DP9
Individual
http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#DP9
Properties
Instance of
Decision Point Id
DP9
Decision question
Should Firm A market its city engineer appointment to prospective private developer clients by advertising a 50% cost savings on inspection fees, or must it refrain from using its publicly conferred position as a commercial differentiator in soliciting private engagements?
Focus
Firm A Marketing Exploitation of City Engineer Position: Whether to Advertise City Inspection Role as a Cost-Savings Advantage to Prospective Private Developer Clients
Option1
Immediately discontinue any advertising, solicitation, or representation to prospective private developer clients that references Firm A's city engineer position or the cost savings flowing from it, obtaining private developer engagements solely through channels independent of the city appointment.
Option2
Inform the city of Firm A's marketing practice and obtain the city's explicit acknowledgment before continuing to reference the city engineer role in developer solicitations, on the theory that transparent disclosure to the principal client converts the marketing conduct into a permissible competitive communication rather than an exploitation of public position.
Option3
Continue to communicate genuine cost efficiencies to prospective developer clients — such as reduced coordination overhead and streamlined permitting familiarity — without explicitly referencing the city engineer appointment or the inspection fee structure, relying on the distinction between legitimate competitive communication of service value and improper exploitation of a publicly conferred advantage.
Role
Engineer A BER 82-4 Multi-Jurisdiction Dual-Role Municipal Engineer
TTL
@prefix case177: <http://proethica.org/ontology/case/177#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-cases: <http://proethica.org/ontology/cases#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
case177:DP9 a proeth-cases:DecisionPoint,
owl:NamedIndividual ;
rdfs:label "DP9" ;
proeth:decisionPointId "DP9" ;
proeth:decisionQuestion "Should Firm A market its city engineer appointment to prospective private developer clients by advertising a 50% cost savings on inspection fees, or must it refrain from using its publicly conferred position as a commercial differentiator in soliciting private engagements?" ;
proeth:focus "Firm A Marketing Exploitation of City Engineer Position: Whether to Advertise City Inspection Role as a Cost-Savings Advantage to Prospective Private Developer Clients" ;
proeth:option1 "Immediately discontinue any advertising, solicitation, or representation to prospective private developer clients that references Firm A's city engineer position or the cost savings flowing from it, obtaining private developer engagements solely through channels independent of the city appointment." ;
proeth:option2 "Inform the city of Firm A's marketing practice and obtain the city's explicit acknowledgment before continuing to reference the city engineer role in developer solicitations, on the theory that transparent disclosure to the principal client converts the marketing conduct into a permissible competitive communication rather than an exploitation of public position." ;
proeth:option3 "Continue to communicate genuine cost efficiencies to prospective developer clients — such as reduced coordination overhead and streamlined permitting familiarity — without explicitly referencing the city engineer appointment or the inspection fee structure, relying on the distinction between legitimate competitive communication of service value and improper exploitation of a publicly conferred advantage." ;
proeth:roleLabel "Engineer A BER 82-4 Multi-Jurisdiction Dual-Role Municipal Engineer" ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-03-01T09:53:24.922951"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasGeneratedBy "ProEthica Case 177 Extraction" .
Metadata
Extraction details
Generated
2026-03-01T09:53:24.922951
Generated by
ProEthica Case 177 Extraction