ABSTRACT
Every petroleum engineer considers himself to be a professional. After all, the engineer provides a service and gets paid in return. Therefore, the engineer is a professional,
The issue obviously is not that simple. In fact, some observers would question whether or not the petroleum engineer can ever exist as a professional in the corporate world.
Perhaps, the question is even more basic than that. Can the petroleum engineer ever be a professional? To answer that question, the traditional professionals and their possessions must be examined.
The two best-known professions are medical and legal. It is necessary to briefly contrast what is required to become a practicing member of these professions.
To become either a doctor or a lawyer, an individual goes through undergraduate school with generally a pre-med or pre-law specialization. After graduation, the education process continues in the speciality. The time required ranges from four years to seven plus years depending upon the degree of specialization--particularly medical.
At this point, the argument can justifiably be made that the parallel exists in petroleum engineering. That is, an individual must--generally--attain at least an undergraduate degree. A certain portion go on to graduate school with a still smaller portion attaining a PhD.
While that point is true, the comparison has stopped short of one key issue. The issue is not the amount of education. The issue is not whether the person works as an employee or as an individual. The issue is not receiving money for services rendered. The issue is attitude and perception.
Attitude is an internal position while perception is an external one. The practitioners of petroleum engineering must have an attitude of professionalism before they can ever be professionals.
What exactly is meant by that? Conduct, aims and/or qualities that mark a professional person are the ingredients of professionalism. Again, the comparison must be made to the commonly acknowledged professions.
Both the medical and legal professionals have codes of conduct and review boards--not only nationally but locally--who are charged with measuring members against the standard. The failure of a member to adhere to the standards can mean expulsion from the profession and prohibition from the practice of that profession in the future.
The codes of conduct, especially that of the legal profession, are based on precepts founded in antiquity. A process of both refinement and expansion have resulted in complex ethical guides. In fact, some members of the legal profession remark upon the difficulty of adhering to these principles from the standpoint of day-to-day practice. Nonetheless, these canons of ethics for lawyers and Hippocratic oath for doctors exist.
There exists a code of ethics of the SPE. However, it is likely that less than a majority of all SPE members are even aware of this code. Therefore, it is also likely that even fewer consciously practice their trade by it.
The Society does not require any of its members anywhere to take an oath to practice engineering according to the code of ethics. By contrast, the legal profession requires on a state-by-state basis, the pledge to follow their precepts before an individual can practice law in that particular state.
Obviously, one of the questions the society members must address is "Does the membership want this type of self-policing?". Again, as a comparison--or a guide-line--the record of law and medicine must be examined. How effective are the self-policing efforts of these professions--or are their ethical codes empty words?
Self-policing is not a step to be taken merely because it sounds nice to outsiders. There are significant liabilities to be addressed. One, of course, is the posture of the organization who handles violations as judge and jury. The legal consequences of such actions must be carefully considered, particularly in a time of vigorous defense of individual rights.
