Blaming it on management is also irrelevant, since management merely takes the advice of engineers, and do financial/business trade offs to maximize profit. If the engineers cannot tell that MCAS system could fail this way (due to the complexity), management will not question it.
if the engineering leadership said, this is not a good idea. Management said, it saves money.
Engineering failed to convince management. Management didn't have the understanding that it was a bad idea.
It is now, no one's fault?
If management merely takes the advice of engineers ( and other who specialize in the things that they do not ), and they choose to ignore it because they do not understand the things they do not specialize in. I believe it's a reasonable to assume that management is more at fault than engineering ( I'm not sure they're is a situation here where any party is fault less )
Management likes hearing things they like, and simply don't hear things they don't like. Then act surprised about it when it becomes public.
Its very common.
By the rest of your comment, it looks as though it's an excellent comparison. How would engineers taking an oath help the situation?
The reason MCAS came about was because management wanted to try to fudge a larger engine into an outdated design created for a different purpose rather than do the engineering and certification necessary for the new requirements and to update the system.
Management wanted to save money. Of course the engineering leadership did not want to fudge something -- they wanted to do proper engineering. But the people in charge just wanted to save money, and the engineering leadership could not do anything otherwise, even they knew that just making the engine larger and compensating did not make sense from an engineering standpoint.
By the time it got to the MCAS, that was far down the line of the decision to not do proper engineering.