Abstract
Descriptive modeling tools, in the engineering world, are often applied objectively to ensure biases do not influence the model. Actor Network Theory (ANT) is a commonly deployed descriptive tool in looking at how different entities interact within a set scope. It exists to establish a set of actants, both human and non-human, and connect them through translations to paint a picture of the larger system. A similar tool, intended for building information networks rather than purely describing them, is Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). Both of these tools result in a set of blocks, or individual components, and associated connections which interact across a set of diagrams and schemas to form a system architecture. MBSE and ANT, while differing fundamentally on building versus describing, are both useful tools in understanding how complex networks interact if looked at through the correct lens.
The technical portion of my research involved working for a large defense contractor to optimize how users interacted with their maker lab. The client prescribed MBSE as the methodology for creating the solution architecture. The final proposed system aided in managing consumables, monitoring lab capacity, and reserving machines. The structured, interconnected network of different solution components, as well as the nature of the client being in the defense industry inspired the STS portion of my research.
The sociological portion of this research looks at how engineers are ethically liable for the downstream consequences of their work. ANT was deployed to highlight this in the context of large defense contractors, connecting the lone engineer to the conflict zones where their employer’s weapons are being used. This actor network was clustered in 5 tiers, including the engineer, the military science company, the U.S. Government, their global allies, and the conflict zones that these allies are involved in. After the web was constructed, it was analyzed through deontological and consequentialist lenses to discern how ethically accountable the engineer should be.
This research helped to frame how individual accountability varies depending on physical and social distance. The ultimate goal of this work was not to cast shame on any industry, nor to dictate how every engineer should feel about the implications of their work, but to provide the tools and frameworks necessary for them to make that decision on their own.
