DP3

DecisionPoint
http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#DecisionPoint

DP3

Should Engineer B accept the peer review engagement as structured under the franchiser's confidentiality instruction, seek clarification of the instruction's basis before proceeding, or decline the engagement unless the franchiser permits prior notification to Engineer A?

Before accepting the franchiser's peer review engagement, Engineer B received an explicit instruction not to disclose the new engagement to Engineer A. This instruction was facially anomalous — a client directing a successor engineer to conceal a peer review from the incumbent whose active work is under evaluation. Engineer B must decide at the point of engagement whether to accept the engagement as structured, seek clarification of the franchiser's reasons for the confidentiality instruction, or decline the engagement unless notification terms are renegotiated.

Proceed with the peer review engagement as structured under the franchiser's confidentiality instruction, treating the client's direction as a binding engagement term and managing any resulting conflict between faithful agency and peer notification duties after the fact.

Before accepting the engagement, ask the franchiser to explain the basis for the confidentiality instruction and explore whether modified engagement terms — permitting at least minimal notification to Engineer A — could satisfy both the client's transition interests and the Code's peer review notification requirement.

Refuse to accept the peer review engagement unless the franchiser agrees to permit prior notification to Engineer A, treating the confidentiality instruction as structurally incompatible with the Code's peer notification obligation and placing responsibility for any resulting delay on the franchiser's decision to impose an ethically incompatible instruction.

Engineer B