This 50-minute team-based, interactive activity immerses students in real-world scenarios where they must navigate multiple technical, ethical, and business decisions - each leading to unique outcomes. Students face outside influences, such as managerial decisions or tests results, introduced through games of chance. This aspect mimics the unpredictability and external risks often faced in industry, encouraging students to assess and manage risk effectively.

The activity emphasizes ethical-decision-making and persistence. As students encounter setbacks, they are encouraged to adapt their strategies and persist in their efforts to reach a positive outcome. Moreover, students must make decisions not only in the best interest of the project but also with awareness of potential long-term consequences.

The decision-making process highlights the need for balancing cost vs. safety, competitive advantage vs. ethical responsibility, and immediate needs vs. long-term value. The opportunity to reflect on the impact of their decisions encourages students to think beyond the immediate context and consider how their choices influence broader outcomes.

This activity is appropriate for any group with some technical knowledge, from high school students and first-year engineering students, through senior undergraduate students, graduate students, professional advisory boards, and faculty.

This project was described in a presentation at ASEE 2021 in the Innovative, Engaging Pedagogies for Engineering Ethics Education conference session.

Scenarios

Case Scenario A: Automotive Defect

This scenario is based on the GM ignition switch scandal which began in 2004 when engineers learned that faulty switches could unexpectedly shut off power, disabling steering, airbags, and the engine. Despite fatal crashes, GM delayed a recall, issuing only a service bulletin in 2005. A redesigned part was quietly introduced in 2007 without a new part number, complicating investigations. In 2014, CEO Mary Barra ordered a recall of 2.6 million vehicles. GM was fined $35 million for delayed reporting and faced $1.25 billion in recall costs. Ultimately, the defect was linked to 124 deaths.

   Ethical considerations addressed:

• Weighing costs vs. safety
• Ignoring test results
• Tracking device changes
• When to issue recalls
• Issuing unbiased reports

Case Study B: Biomedical Device

This scenario is based on the 2005 recalls of Medtronic’s Marquis™ and Guidant’s Ventak™ implantable defibrillators due to similar battery failure issues. In February, Medtronic warned physicians that certain devices could experience rapid battery depletion, requiring surgical replacement. Guidant, despite knowing of the issue for three years and reporting it to the FDA, only recalled its devices in May after a patient’s death. Guidant had documented 25 similar cases but did not inform physicians. The case led the FDA to revise its filing process.

   Ethical considerations addressed:

• Weighing potential mortality rates
• Sharing competitive/confidential information
• When to issue recalls
• Issuing unbiased reports

Materials

Case study cards printed double-sided (66 cards for the biomedical scenario, 55 cards for the automotive scenario) - 1 case per ~20 students, both cases can be run simultaneously (laminated cards can be reused)

Games of chance poster

Games of chance:

• big foam dice
• 8x11-inch super jumbo playing cards
• 12-inch heavy duty spinning wheel with 10 color slots, 5 colors repeated
• green, blue, and white marbles
• jumbo coin

Clipboards, one for each team

"Documentation of student decision" form, one for each student

"Ethical game reflections" sheet, one for each student