Question

Andrew, a highly qualified and experienced software developer, has just started work with a government health department on a project that has been underway for about 9 months. He is replacing a novice developer who has decided to move on to a new project with another organisation. Even though the current system is incomplete, it has is being used with 'live' data. On analysing what's been done so far, Andrew discovers that the system is poorly designed and is riddled with bugs due to the former developer's lack of expertise, and that the choice of technologies are incompatible with the department's infrastructure, leading to corruptions and loss of financial data on a daily basis. In fact, much of Andrew's time is initially spent unsuccessfully attempting to recover corrupted data. His vast experience leads him to the conclusion that the system is so unstable that it will eventually corrupt beyond repair and that all its data will become unrecoverable. He therefore advises the supervisor of his findings and recommends that the system be redeveloped using appropriate technologies and quality control measures. He indicates that the entire redevelopment effort will take less than 6 weeks. The supervisor rejects Andrew's recommendation, stating that their IT Department will not agree to a change in technology, and directs Andrew to complete the project using the existing technologies. What should Andrew do?

Q1. What's going on?

Q2. What are the facts?

Q3. What are the issues (non-ethical)?

Q4. Who is affected? ?

Answer 1

1. The organization seems to be trivializing the issue and is not understanding teh gravity of the situation. Moreover, many a times organizations become defensive towards change. This may be due to many factors. A certain way has been functional in an organization for years, and the need for change is likely to make most people associated with it uncomfortable due to the expectations it would bring forth of making the required adaptations and adjustments. Therefore, what needs to be focused on helping the organization and its members, especially the ones in lead to re-familiarize them with the inherent resilience and help create support groups within, in order to facilitate change in a smooth and effective manner.

2. The facts are that the organization is likely to suffer in future if this recommended change is not made. The fact that a certain individual member was assumed to indespensable is seen in a different light altogether may be a challenge to adapt to, however the true confrontation and united problem solving is what is likely to hep control te situation in this case.

3. The issues that are non-ethical at this point are the fact that the management is not looking into the suggested matter in elaborate detail and expecting its people to adjust within the availabiity of resources. However, no matter how painful the initial process of change may be, it is bringing about dire future consequences to face. The corrupted system may lead to irreplacable loss of data which is a huge cost for the organization to bear. This indeed needs special attention by recruiting more exprts in the fielf who can help mend the situation in the most effective and efficient manner.

4, The entire organization as well as all the members are likely to suffer in the given case. Also, any clientele who may be directly impacted by their nature of work is likely to suffer as a third party if this organization bears the brunt.