Automotive case

''Decision'' You decide to ignore the abnormal test. The senior engineer comes back, and you move onto another project. You are off working successfully when you hear a report that there has been a fatal car crash. The report showed that Amber Marie Rose, 16, was driving when the ignition switched from run mode into accessory mode. This caused the motor and power steering to shut off and the car ran into a tree. The airbags did not go off because power to the safety devices also does not work in accessory mode. You realize this is likely what happened in the technician’s original failed test. What do you do next? 1 [[Let the senior engineer investigate the failure. ->6A]] 2 [[Inform your manager of the situation. ->7A]] 3 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->8A]]

''Decision'' You are off working successfully on another project when you hear a report that there has been a fatal car crash. The report shows that Amber Marie Rose, 16, was driving when the ignition switched from run into accessory mode. The motor and power steering shut off and the car ran into a tree. The airbag did not go off because power to the safety devices also does not work in accessory mode. You speak to the manager who tells you to work quickly with the senior engineer to fix the problem on the next lot of cars. You find that the ignition switch can be redesigned at a cost of $0.90 per car. The senior engineer wants to keep the part number the same between the old and new switches to avoid confusion and to speed up the paperwork process, given that this is only a minor change. The senior engineer says it will also keep people from overblowing the minor issue. What should you do? 1 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars and keep the part number the same. Total cost $200,000. ->6C]] 2 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars. and change the part number. Total cost $200,000 and ~3 months delay due to paperwork. ->2B]] 3 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->2C]]

''Decision'' The manager decided to send the safety memo but wants to redesign the ignition switch. The manager tells you to work quickly with the senior engineer to fix the problem on the next set of cars. The senior engineer wants to keep the part number the same to avoid confusion and speed up the paperwork process since it is a minor change. The senior engineer wants to keep the part number the same between the old and new switches to avoid confusion and to speed up the paperwork process, given that this is only a minor change. The senior engineer says it will also keep people from overblowing the minor issue. What should you do? 1 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars and keep the part number the same. Total cost $200,000. ->6B]] 2 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars. and change the part number. Total cost $200,000 and ~3 months delay due to paperwork.->7C]] 3 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->8B]]

''Decision'' Production is stopped and the new car launch delayed. Since you know the issue well, the CEO wants you to write a technical bulletin for the shareholders about the reason for the stop of production and launch delay. Your manager suggests deflecting some of the blame to the ignition switch supplier for not making the part to original specifications even though the senior engineer agreed to accept the lower specification parts. Otherwise, the blame will go to the senior engineer, who will be fired. What do you write? 1 [[Write an objective report stating the facts without concern for blame. ->2E]] 2 [[Modify your report, deflecting some blame and saving the senior engineer’s career. ->4D]]

''Decision'' The manager wants you to work quickly with the senior engineer to fix the problem on the next lot of cars. You find that the ignition switch can be redesigned at a cost of $0.90 per car. The senior engineer wants to keep the part number the same between the old and new switches to avoid confusion and to speed up the paperwork process, given that this is only a minor change. The senior engineer says it will also keep people from overblowing the minor issue. What should you do? 1 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars and keep the part number the same. Total cost $200,000. ->6C]] 2 [[Fix the problem by changing the part for the next lot of cars. and change the part number. Total cost $200,000 and ~3 months delay due to paperwork. ->2B]] 3 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->2C]]

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You talk to the service technician and point out how important this testing is and what it could mean to the technician’s career. You stress that the technician should retest very carefully before bringing the results to you. To see the results of the test, (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[click here. ->4C]]','[[click here. ->3D]]','[[click here. ->3D]]')

''Decision'' The redesigned ignition switch was implemented which fixed the problem on the next lot of cars. The part number was changed to help maintain records of the changes. In the meantime, there have been reports of 13 more crashes (four more fatalities) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is looking into it. The manager says not to talk to anyone unless directly asked about the ignition switch change. The manager says it is not certain that the ignition switch is the cause and everyone in the division will be fired including you if it is determined to be. What should you do? 1 [[Let the NHTSA investigate the failure without your help. ->5E]] 2 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->8C]]

''Decision'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the possibility that the ignition switch caused the accident and what your department has done so far. She immediately issues an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal crash. All future vehicles will use the redesigned switch under a new part number. A recall begins on all existing cars to undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. Since you understand the issue, you are asked to write a technical bulletin about the problem which will be released to the public. During the review process, the public relations writer suggests deflecting some of the blame to the ignition switch supplier for not making the part to original specification even though the senior engineer agreed to accept the lower specification parts. What do you write? 1 [[Write an objective report stating the facts without concern for blame. ->3C]] 2 [[Use the suggestion and modify your report deflecting some of the blame. ->5B]]

''Outcome'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the ignition switch possibly causing the accidents. She immediately demands an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal and non-fatal crashes. A massive recall begins because it cannot be determined when the redesigned switch was implemented. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 12 crashes and 6 deaths. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $800 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your role. Your whistleblower status protects your job, but your reputation is partially damaged due to your involvement in the issue. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened in this case [[click here. ->9]]

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You write an objective factual technical bulletin detailing how in final product testing a potentially dangerous error was found and how production was immediately stopped to err on the side of consumer safety. GM accepts responsibility for the near-miss and begins using this as a training incident. The senior engineer is demoted for his role in approving the defective ignition switches. (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[Click here to see how the supplier responds. ->3E]]','[[Click here to see how the supplier responds. ->4E]]','[[Click here to see how the supplier responds. ->4E]]')

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You use the whistleblower policy and write the CEO of the potential problem. The CEO thanks you but wonders why you did not pass the information up the regular chain of command. The CEO assigns your manager to investigate it. Your manager is furious with you for going over their head but cannot fire you due to whistleblowing protections. You investigate and find that the ignition switch turns the car from run mode to accessory mode if the key chain is too heavy or jostled just right. This means power to the engine/power steering/brakes/safety devices (such as airbags) is immediately cut. The senior engineer noted this unlikely scenario and planned to send a safety memo out to all car dealerships to prevent people from having overly heavy key rings. At this point it will cost $0.90 / per car (a $400,000 fix) to install the safer redesigned ignition switches and a one year delay to launch. You inform your manager. Your manager (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[sends out the memo but does not initiate the change to the new switches. ->1B]]', '[[sends out the memo and initiates the change to the new switches. ->1C]]', '[[sends out the memo and initiates the change to the new switches. ->1C]]', '[[delays production. ->1D]]', '[[delays production. ->1D]]')

''Outcome'' You email the CEO, Mary Barra, and let her know about the ignition switch possibly causing the accidents. She immediately issues an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal and non-fatal crashes. A massive recall begins on all cars made before the ignition switch was redesigned. Each car must undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 15 crashes and 8 deaths. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $1 billion in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your decisions and role in this scandal. Your whistleblower status protects your job, but your reputation is partially damaged due to your involvement in the issue. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened in this case [[click here. ->9]]

''Decision'' The re-test shows no problem. The senior engineer comes back, and you move onto another job. You are off working successfully on another project when you hear a report that there has been a fatal car crash. The report shows that Amber Marie Rose, 16, was driving when the ignition switched from run mode into accessory mode. The motor and power steering shut off and the car ran into a tree. The airbag did not go off because power to the safety devices also does not work in accessory mode. You realize this is like the technician’s original test results. What do you do next? 1 [[Let the senior engineer investigate the failure. ->6A]] 2 [[Inform your manager of the situation. ->7A]] 3 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->8A]]

''Outcome'' You continue to work with the supplier and lead the project. Through your hard work and luck, the supplier manages to get the redesigned ignition switches to you ahead of schedule. Instead of a year delay, the stop of production only lasts 3 months. Overall, the budget overages only cost ~$400,000 which is exceptionally good with this type of major issue. Your reputation as both an engineer and a good project leader grows. You soon get promoted to bigger projects and have a great career. This is a possible outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal if the engineers had acted more ethically. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outside Influence (random event) '' You inform the manager of the faulty test. The manager tells you that you can’t ignore the test but acknowledges the technician’s previous bad history. The manager's decision is as follows: (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[The manager tells you to have the technician retest. ->2A]]','[[The manager tells you to conduct a retest. ->5A]]','[[The manager tells you to conduct a retest. ->5A]]')

''Outcome'' The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 10 crashes and 1 deaths. GM must pay a $5 million-dollar civil penalty and $3 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You write an objective factual technical bulletin. The media regards you as an ethical whistleblower who prevented further deaths. You remain working at GM. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. To read what really happened in this case [[click here. ->9]]

''Decision'' The test is repeated with the same results as before. You investigate further and see that the ignition switch turns the car from run to accessory mode meaning power to the engine/power steering/brakes/safety devices (such as airbags) is immediately cut out if the key chain is too heavy and/or jostled just right. The senior engineer noted this as unlikely but planned to send a safety memo out to all car dealerships to deter people from having large heavy key rings. At this point it will cost $0.90 / per car (a $400,000 fix) to install the safe redesigned ignition switches and delay the launch by a year. You must recommend a plan of action to your manager, what do you recommend? Write down your answer and [[click here. ->7B]] 1) Go with the original plan of sending out a memo to stop the problem but keep everything on schedule and budget. 2) Send out the memo but change the ignition switch for the next lot of cars, keeping you on schedule but not on budget (a $200,000 fix). 3) Stop production to get it fixed immediately costing $400,000 and delaying the launch. 4) Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO without informing your manager.

''Outcome'' You write the technical bulletin deflecting some of the blame towards the ignition switch supplier. The CEO releases this technical bulletin to the media. The supplier immediately sues GM for libel and $1 million in damages. The media find outs and uses this as an example of GM covering up problems. GM’s reputation, already hurt by the production delay, goes down along with its stocks. You are demoted as a lead engineer on the project and your reputation is severely damaged. This is a possible outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' You continue to work with the supplier and lead the project. Through your hard work, production is restarted, and the new car is launched with a year delay. Overall, the budget overages only cost ~$800,000 which is exceptionally good with this type of major issue. Your reputation as both an engineer and a good project leader grows. This is a possible outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal if the engineers had acted more ethically. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You know how important this project is and decide to investigate the failure yourself. You attempt to replicate the test. (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[Click here to see the outcome of your test. ->4C]]', '[[Click here to see the outcome of your test. ->3D]]')

''Outcome'' The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 10 crashes and 1 deaths. GM must pay a $5 million-dollar civil penalty and $5 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You write the technical bulletin as the media relations person suggests, placing some of the blame on the supplier. The supplier immediately sues GM for libel and $1 million in damages. The media finds out and uses this as another example of GM covering up problems. GM's reputation, already damaged by the recall, goes down further along with its stocks. Your whistleblower status saves your job but your reputation, which was partially damaged due to your involvement in the issue, is further diminished by the technical bulletin. You are not promoted to any other ranks. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' It takes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) an additional 3 years before they realize there is a correlation due to the same part number on the redesigned switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 31 crashes and 13 deaths. GM is forced to issue a recall on 3.2 million cars since they cannot definitively determine when the new fixed switches were installed. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $1.2 billion in recall related expenses. The CEO fires you and places all of the blame on you, your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your role. Your reputation in the field is destroyed since you did not follow the engineering code of ethics. You cannot find another job in this field. This is the outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. To read the details of what happened, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 10 crashes and 1 deaths. GM must pay a $5 million-dollar civil penalty and $3 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You write the technical bulletin as the public relations person suggests, placing some of the blame on the supplier. The supplier immediately sues GM for libel and $1 million in damages. The media find outs and uses this as another example of GM covering up problems. GM’s reputation, already damaged by the recall, goes down along with its stocks. Your whistleblower status saves your job but your reputation, which was partially damaged due to your involvement in the issue, is further diminished by the technical bulletin. You are not promoted to any other ranks. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) quickly realizes that there is a correlation between the crash and the redesigned switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 20 crashes and 10 deaths. GM is force to issue a recall on 2 million cars. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $1 billion in recall related expenses. The CEO places all the blame on you, your manager and the senior engineer. You are fired from GM and must testify before congress about your role. Your reputation in the field is destroyed since you did not follow the engineering code of ethics. You cannot find another job in this field. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened, [[click here. ->9]]

''Decision'' The senior engineer continues to work on the project while you move onto another job. The senior engineer redesigns the ignition switch which fixes the problem on the next lot of cars but keeps the part number for the ignition switches the same. In the meantime, there have been reports of 13 more similar crashes (with four more fatalities) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating. Your manager says not to talk to anyone unless directly asked about the ignition switch change. The manager says it is not certain that the ignition switch is the cause and everyone in the division will be fired including you if it is determined to be. What should you do? 1 [[Let the NHTSA investigate the failure without your help. ->5C]] 2 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->3B]]

''Decision'' The ignition switch was redesigned without changing the part number which fixed the problem on the next lot of cars. The report shows that Amber Marie Rose, 16, was driving when the ignition switched from run into accessory mode. The motor and power steering shut off and the car ran into a tree. The airbag did not go off because power to the safety devices also does not work in accessory mode. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is looking into it. Your manager says not to talk to anyone because the problem has been fixed and everyone in the division will be fired including you for your part in this. What should you do? 1 [[Let the NHTSA investigate the failure without your help. ->8D]] 2 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->2D]]

''Decision'' The redesigned ignition switch was implemented without changing the part number. This fixed the problem on the next lot of cars. In the meantime, there have been reports of 13 more crashes (four more fatalities) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is investigating the crashes. Your manager says not to talk to anyone unless directly asked about the ignition switch change. The manager says it is not certain that the ignition switch is the cause and everyone in the division will be fired including you if it is determined to be. What should you do? 1 [[Let the NHTSA investigate the failure without your help. ->5C]] 2 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->3B]]

''Outcome'' The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) quickly realizes there is a correlation between the crash and the redesigned switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 12 crashes and 6 deaths. GM is force to issue a recall on 2 million cars. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $800 million in recall related expenses. The CEO places all the blame on you, your manager and the senior engineer. You are fired from GM and must testify before congress about your role. Your reputation in the field is destroyed since you did not follow the engineering code of ethics. You cannot find another job in this field. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' You use the whistleblower policy and write the CEO of the potential problem. The CEO thanks you but wonders why you did not pass the information up the regular chain of command. The CEO insists that you stop production immediately and assigns your manager to investigate. Your manager is furious with you for going over their head but cannot fire you due to whistleblower protections. [[Click here to see what follows. ->1D]]

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You speak to the manager about your suspicions that the fatal crash is related to the ignition switch. Your manger's decision is as follows: ''(seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[The manager tells you that the senior engineer will investigate it. ->6A]]', '[[The manager tells you to investigate the problem with the senior engineer. ->1E]]')''

''Outside Influence (random event)'' You give your recommendations and support to your manager. The manager will take care of it and puts you on another job. If you contacted the CEO, [[click here. ->6E]] Otherwise, your manager's next actions are as follows: (seed:(string:$seed))(either: '[[Your manager sends out the memo but does not initiate the change of ignition switches.->1B]]', '[[Your manager sends out the memo and initiates the change of ignition switches. ->1C]]', '[[Your manager delays production. ->1D]]', 'Your manager goes with your recommendation. Click the appropriate choice: [[1 The manager should send out the memo but not initiate any further changes. ->1B]] [[2 The manager should send out the memo and initiate the change in ignition switches. ->1C]] [[3 The manager should delay production. ->1D]]', 'Your manager goes with your recommendation. Click the appropriate choice: [[1 The manager should send out the memo but not initiate any further changes. ->1B]] [[2 The manager should send out the memo and initiate the change in ignition switches. ->1C]] [[3 The manager should delay production. ->1D]]')

''Decision'' The ignition switch was redesigned with a new part number which fixed the problem on the next lot of cars. You hear of a report that Amber Marie Rose, 16, was driving an older car when the ignition switched from run into accessory mode. The motor and power steering shut off and the car ran into a tree. The airbag did not go off because power to the safety devices also does not work in accessory mode. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is looking into it along with 10 more crashes (two more fatalities). The manager says not to talk to anyone because the problem has been fixed and everyone in the division will be fired including you for your part in this. What should you do? 1 [[Let the NHTSA investigate the failure without your help. ->6D]] 2 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->8E]]

''Decision'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the possible ignition switch issue causing the accident. She immediately demands an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal crash. It is found that the switch can be redesigned for $0.90 per car. All future vehicles will use the redesigned switch. A recall begins on all existing cars to undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. Since you understand the issue, you are asked to draft a technical bulletin about the problem which will be released to the public. During the review process, the public relations writer suggests deflecting some of the blame to the ignition switch supplier for not making the part to original specification, even though the senior engineer agreed to take the lower specification parts. What do you write? 1 [[Use the suggestion and modify your report deflecting some of the blame. ->5B]] 2 [[Write an objective report stating the facts without concern for blame. ->3C]]

''Decision'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the possibility that the ignition switch caused the accidents and what your department has done so far. She immediately demands an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal crash. All future vehicles will use the redesigned switch under a new part number. A recall begins on all existing cars to undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. Since you understand the issue, you are asked to write a technical bulletin about the problem which will be released to the public. During the review process, the public relations writer suggests deflecting some of the blame to the ignition switch supplier for not making the part to original specification even though the senior engineer agreed to accept the lower specification parts. What do you write? 1 [[Write an objective report stating the facts without concern for blame. ->4B]] 2 [[Use the suggestion and modify your report deflecting some of the blame. ->5D]]

''Outcome'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the ignition switch causing the accidents. She immediately demands an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal and non-fatal crashes. A massive recall begins on all cars made before the ignition switch was redesigned. Each car must undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 15 crashes and 8 deaths. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $900 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your role. Your whistleblower status protects your job, but your reputation is partially damaged due to your involvement in the issue. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' It takes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) an additional 3 years before they realize that there is a correlation due to the same part number on the redesigned switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 15 crashes and 7 deaths. GM is force to issue a recall on 3.2 million cars since they cannot determine when the new fixed switches were installed. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $1 billion in recall related expenses. The CEO fires you and places all the blame on you, your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your role. Your reputation in the field is destroyed since you did not follow the engineering code of ethics. You cannot find another job in this field. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Outcome'' You email the CEO Mary Barra and let her know about the ignition switch causing the accidents. She immediately demands an internal investigation which concludes that the ignition switch caused the fatal and non-fatal crashes. A massive recall begins on all cars made before the ignition switch was redesigned. Each car must undergo a $10 per car repair to replace the faulty ignition switch. The faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 12 crashes and 6 deaths. GM must pay a $35 million-dollar civil penalty and $800 million in recall related expenses. The CEO fires your manager and the senior engineer. You must testify before congress about your role. Your whistleblower status protects your job, but your reputation is partially damaged due to your involvement of the issue. This could have been an outcome of the GM ignition switch scandal. You made similar decisions to the real engineers in the case. To read what really happened in this case, [[click here. ->9]]

''Summary'': This scenario is based on the GM ignition switch scandal. In 2004, GM engineers had reports of faulty ignition-switch failures that caused the vehicle to switch from run mode to accessory mode during operation with minimal pressure (such as a key chain, a large bump, hitting the key with your knee). This caused the power to be cut immediately to the engine, power steering, and safety modes such as airbags. The failure was a result of one part on the ignition switch being less than 2mm short, thus not meeting specifications. The defectively short parts were approved. In 2005, the engineers did not deem this enough of an issue to start a recall and instead a service bulletin was sent out to advise customers “to remove heavy items from their key rings”. Amber Marie Rose was the first reported death attributed to this issue. DeGiorgio, a GM engineer who approved the part in the first place, redesigned the part and implemented the new parts without a part number change in 2007. There were several investigations including two from the NHTSA, who struggled to find a correlation without knowledge of the part number change. In 2013, GM concluded that the fatal crashes were linked to the ignition switch and was to be blamed for 31 crashes and 13 deaths. In 2014, Mary Barra, GM’s CEO, issued a recall on 2.6 million vehicles and notified the NHTSA. The NHTSA determined GM delayed reporting the issue and issued a 35-million-dollar civil penalty. GM had around 1.25 billion dollars in recall expenses including a $595 million settlement fund. Eventually, there were 124 death claims attributed to this issue. This is an edited, digital adaptation of Fiegel, Rundlett, Bradley, and Murhammer's 2021 Choose Your Own Adventure activity. Fiegel, J., & Rundlett, B., & Bradley, A. A., & Murhammer, K. R. (2021, July), //Piloting an Ethics Choose-Your-Own Adventure Activity in Early Engineering Education// Paper presented at 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference. ''Further Reading:'' Wanasika, I., Conner, Suzanne; “General Motors: The ignition switch from hell” J. of Case Studies Nov. 2018 Vol. 36 Valikas, A. R.; “Report to Board of Directors of General Motors Company Regarding Ignition Switch Recalls.” Jenner & Block May 2014 (link:"https://www.aieg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Valukas-report-on-gm-redacted2.pdf")[(gotoURL:"https://www.aieg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Valukas-report-on-gm-redacted2.pdf")] Basu, T.; “Timeline: A history of GN’s Ignition Switch Defect” NPR Mar. 2014 (link:"https://www.npr.org/2014/03/31/297158876/timeline-a-history-of-gms-ignition-switch-defect")[(gotoURL:"https://www.npr.org/2014/03/31/297158876/timeline-a-history-of-gms-ignition-switch-defect")] Valdes-Dapena, P., Yellin, T.; “GM: Steps to a recall nightmare” CNN Money (link:"https://money.cnn.com/infographic/pf/autos/gm-recall-timeline/index.html")[(gotoURL:"https://money.cnn.com/infographic/pf/autos/gm-recall-timeline/index.html")] Blau, Max “No Accident: Inside GM’s deadly ignition switch scandal” Atlanta Jan. 2016 (link:"https://www.atlantamagazine.com/great-reads/no-accident-inside-gms-deadly-ignition-switch-scandal/")[(gotoURL:"https://www.atlantamagazine.com/great-reads/no-accident-inside-gms-deadly-ignition-switch-scandal/")] Gardella, Rich, Reynolds, Talesha; “Did GM Reject Safer Ignition Switch Design in 2001 Because of Cost?” NBC News April 2014 (link:"https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/gm-recall/did-gm-reject-safer-ignition-switch-design-2001-because-cost-n81526")[(gotoURL:"https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/gm-recall/did-gm-reject-safer-ignition-switch-design-2001-because-cost-n81526")]

Welcome! This is a choose your own adventure activity for engineering ethics students. In what follows, you will be asked to make decisions in response to information and events that are not always under your full control. The behavior of "the world" in this game is largely determined randomly, though some outcomes are more common than others. If you are playing with a group across multiple devices, you may want to enter a seed so that you can collectively experience the same outcomes in response to your group's choices. (link: "Click here to begin.")[ [(set: $seed to (random: 1, 100000))] (goto: "Beginning") ] (link: "Click here to set a seed.")[ (set: $seedText to (prompt: "Enter a seed or leave blank for random outcomes", "")) (if: $seedText is "")[(set: $seed to (random: 1, 10000)) ] (else: )[ (set: $seed to $seedText) ] (goto: "Beginning") ]

You are an engineer working at a large automotive manufacturer. Your manager has asked you to fill in for a senior design engineer while he takes vacation. He is working on the final pre-production testing and launch of a new car. This is a multi-million-dollar project. It is also your chance to prove yourself capable in leading these large projects if you can launch without delay or cost overages. The company has a whistleblower policy which means that you can contact the CEO at any point to report unethical behavior or safety issues. During the final stage of pre-production testing, a service technician reports that a car stopped running during a final driving test because of trouble with the ignition switch. This technician has a history of sloppy testing techniques and causing problems. You know if he makes another mistake, he will be fired. What is your next step? 1 [[Ignore the abnormal test due to probable technician error. ->1A]] 2 [[Allow the technician to run the test again. ->2A]] 3 [[Investigate the failure yourself. ->5A]] 4 [[Inform your manager of the situation. ->4A]] 5 [[Use the whistleblower policy to directly contact the CEO. ->3A]]