Writing Assignment 2

Due Week 15

Format for papers:

1. Double-space

2. No cover sheet or report cover.

3. Title in top center: Paper #2

4. Name in top right corner with IME 4020 and date (single spaced).

5. One-inch margins all around with 12 point font, Times New Roman preferred.

Submission Requirements

E-mail to: Gmail address given on the syllabus

Grading Rubric:

Papers will have a maximum grade of 10 points based on the subjective evaluation of the instructor: 7.5-10 points – Thoughtful response that reflects some depth of thinking on the topic. Not trite or superficial with little or no fluff (see box included with assignment #2 below for an example of “fluff”). Well-written with very few grammatical and/or spelling errors. Score 10 are reserved for exemplary papers that exhibit reflective thought as well as good analysis. (Note: Students who have difficulty writing should ask for proof reading assistance from friends or other qualified people. The Writing Center is also available to help students with this type of work)

5-7.4 Met the requirements but without any notable insight or discovery. Moderate depth of thinking. May have grammatical and/or spelling errors. May have had too much “fluff”. 2.5-4.9 Met some of the requirements, but not all. May not have shown signs of gaining insight or learning. May contain a lot of facts that would be considered common knowledge. Little depth and perhaps too many generalities. May be very poorly written.

<=2.4 Did not meet requirements

————————————–

Paper 2:

(1) Choose one of the characters in “incident at Morales”case:

Fred, Wally or Chuck.

· Analyze his action/decision and involved impediments.

· Demonstrate and discuss the ethical issues involved and your comments.

(2) From the list shown below, choose two question about the case and answer.

(3) Write a paper, 2-3 pages

This is an individual assignment .

1. On Fred’s first day, Wally says “We’re fast at Phaust.” How might engineering decisions be affected by a corporate culture that emphasizes speed?

2. Chuck alludes to inflating the budget as a hedge against potential budget cuts:

a) What is the difference between inflating a budget and providing contingency funds as a line item?

b) What happens to a project when engineers are faced with budget cuts.

3. Chuck’s brother-in-law is the U.S. representative for Lutz and Lutz. What ethical questions does the procurement process raise when the in-law of a corporate officer works for the supplier? How does this situation look from the viewpoint of other potential suppliers?

4. At SuisseChem, personnel in operations work with engineering personnel in designing chemical plants, but at Phaust, operations and engineering are clearly separate. What are the implications of separating engineering from operations?

5. While talking with Peter, Fred is inspired to make the couplings a maintenance issue, specifying that the couplings should be replaced regularly. Is it appropriate to convert design decisions into maintenance procedures without including operations people in the decision process?

6. Although the chemical process was supposed to be automated, Fred allowed Manuel to volunteer to control the process manually. Is this reasonable?