Knowledge Hiding – Is it ethical?
The case of Boeing 737 Max

Ms. Mariyam Ahmed
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Commerce & Management
mariyam.ahmed@kalingauniversity.ac.in

Knowledge hiding can be defined as an intentional attempt by an individual to withhold or conceal knowledge that has been requested by another person (Anand, P., 2019). The ethics of knowledge hiding depend on various factors, including the context, motivations, consequences, and the relationship between the parties involved.
Context: In some situations, such as protecting sensitive information related to national security or proprietary business secrets, knowledge hiding may be deemed ethical. For instance, a company may have a legitimate interest in safeguarding trade secrets to maintain its competitive edge in the market.
Motivations: The motivations behind knowledge hiding are crucial in determining its ethicality. It is generally unethical if someone conceals information with malicious intent, such as to gain an unfair advantage, harm others, or manipulate outcomes for personal gain. Conversely, if knowledge hiding is driven by a genuine concern for safety, privacy, or other moral principles, it may be considered ethical.
Consequences: Consideration of the potential consequences is paramount. If withholding information leads to harm, loss, or negative impacts on individuals or society, it raises ethical concerns. For example, if a researcher hides crucial data about the safety risks of a product, resulting in harm to consumers, the act of knowledge hiding would be deemed unethical due to its adverse consequences.
Relationships: The nature of the relationship between the parties involved can influence the ethical evaluation of knowledge hiding. For instance, professionals have moral obligations to be transparent and honest with their clients, patients, or stakeholders. If a doctor hides information about a patient’s diagnosis or treatment options, it violates the trust inherent in the doctor-patient relationship and is, therefore, unethical.
While there may be instances where knowledge hiding is justifiable or even necessary, particularly in contexts involving confidentiality, privacy, or security concerns, evaluating such actions based on their motivations, consequences, and the ethical obligations inherent in the relationships involved is essential.
Transparency, honesty, and respect for the well-being of others are fundamental principles that should guide decisions regarding the disclosure or withholding of knowledge.
Whether knowledge hiding is ethical can be explored through the lens of moral principles as under- –
Fundamental Canon: The Fundamental Canon underscores the imperative for professionals, such as engineers, to prioritize the safety, health, and welfare of the public above all other considerations. It serves as a foundational ethical principle guiding decision-making in various fields. By placing paramount importance on public well-being, the Fundamental Canon ensures that professionals uphold ethical standards and act responsibly in their practices. This principle is crucial in maintaining trust, safeguarding against harm, and fostering a culture of accountability within industries where human lives and safety are at stake, ultimately promoting the greater good of society. From the perspective of the Fundamental Canon, knowledge hiding can be considered unethical. In the case of Boeing, withholding information about the faulty sensor and the potential consequences of the automatic anti-stall system deprived pilots of crucial knowledge that could have prevented the disasters. This lack of transparency compromised the public’s safety, health, and welfare, violating the ethical obligation to prioritize these concerns over corporate interests.
Informed Consent: The principle of informed consent mandates that individuals have the right to be fully informed about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of any decision or action affecting them and to freely consent based on this understanding. Its importance lies in respecting individuals’ autonomy, dignity, and right to self-determination. It ensures that patients can make informed decisions about their treatment in medical contexts. At the same time, engineering and other fields provide users with an understanding of the risks associated with products or systems. Upholding informed consent fosters trust, promotes ethical conduct, and safeguards against potential harm or exploitation. Knowledge hiding undermines the principle of informed consent. Just as patients have the right to make informed decisions about their medical treatment, pilots should be fully informed about the systems and risks associated with the aircraft they operate. By concealing information about the new anti-stall system from pilots, Boeing deprived them of the opportunity to provide informed consent to use this technology, potentially endangering the safety of passengers and crew.
Precautionary Principle: The principle advocates taking proactive measures to address potential risks, even without conclusive evidence, to safeguard public health and the environment. It underscores the importance of prioritizing caution and prevention when uncertainties exist, aiming to prevent harm before it occurs rather than waiting for irreversible consequences to manifest. This principle is crucial in guiding decision-making, particularly in industries where human safety is paramount, such as aviation. By erring caution and implementing preventive measures, the precautionary principle helps mitigate risks, protect lives, and uphold ethical standards in uncertainty. In the case of Boeing, delaying action to address concerns about the 737 MAX 8’s safety, despite mounting evidence of design flaws, can be seen as a form of knowledge hiding. Boeing failed to uphold the precautionary principle and prioritize public safety over uncertainty by downplaying the risks and resisting calls to ground the aircraft.
In conclusion, from an ethical standpoint, knowledge hiding can be deemed unethical, mainly when it compromises public safety, undermines informed consent, and disregards precautionary measures. In the context of the Boeing disasters, concealing information about critical system flaws and delaying action to address safety concerns constituted ethical failures that had tragic consequences. As such, fostering transparency, promoting informed decision-making, and prioritizing precautionary measures are essential to uphold ethical standards in industries where human lives are at stake.

Reference:
Anand, P. and Hassan, Y. (2019), “Knowledge hiding in organizations: everything that managers need to know”, Development and Learning in Organizations, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-12-2018-0158.
United States Congress House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. (2020). The design, development & certification of the Boeing 737 Max. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Washington, D.C.
Peterson, Martin (2019). Ethics for engineers. Oxford University Press. New York
Anser, M. K., Ali, M., Usman, M., Rana, M. L. T., & Yousaf, Z. (2021). Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: an intervening and interactional analysis. The Service Industries Journal, 41(5-6), 307-329.
Koay, K. Y., & Lim, P. K. (2022). Ethical leadership and knowledge hiding: testing the mediating and moderating mechanisms. Journal of Knowledge Management, 26(3), 574-591.
Islam, T., Ahmed, I., Usman, A., & Ali, M. (2021). Abusive supervision and knowledge hiding: the moderating roles of future orientation and Islamic work ethics. Management Research Review, 44(12), 1565-1582.
Anand, A., Agarwal, U. A., & Offergelt, F. (2023). Why should I let them know? Effects of workplace incivility and cynicism on employee knowledge hiding behavior under the control of ethical leadership. International Journal of Manpower, 44(2), 247-266.
Mohsin, M., Zhu, Q., Wang, X., Naseem, S., & Nazam, M. (2021). The empirical investigation between ethical leadership and knowledge-hiding behavior in financial service sector: a moderated-mediated model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 798631.
Fauzi, M. A. (2023). Knowledge hiding behavior in higher education institutions: a scientometric analysis and systematic literature review approach. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(2), 302-327.
Connelly, C. E., Zweig, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. P. (2012). Knowledge hiding in organizations. Journal of organizational behavior, 33(1), 64-88.