Ethical Expectations in the Computerized Office

Wayne Machuca
Northcentral University

November, 2005

Introduction

The conversation of ethics in a computerized society has become desperate as well as disparate. The reason why computer ethics is a difficult issue with which to deal is that the technology changes so quickly that it is difficult for administrators and security agents keep up and administer standards, codes, and rules for use (Artz, 1995). Furthermore, creating a definition of “computer ethics” is a difficult task. Moor (1985) of attempts this definition:

“On my view, computer ethics is the analysis of the nature and social impact of computer technology and the corresponding formulation and justification of policies for the ethical use of such technology. I use the phrase “computer technology” because I take the subject matter of the field broadly to include computers and associated technology. For instance, I include concerns about software as well as hardware and concerns about networks connecting computers as well as computers themselves.”

Additionally, the Brookings Institute’s Computer Ethics Institute (CEI) attempts a sort of “10 commandments of computer ethics” (Table 1) (“Ten Commandments”, 1992) which looks ominously familiar as a sort of blending of Isaac Asimov’s “I, Robot” and Deuteronomy 20. Of note in CEI’s version of the 10 commandments are admonitions to not use the computer to lie, cheat, or steal.

Shelly, Cashman, & Vermaat (2006) define computer ethics as “the moral guidelines that govern the use of computers and information systems.” In this definition, the guidelines are placed squarely on the users of the systems and the methodology they use to employ their tasks.

Computer ethics incorporates a tremendous amount of territory which is frequently broken into six areas of “unauthorized use of computers and networks, software theft (piracy), information accuracy, intellectual property rights, codes of conduct, and information privacy” (Shelly, 2006). Each of these are vast topics of which some can be incorporated into entire industries (such as virus protection, piracy protection or authentication protocols).

Working in an office environment, it seems, has gone through an interesting social transformation over the last several decades (see also Meierdiercks, 2005). Whereas in times past, office data controls were limited to locked file drawers and safes, and a company’s exposure was limited to what a worker could carry. A computerized working environment has led to a culture of distrust (Bennett, 2003). The aforementioned industrialized protections are typically designed to protect the organization’s data and networks from destruction both intentional and unintentional. For the ethical worker, the issue is not so much one of distrust that the employees will do something improper, but that even a slightest error could have repercussions throughout.

This essay will focus on the ethical issues facing the typical ethical office worker and the personal responsibility they must endure in a modern office environment.

Working in a computerized office

Even with all of the controls installed in a computerized office environment, a new worker is often amazed by the amount of data to which they have access. Additionally, as workers become more adept in computer usage, the same may become comfortable with the software, networking, and Internet speeds available. These features can become quite the temptation for even the best intentioned worker.

While this paper will attempt to avoid being a list of “don’ts” or “thou shalt not’s” (a la “Ten Commandments”, 1992), there are some areas of personal responsibility that the worker must understand and acknowledge. All of the equipment, computers, data stores, software, networks, and the electricity to run them, as well as the desk, walls, lighting, air conditioning, and every single office supply right down to the last paper clip belong to the company and are to be for the exclusive use of the company, period. While a worker may be assigned to a desk, it is not “her desk”; and if there is a computer to which that worker is assigned, it is not “her computer”; and if that computer has access to a particular corporate email account, even if that account contains her name before the @ symbol, it is not “her email”. If the worker runs a small business out of their work station (see also Lardner, 1999), they are stealing time and resources from the company. If the worker uses the computer for personal reasons (not limited to storing data, music, or pictures), these resources are being stolen from the organization. Even if the worker is using their email for personal messages, the worker is stealing services from the organization. Additionally, companies can track this sort of activity on the employee even without the employee’s knowledge or approval (Lardner, 1999; see also Moseley, 2005).

The question is not one of magnitude. Stealing is stealing whether it is millions of dollars or a single CPU cycle. While the punishment may indeed be different, the action of stealing is indistinguishable. The defense of such actions cannot be that it was only one paper clip, or it was only one email, or it was only a small business. Such justifications can all too easily lead to harsher infractions. A simple download can end up costing an organization hundreds of thousands (cite the grandfather sued by MPAA for downloads).

The typical computerized office worker, unlike any worker before, will have access to an incredible amount of personal data, corporate data, customer data and more. The temptations for gain are greater than ever before, and the ability to walk away with gigabytes of data is easier than ever before (“8GB”, 2005). As such, the offer worker must have greater control of their own personal responsibility than ever before. Today’s worker must be an area of trust and competency.

Table 1.

The Ten Commandments of Computer Ethics.

1.	Thou Shalt Not Use A Computer To Harm Other People.
2.	Thou Shalt Not Interfere With Other People’s Computer Work.
3.	Thou Shalt Not Snoop Around In Other People’s Computer Files.
4.	Thou Shalt Not Use A Computer To Steal.
5.	Thou Shalt Not Use A Computer To Bear False Witness.
6.	Thou Shalt Not Copy Or Use Proprietary Software For Which You have Not Paid.
7.	Thou Shalt Not Use Other People’s Computer Resources Without Authorization Or Proper Compensation.
8.	Thou Shalt Not Appropriate Other People’s Intellectual Output.
9.	Thou Shalt Think About The Social Consequences Of The Program You Are Writing Or The System You Are Designing.
10.	Thou Shalt Always Use A Computer In Ways That Insure Consideration And Respect For Your Fellow Humans.

References

“8GB 4x Pro 2 Series USB 2.0 Flash Drive”. (2005). Retrieved from the CompUSA Web Site at http://www.compusa.com/products/ product_info.asp?product_code=50751729&pfp=BROWSE.

Artz, J.M. (1995). Dialectic Values Clarification: Putting Virtue into Practice. Retrieved on November 14, 2005 from the Computer Ethics Institute Web site at http://www.brookings.edu/its/cei/papers/Artz_Dialect_1995.htm.

Bennett, C. (2003). Ethics in business – professional development series. Boston, MA: Thompson South-Western. 2. Retrieved on November 6, 2005 from http://www.swep.com/swepstuff/previews/files/careerreadiness/0538726164/ethics_ch01.pdf#search='computer%20office%20ethics.

Lardner, J. (1999, November 8). Every click you make…. U.S. News and World Report 127(18), 69.

Meierdiercks, K. (2005, Spring). The Dark Side of the Laptop University. Journal of Information Ethics 14(1), 9-11.

Moor, J.H. (1985). What is Computer Ethics? Retrieved on November 14, 2005 from http://www.southernct.edu/organizations/rccs/resources/teaching/teaching_mono/moor/moor_definition.html.

Moseley, J.A. (2005). The Fourth Amendment and Remote Searches: Balancing the Protection of "The People" with the Remote Investigation of Internet Crimes. Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics, & Public Policy 19 (1), 355-78.

Shelly, G.B., Cashman, T.J., Vermaat, M.E. (2006). Discovering computers 2006: a gateway to information. Boston, MA: Course Technology.