DP1

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

DP1

Should Engineer A proactively disclose WXY's three active contracts and their self-oversight implications to City H officials before any city engineer appointment discussion begins, or defer to City H's own deliberative process to surface and evaluate the conflict?

Engineer A, as president of WXY Engineers, must decide whether to proactively disclose to City H the full structural conflict of interest created by WXY's three active design contracts before any appointment discussion proceeds, or to allow the city to discover and evaluate the conflict through its own deliberative process. This decision point addresses the timing, form, and completeness of disclosure required under NSPE Code II.4.a when an incumbent multi-contract firm is being considered for a supervisory advisory role over its own active work.

Engineer A affirmatively discloses to City H officials the existence, scope, and self-oversight implications of all three active WXY contracts before any formal or informal appointment discussion begins, providing a written summary of the structural conflict and WXY's assessment of its manageability.

Engineer A responds fully and transparently when City H officials or a city official raises the conflict-of-interest concern, providing complete information at that point, on the grounds that the city's own deliberative process surfaced the issue and a reactive disclosure satisfies the informational purpose of II.4.a.

Engineer A discloses not only the three existing contracts but also the structural pattern of prospective conflicts — that new design contracts will foreseeably arise during the city engineer tenure — at the moment of formal appointment consideration, treating the disclosure as encompassing both current and reasonably foreseeable future conflicts as required by the word 'potential' in II.4.a.

Engineer