Response to case study scenario 1

After discussing the test result with my supervisor, I decided to take advantage of our open door policy and approached the manager of safety testing and explain my decision not to ignore this problem for the following reasons:

1. It would be unethical not to issue a product recall as the company should have the morals and duty to ensure a fully functional USB flash drive and also to ensure product safety.
2. The fault classification is permanent in the hardware, which is worsen the situation.
3. If product recall is not issued then the company is liable as it can cause personal damages and our disclaimer would not hold up in court as there has been no misuse or modification.
4. This would be detrimental to the company’s financial budget and its reputation for quality.

I would also inform my manager of my experience and steps in returning product defect to manufacturer as well as the General Product Safety Regulations 2005 (part 1, 2, 3 and 4) and similar product recall examples; the HP fire alarm recall (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,39229764,00.htm) and Sony overheating recall (http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000000091,2077559,00.htm)
Financially I believe the company should be familiar with ‘The Rule of Ten’ that states testing should take place at all levels of design. The earlier a possible fault is discovered, the cheaper it is to fix the fault as described below:

Block level (X1)
System / chip level (X10)
Chip prototype level (X100)
Board level (X1000)
System level (X10000)
In field (X100000)

As the fault of the USB flash drive was detected at “In field level”, it is likely to have a heavy cost on the company (compensation for inconvenience to the customer and cost for recall).

Management should have a Priori Justification and Knowledge that unless test results proves otherwise, the USB flash drive is deemed safe as Edmund Gettier famously argued (1967) “Knowledge is generally thought to require justified true belief, even if justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge.”Ref: http://www.seop.leeds.ac.uk/entries/apriori/

I will also suggest that the safety manager should implement a strict test plan at all levels of testing and ensure that satisfactory test results are produced prior to shipment instead of cutting cost by carrying out minimal tests. Further to this I would liaise with other safety test engineers to avoid reoccurrence of these errors.