Advisory Role Integrity Principle
Class
http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#AdvisoryRoleIntegrityPrinciple
Class Hierarchy
- Thing
- ↳ entity (bfo)
- ↳ continuant (bfo)
- ↳ generically dependent continuant (bfo)
- ↳ information content entity (iao)
- ↳ directive information entity (iao)
- ↳ Principle (proethica-core)
- ↳ Relational Principle (proethica-intermediate)
- ↳ AdvisoryRoleIntegrityPrinciple
Definition
Professional principle requiring engineers who serve in a purely advisory capacity to maintain the independence and objectivity of that role, and not to allow their interest in obtaining subsequent work to shape the content or scope of the advice they provide.
Case Provenance
Discovered in
This class was discovered during extraction of the case(s) above; the supporting verbatim quotes are in Source Evidence.
Properties
Abstract Nature
Requires contextual judgment about when advisory and service-provider interests are sufficiently intertwined to compromise the advisory role, and what structural or disclosure measures are necessary to preserve advisory integrity.
Confidence
0.85
Derived Obligations
Avoid structuring advice to steer toward self-benefiting outcomes
Disclose anticipated follow-on work interest before or alongside advisory recommendation
Recommend independent review if advisory objectivity is compromised
Extensional Examples
Cases where a design engineer recommends a project delivery method in which they are the preferred or sole qualified provider
Feasibility advisors who recommend approaches that generate follow-on contracts for themselves
Operationalization
Requires engineers to separate advisory and service-provider roles where feasible, disclose the relationship between the recommendation and any anticipated follow-on work, and ensure the client understands that the recommendation may not be independent.
Potential Conflicts
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Principle
Loyalty
Objectivity
Principle Category
relational
Value Basis
The value of professional advisory services depends on the client's reasonable belief that the advisor is acting in the client's interest. When the advisor stands to benefit from the recommendation, the advisory relationship is structurally compromised unless the interest is disclosed and managed.
Property Structure
1 · Object and Data Properties
rdfs:domain on this class or ancestor
| Property | Range | Description |
|---|---|---|
| establishedBy inherited | CodeProvision | Indicates which code provision establishes this ethical concept. |
| invokedBy inherited | Agent | Relates a Principle to the Agent(s) that invoke it in the case scenario (the parties who appeal to the principle to justify or evaluate conduct). May name several agents. |
2 · Definitional Attributes
SHACL definitional shape
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| principle kind | principleCategory | The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal. |
| extensional cases | extensionalCases | Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field. |
3 · Bearer Attributes
SHACL property shape
individual data
| Attribute | Property (sh:path) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| interpretation | interpretation | Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| concrete expression | concreteExpression | How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| applied to | appliedTo | What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on). |
| balancing with | balancingWith | The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field. |
| tension resolution | tensionResolution | How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field). |
| invoked by | invokedBy | The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent. |
4 · Referenced By
rdfs:range on this class or ancestor
| From | Property | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Action | guidedByPrinciple inherited | Relates an action to a principle that directs it. The principle supplies the value the action is taken to serve. |
| Code Provision | establishes inherited | Relates a code provision to the ethical concepts (principles, obligations, constraints) it establishes or defines. |
| Obligation | derivedFromPrinciple inherited | Relates an obligation to the principle or principles it operationalizes. The obligation gives concrete directive force to the more abstract value the principle expresses (Dennis et al. 2016). |
| Role | adheresToPrinciple inherited | Relates a role to principles that guide its conduct; the role-relative applicability edge of the R->P->O chain (the role determines which principles apply to conduct in that standing). |
Source Evidence
Text references
Engineer A currently has no contractual relationship with City B.
Engineer A is qualified to provide construction services under Progressive-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk delivery methods
Engineer A recommended Progressive Design Build. Accompanying the recommendation, Engineer A provided a summary of the firm's experience with Progressive-Design-Build projects and references from past projects
Source text
Engineer A currently has no contractual relationship with City B.
Used in cases 1
Case ontologies that instantiate this class or one of its base-ontology descendants. Computed from each individual's type, so the list stays current as cases are extracted. The originating case is shown under Extraction details.
Case 14@prefix core: <http://proethica.org/ontology/core#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix pcsh: <http://proethica.org/shapes/core#> .
@prefix proeth: <http://proethica.org/ontology/intermediate#> .
@prefix proeth-prov: <http://proethica.org/provenance#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
proeth:AdvisoryRoleIntegrityPrinciple a owl:Class ;
rdfs:label "Advisory Role Integrity Principle" ;
proeth:abstractNature "Requires contextual judgment about when advisory and service-provider interests are sufficiently intertwined to compromise the advisory role, and what structural or disclosure measures are necessary to preserve advisory integrity." ;
proeth:confidence "0.85" ;
proeth:derivedObligations "Avoid structuring advice to steer toward self-benefiting outcomes",
"Disclose anticipated follow-on work interest before or alongside advisory recommendation",
"Recommend independent review if advisory objectivity is compromised" ;
proeth:extensionalExamples "Cases where a design engineer recommends a project delivery method in which they are the preferred or sole qualified provider",
"Feasibility advisors who recommend approaches that generate follow-on contracts for themselves" ;
proeth:operationalization "Requires engineers to separate advisory and service-provider roles where feasible, disclose the relationship between the recommendation and any anticipated follow-on work, and ensure the client understands that the recommendation may not be independent." ;
proeth:potentialConflicts "Conflict of Interest Disclosure Principle",
"Loyalty",
"Objectivity" ;
proeth:principleCategory "relational" ;
proeth:textReferences "Engineer A currently has no contractual relationship with City B.",
"Engineer A is qualified to provide construction services under Progressive-Design-Build and Construction-Manager-at-Risk delivery methods",
"Engineer A recommended Progressive Design Build. Accompanying the recommendation, Engineer A provided a summary of the firm's experience with Progressive-Design-Build projects and references from past projects" ;
proeth:valueBasis "The value of professional advisory services depends on the client's reasonable belief that the advisor is acting in the client's interest. When the advisor stands to benefit from the recommendation, the advisory relationship is structurally compromised unless the interest is disclosed and managed." ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInCase 14 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInPass 2 ;
proeth-prov:discoveredInSection "facts" ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredAt "2026-06-04T08:43:46.016802+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
proeth-prov:firstDiscoveredInCase 14 ;
proeth-prov:matchConfidence 0.0 ;
proeth-prov:matchesExisting false ;
proeth-prov:sourceText "Engineer A currently has no contractual relationship with City B." ;
rdfs:comment "Professional principle requiring engineers who serve in a purely advisory capacity to maintain the independence and objectivity of that role, and not to allow their interest in obtaining subsequent work to shape the content or scope of the advice they provide." ;
rdfs:subClassOf proeth:RelationalPrinciple ;
skos:definition "Professional principle requiring engineers who serve in a purely advisory capacity to maintain the independence and objectivity of that role, and not to allow their interest in obtaining subsequent work to shape the content or scope of the advice they provide." ;
prov:generatedAtTime "2026-06-04T08:43:46.016802+00:00"^^xsd:dateTime ;
prov:wasAttributedTo "Case 14 Extraction",
"claude-sonnet-4-6" .
pcsh:CaseAnnotationShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Shared per-case annotation schema (all nine components)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "The cross-component annotation fields on committed case individuals: proeth:confidence (extraction confidence, decimal; all components except Action, whose Step-3 contract carries no confidence field), proeth:textReferences (verbatim supporting quotes, universal), proeth-prov sourceText (the source snippet, on the Step-1/2 provenance layers; Step-3 A/E individuals ground via textReferences only), and the involvement gloss (proeth:caseInvolvement on role individuals, proeth:caseContext on obligation, capability, and constraint individuals). Values are per-individual; the fields do not individuate any type."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Extraction confidence for this individual (0 to 1)." ;
sh:name "confidence" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:confidence ],
[ sh:description "Verbatim case quotes supporting this individual." ;
sh:name "text references" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:textReferences ],
[ sh:description "How this individual figures in the case narrative (role individuals; the same text is routed into rdfs:comment)." ;
sh:name "case involvement" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:caseInvolvement ],
[ sh:description "Grounding context in this case (obligation, capability, and constraint individuals)." ;
sh:name "case context" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:caseContext ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Action,
core:Capability,
core:Constraint,
core:Event,
core:Obligation,
core:Principle,
core:Resource,
core:Role,
core:State .
pcsh:PrincipleDefinitionShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle definition schema (type-level, descriptive, field contract)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What individuates a principle TYPE: its canonical kind (drives the four-kind subClassOf typing; the canonical leaf becomes the rdf:type) and the extensional cases that ground it (McLaren). The five per-case narrative literals and the invokedBy edge are per-individual and now declared on PrinciplePropertyShape, mirroring the RoleDefinitionShape/ProfessionalRolePropertyShape split so the {{ principle_schema }} prompt separates the type judgment from what the case supplies. Descriptive only (no validation result); principle_category is a routing input, not stored as a literal."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "The controlled principle kind, which drives the four-kind subClassOf typing: FundamentalEthicalPrinciple, ProfessionalVirtuePrinciple, RelationalPrinciple, DomainSpecificPrinciple. The canonical leaf label becomes the rdf:type; the category is a routing input, not stored as a literal." ;
sh:name "principle kind" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:principleCategory ],
[ sh:description "Class-level prior cases that instantiate the principle (McLaren extensional grounding); an optional class-mint field." ;
sh:name "extensional cases" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:extensionalCases ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
pcsh:PrinciplePropertyShape a sh:NodeShape ;
rdfs:label "Principle per-case schema (individual data, non-definitional)"@en ;
rdfs:comment "What a principle INDIVIDUAL is described by in a specific case: the five narrative literals the defeasibility pipeline consumes and the agent that invokes it. These do NOT individuate the principle TYPE (that is PrincipleDefinitionShape); their values are per-case, asserted on the individual. Descriptive only."@en ;
sh:property [ sh:description "Per-case reading of what the principle requires in this situation (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "interpretation" ;
sh:order 1 ;
sh:path proeth:interpretation ],
[ sh:description "How the principle is concretely expressed in the case (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "concrete expression" ;
sh:order 2 ;
sh:path proeth:concreteExpression ],
[ sh:description "What the principle is applied to in the case (the situation or party it bears on)." ;
sh:name "applied to" ;
sh:order 3 ;
sh:path proeth:appliedTo ],
[ sh:description "The competing principle or value this principle is balanced against in the case, recorded as a literal; extraction records the tension but asserts no defeat or precedence, and the defeasibility edges are materialized by a separate pass from this field." ;
sh:name "balancing with" ;
sh:order 4 ;
sh:path proeth:balancingWith ],
[ sh:description "How the case resolves the tension involving this principle (a defeasibility-pipeline source field)." ;
sh:name "tension resolution" ;
sh:order 5 ;
sh:path proeth:tensionResolution ],
[ sh:description "The agent who invokes the principle, via the P->Agent invokedBy edge (resolved to a case Agent by embedding shortlist + LLM select; a Board-pattern invoking party resolves deterministically to the case-scoped NSPE Board of Ethical Review Agent). Range: Agent." ;
sh:name "invoked by" ;
sh:order 6 ;
sh:path core:invokedBy ] ;
sh:targetClass core:Principle .
Metadata
Extraction details
Discovered in case
14
Discovered in pass
2
Discovered in section
facts
First discovered
2026-06-04T08:43:46.016802+00:00
First case
14
Match Confidence
0.0
Matches Existing
false
Generated
2026-06-04T08:43:46.016802+00:00
Attributed to
['Case 14 Extraction', 'claude-sonnet-4-6']