Response to case study scenario 1

I am assuming that these are a new product for our company so therefore there is no previous knowledge of similar testing of our product available to me.

Drawing from the codes of conduct for engineers referencing both NSPE and RAEng; it is my duty to take the public safety as my priority in the actions I proceed with and I must avoid deceptive acts and keep client trust.

With this in mind, including the awareness of financial loss I would take the following actions precariously:

• To help evaluate I would do some quick research into whether there had been an existing cases involving fires from power consumption failures.
  
• As I am only a junior engineer I would have to report to my supervisor. I would challenge their professional practice and call an urgent meeting between the relevant managers including the finance/sales manager and
  director of the company (whoever's money we are using, whom owns the company). The minutes of meeting would
  be documented on file. The meeting is held to avoid any deception regarding the integrity of the product within the
  company.
  
• In the meeting I would highlight the key issue of public safety, disputing the consequences of ignoring product test failures. The inquirer reports an incident (link to report is below) of a Dell laptop exploding during a Japanese
  conference, this is a clear example of endangering public safety due to power consumption failure.
  
• To avoid any deception towards the client: I would instruct the client be contacted and made aware of these findings and the fire hazard. The client must stop sale of this product and issue a product recall. I would assure
  the client and company director that product recalls are not uncommon and has been issued with USB drives
  before, referencing Lexar's product recall of 66,000 drives before any incidents occurred.
  
• Next we must implement a change in method of testing. Increase the number and/or accuracy of tests produced whichever is most efficient.
  
• Reason being ultimately we would be saving; as the total cost of thorough testing and an immediate recall would be far less, than the financial loss of a product recall over an accumulation of sales for a period of time. Sony
  suffered a hefty $258 million financial loss in recalls through Dell and Apple. Apple had to recall 1.8 million. This
  was three years of sales.

Personally I remember reading an article about a member of public at the time. She had left her dell laptop on and running on the lounge floor for only a few minutes. When she had returned she found the laptop alight in flames sitting in the middle of her lounge floor. After reading it although its comical value as no one was hurt, I was shocked and would not have expected this from a consumer's point of view to have occurred.

In reflection "it is better to be safe than sorry."

Lexar Recalls 66,000 USB JumpDrives. http://www.betanews.com/article/Lexar_Recalls_66000_USB_JumpDrives/1152288843
http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml06/06205.html
The New York Times. Apple Recalls 1.8 Million Laptop Batteries. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/24/technology/23cnd-apple.html?_r=1
The Inquirer. Dell laptop explodes at Japanese conference. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/700/1042700/dell-laptop-explodes-at-japanese-conference