Today's policy asks whether a constitutional change to recognise and define multi-jurisdictional projects that represent the national ICT interest is achievable. So let me start this conversation by saying that the fear of God does not exist in modern commerce and for that reason the ICT industry is often treated with a mix of both awe and contempt. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is the classic case study in ethical dilema that drives a lot of what goes on in our industry today.

Speaking at an AIIA lunch last week was John Higgins, Director General of Intellect, the UK's equivalent of AIIA. He was recounting certain conversations with Sir Peter Gershon and in particular Sir Peter's comments about the differences between the ICT industry and the Engineering industry. Gershon commented that if he went to the Engineering industry with a desire and concept to build a bridge across the Thames he might possibly be told that it could not be built, and the reasons why; regardless of which engineering firm he called upon.

He lamented that this would never be the case for a major ICT project within government (or presumably elsewhere) because the first company he asked would be certain that even though it was likely unachievable, the only outcome would be that the job would go to their competitor who would surely say yes anyway. As our research director, Sam Higgins, pointed out to me when I was recounting this conversation, it is the ethical equivalent of saying that "the first guy to clone a human wins". It is the Frankenstein effect.

Despite the question of ethics running deep in the ICT industry individual companies within the industry often see technology reuse opportunities as non-competitive. Leverage and re-use are unpopular instruments for individual gain and despite a plethora of organisations and associations, so much of what the ICT industry does today is based on individualism. Why?

Well for one thing, unlike the Royal Society of Architects, Engineers, Accountants and others, the ICT industry has not been a product of a monarchy. ICT is not an industry developed at the pleasure of the King based on ethics and charter and therefore the priveleges of success are not rewarded in the same way. It is hard to draw a modern comparison.

Similarly, the short-comings of failure, being expulsion, disgrace, and financial destitution are avoidable. With God or his emissary as their governor, old industries have had little trouble in establishing ethical standards and codes of conduct. Without God, King and Country, ICT and other modern industries have struggled. Thus our comment that the fear of God does not exist in modern industry. As Sam also pointed out:

Modern industries are in fact highly capitalist and grew out of the democracy. They are a modern function of capitalism and not done at anyone's pleasure but on the personal enterprise of individuals who can make or break themselves.

Even in the UK, the homeland of divinely endorsed associations, the British Computer Society has done no better than our local ACS at forwarding the cause of ethical standards in ICT. Perhaps this stands as an inevitable legacy for the next King of our Commonwealth. 

But without a monarch we are left with the democratic device of our legal constitution and in order to achieve the necessary level of ethics and charters, Australia could take a global-lead and seek constitutional change for our most modern of industries.

Afterall, the constitution was written to identify the areas in which the commonwealth government had powers to legislate. It articulates agreement as to what things are important as a nation, and to the national interest. It covers the objective of defending ourselves jointly and not with state-based militias. It allows us to practice our own religions, leverage our vast primary resources, and ensures that issues of trade and quarantine serve the greater good. 

With ICT now so fundamental to society, is it reasonable to suggest that if the Constitution was being drafted today that the cyber-infrastructure of a country would also be protected? In tomorrow's policy we will explore an example.

Today I wish to acknowledge the input and words of Sam Higgins to this blog and for his passionate discussion last Friday afternoonabout what the Queen's birthday long-weekend and the monarchy means to our industry.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed