framework answers every dilemma. Apply multiple; the most defensible decision survives scrutiny under several.
Stockholder
Friedman. A company's primary obligation is shareholder return within legal rules. Ethics = legal compliance.
Stakeholder
Freeman. Companies owe obligations to all affected parties — employees, customers, community — not only shareholders.
Utilitarian
Bentham, Mill. Choose actions that produce the greatest good for the greatest number. Outcomes matter.
Deontological
Kant. Some acts are inherently right or wrong, regardless of consequences. Duty matters more than outcome.
How to use them: when facing a hard call, apply each framework to the choice. If three of four say "stop," that's a strong signal — even if the fourth says "go."
Slide 6 of 13
Stockholder vs. Stakeholder
Same company, two very different views of who matters.
Stockholder lens
"Did this serve shareholders? Was it legal?" If yes to both, the action is justified.
Stakeholder lens
"Who is affected, and what do we owe each of them?" Obligations to many, weighed and balanced.
Slide 7 of 13
Utilitarian vs. Deontological
Two opposing intuitions about what makes an act ethical.
Utilitarian (consequence-based)
Question asked: What outcome maximizes net good?
Bentham & Mill: sum the harms and benefits across all affected parties; pick the option with the largest positive sum.
Strength: matches how policy decisions are made.
Risk: can justify harming a minority for the benefit of a majority.
Deontological (duty-based)
Question asked: Is the act itself right or wrong?
Kant's categorical imperative: act only on principles you could will to be universal laws for all rational agents.
Strength: protects individual rights from utilitarian arithmetic.
Risk: can produce rigid outcomes that ignore real-world consequences.
Slide 8 of 13
Ethical Decision-Making Process
Five steps. None are optional. Skipping the first two is the most common failure.
1Recognize: does this decision harm someone, violate rights, or conflict with a professional obligation? If yes, it's an ethical issue — not just a business call.
2Facts: who is affected? What are the realistic options? What is known and unknown? Resist deciding while still ignorant.
3Options: what does each ethical framework say about each option? Don't reach for one framework and stop.
4Decide: which option survives scrutiny under the most frameworks? Which obligations are non-negotiable?
5Reflect: was the decision right? What would you change? How does this inform future decisions?
Slide 9 of 13
Case Study: VW Emissions
A textbook ethics failure not because one person made a wrong decision, but because hundreds did.
The defeat device, in software: Volkswagen engineers programmed diesel engine control units to detect when a vehicle was undergoing emissions testing and activate full emissions controls during the test only. During normal driving, the controls were disabled, and engines emitted NOx at up to 40× the legal limit. Approximately 11 million vehicles globally carried the device.
The institutional pattern: the decision was not made by one rogue engineer. It was the product of incremental institutional decisions made over six years by engineers, managers, and executives who prioritized regulatory compliance performance over actual emissions reduction. Many people knew. None said stop.
$30B+
Eventual loss in market capitalization once exposed.
6 years
Duration the defeat device went undetected (2009-2015).
Slide 10 of 13
VW Defeat Device Timeline
Two parallel realities for six years — what VW knew, what the world saw — until one outside study collapsed both.
The two realities collapsed in one moment. ICCT and West Virginia University ran on-road emissions tests in May 2014 to validate VW's clean-diesel claims for the European market. Instead, they found NOx readings 5-35× the lab values. Sixteen months of investigation followed. In Sept 2015, the EPA issued the notice of violation. The cover-up was over.
Slide 11 of 13
VW Through Each Framework
Three of four frameworks condemn the defeat device. The fourth's "approval" lasted only as long as the secret.
Stockholder
Defeat device enabled competitive positioning and market share growth — aligned with shareholder interest until exposure caused $30B+ loss. Even Friedman's framework fails when the act is illegal.
Stakeholder
Violated obligations to customers (deceived about the product they bought), communities (NOx health effects), regulators (deliberate evasion), and employees (career consequence of institutional fraud).
Utilitarian
Short-term market gain does not outweigh health harm to millions exposed to elevated NOx over years, plus systemic harm to regulatory integrity. Net good is deeply negative.
Deontological
Deliberate deception of regulators and customers is wrong regardless of outcome. The defeat device was a lie encoded in software. No outcome calculation changes the duty violation.
What it took: a software engineer in 2009 told to "implement a feature in the engine control unit that behaves differently during test cycles." Not told why. Told it was a "calibration optimization." That moment — before knowing the full picture — is when the personal code matters most.
Slide 12 of 13
Personal Code & the Transparency Test
Professional codes set the floor. A personal code is what stops you from drifting below it.
The Transparency Test: if you would not be comfortable having your decision — and your reasoning for it — reported on the front page of a national newspaper, the decision requires further ethical analysis before proceeding.
Slide 13 of 13
Module 1 Summary
Overview of Ethics — key takeaways.
1Three domains: morality (individual), ethics (group/profession), law (society). They overlap but never perfectly.
2Most IT ethics work is in the legal-but-unethical quadrant — the law evolves slower than technology.
3Four frameworks: Stockholder (Friedman), Stakeholder (Freeman), Utilitarian (Bentham/Mill), Deontological (Kant).
4Apply multiple frameworks. If three of four say "stop," that's a strong signal — even if the fourth says "go."
5Five-step decision process: Recognize → Facts → Options → Decide → Reflect. Skipping the first two is the most common failure.
6VW lesson: systemic ethics failures are made of individually small compromises in cultures where dissent is discouraged. The personal code is what breaks the drift.
7Five professional relationships: employer, client, supplier, user, society. Obligations to all.
8Transparency Test: if it can't be reported publicly without embarrassment, it needs more analysis.
Next up: Module 2 — Ethics for IT Professionals. Codes of conduct, the five professional relationships in depth, and what it means to be a profession.