In 1971 Ford Motor Company decided it needed a way to compete in the small car market that was beginning to be dominated by the smaller, cheaper cars from Japan. The answer Ford came up with has now become synonymous with one of the most debated cases in ethics; production of the Ford Pinto. In this paper we will take a look at Ford’s decision to produce the Pinto under the scope of Utilitarian ethics and ultimately review the lingering question did the ends justify the means? I implore you as the reader to keep an open mind and let the analysis of this case play out before drawing your final conclusions. As presented in the case study we know that Ford was losing the market to the cheap Japanese cars being produced. As a corporation that …show more content…
ultimately exists to produce profit something needed to be done. The CEO of Ford at the time was Lee Iacocca his answer was to Ford to produce a small car that would be competitive in cost.
In order to produce this car Ford would rearrange its time table from concept to production to be 25 months almost 20 months less than what it normally takes to produce a new car. Here in lies the ethical quandary that I feel is at the heart of the decision to produce the Pinto. Was Ford’s need to regain market share great enough to justify rushing the production of the Pinto? Ford was already losing market share we know that but what is not fully explained is the a new NHSTA standard that by 1972 would have required a vehicle like the Pinto to meet standards for rear-end impacts up to 20 MPH. The new standard proposed by the NHSTA was specifically designed to reduce fires from traffic accidents. If you remember from the case study the Pinto failed these this very test prior to its production and rear end impacts were the cause of the fiery explosions in the gas tanks of the Pinto. An argument can be made that even though Ford had advance notice of the issues with the Pinto’s rear end collision tests, it proceeded to put the car into production prior to the new NHSTA standard taking effect. The constricted timeline …show more content…
for producing the Pinto meant that design changes in the vehicle which could have normally been accomplished pre-production had to be done in the production phase. Changes in design during the production phase would have most certainly delayed the production of the car and increased its costs. In fact a cost benefit analysis showed that Ford a re-designed gas tank for the Pinto would have cost $5 to $ 8 per vehicle (phiosophia.com). However an analysis of the benefits of changing the design vs. the possible liability shows that Ford determined the cost outweighed the decreased safety of using the current tank. Being that Ford is a business and a has an obligation to its shareholders to make profit it could also be argued that the companies greater good lies in doing what is best for its shareholders. In a business environment the ethics of a decision are more often weighted against the greatest benefit received for the company. A different ethical lens is used and so decisions that would make since in other parts of our lives may not even be contemplated in a business transaction. So as we are aware of Ford proceeded with the production on the Pinto for 1971 and enjoyed early success, with few if any accidents related to the Pintos rear end design flaw reported.
This would eventually come to an end in and the Pinto would be a factor in over 180 deaths and numerous burn injuries. While Ford did come up with a fix for the gas tank design it was never implemented. The cost of $11 per vehicle was once again determined to be higher than the ensuing damages Ford would pay from the resulting lawsuits. The problem in judging an outcome such as Ford’s is the determining the target population that the greatest benefit is bestowed upon. For individuals our greatest good is often in what is best for us, our families or the benefit of the society we exist in. Corporations on the other hand exist for a different purpose and so there target audience for ethical decisions is more focused on the company itself. Another issue is that business often uses cost/benefit analysis to make decisions but that model uses only quantifiable data. What is not taken into account in the cost/benefit model is the value of a human life and what that life may have accomplished. It also does not factor in the suffering of those related to the deceased, the company’s reputation or assumption of corporate social
responsibilities.
This case involves the explosive nature of the Ford Pinto's fuel tank when involved in a rear-end collision. The flawed fuel tank’s structural design, led to a lawsuit and later to over one hundred civil suits as well. Engaging the examination of many concerns, most of which focused on Ford’s use of their cost-benefit analysis, showing it was less expensive to pay the court costs of the claims expected, some $49.5 million, instead of fixing the issue on each car after production, at a cost of $137 million. Leading to public disputes as to the ethics encompassing its corporate judgment to follow the internal cost-benefit.
The 1920's were a time where North America became modernized. Whether it was the music, the culture or the growth in technology, this time era is known to most people as the point where America advanced itself to become a world renowned country. An advancement that will be focused on is the Ford Model T. During this time owning a car was a symbol of wealth. Henry Ford, the creator of the Model T, made a system that revolutionized the automobile industry as we know it today. Henry Ford made it possible for people with an average income to own a motor vehicle by creating the assembly line and the theory of mass production. "The horse, which had been the chief means of land transportation for 3,500 years, had given way to the automobile, and the country's largest industry had been born." (Gordon)
I can recall when my older sister in the 70’s had purchased a shiny new Ford Pinto and pulled it into the driveway. She used at that time what she thought was her best judgment along with an economical price but only to be succumbed by our Dad when he realized what she purchased. Ford Motor Company in the late 60’s were being overtaken by other countries car manufactures in the subcompact market. The Volkswagen Beetle was still formidable, and the VW Rabbit was on the drawing board. Datsun and Toyota were readying new models. Honda was preparing to change the nature of the competition with its Civic. (Lee Iacocca 's Pinto: A Fiery Failure) It would be 10 years later that Henry Ford II, Ford Motor Co. Chairman would fire the person who ultimately
At this time, not only was the affair of no education, but there were pollution clouds throughout the entire country. For instance, “In a very well depicted work of art, it demonstrated much smoke spewing out of small buildings and heaps more out of factories” (Document 3). The smoke escaping into the atmosphere was not an issue back then. There were no regulations and restrictions on how much pollution was allowed to be produced. Nowadays, decrees are passed to regulate the consumption of nonrenewable elements. In addition, “document 4 explains the process of assembly lines, which Henry Ford thoroughly enjoyed using, and how they aided in the pollution filled skies”(Document 4). Henry Ford was bringing a wonderous idea into the world, but
To say that Henry Ford dilly-dallied around before finally establishing a serious car company would be invalid. The 40 year old man had been acquiring valuable knowledge regarding business, engines, management, and most importantly cars. Now it was time to take a leap of faith.
When we consider the case of the Ford Pinto, and its relative controversy, through the varied scope of ethical viewpoints, the results might surprise us. From a personal standpoint, as a consumer, the idea of selling a vehicle to the masses with such a potentially devastating flaw is completely unethical. When we consider the case from other directions and other ethical viewpoints, however, it makes it clear that often ethics are a matter of perspective and philosophy. It’s also clear that there are cases where more information will muddy the waters, rather than clear them.
Despite of these good things, Ford Motor faced a loss due to some wrong decisions taken by the management regarding their business strategy. The decision of centralizing the management made them think narrowly which results in too much Americanization and ignorance of local market in the rest of the world. This caused losing global market for them.
Henry Ford was one of the principle illustrators of Scientific Management. He revolutionized the concept of mass production and changed the world by developing new, innovative business practices that enhanced efficiency and productivity. He created a manufacturing model that marked an era and led industrial manufacturing to continuously grow around the world, a model that is known as Fordism. Fordism brought success and innovation, not only to the whole American manufacturing industry, but also all over the world between the years 1903 and 1926 (Smith, 2011). However, these practices were not always as perfect, as there are many drawbacks within his practices that influenced both Ford Motor Company and the motor industry as a whole, which brought
Ford and Firestone knew that they were having problems with their products before all of these accidents happened. For instance “Ford internal documents show the company engineers recommended changes to the vehicle design after it rolled over in company tests prior to introduction.”(www.ratical.org/corporation) Moreover, “In 1998, mounting insurance claims already had indicated to financial staff members at Firestone that a problem existed with the tires.” (www.ombuds.org.) But Ford and Firestone did not take any action to fix the problem. So it was obvious then that they were not concerned for the well being of the people. Even staff members who knew that the safety of customers was in danger due to the defect of these tires, failed to report it to the authorities. And when Firestone was confronted with accusations about the performance of the tire, they provided misleading information. Therefore, this represented a very critical ethical problem. According to an executive director of auto safety, “if consumers never find out about this problem, these companies will end up saving millions of dollars in recall costs at the expense...
Ford Motor Company CEO, Lee Iacocca, was concerned about losing market sales to smaller Japanese imports. Therefore, he ordered Ford to produce a new car line in an accelerated manner, which
Around 1967 Ford Motor Company decided to design a small size car called the Ford Pinto. The automobile industry at the time (and still is) was highly competitive and very cyclical. In the late 1960's, America began to see the influences of foreign vehicles. Prior to that, cars were bigger and less fuel efficient, allowing the Japanese to gain substantial market share with the smaller, more economical vehicles, and the need to react to this pressure was even greater at Ford. Even though they held the number two spot in market share behind General Motors, they only held a 22.3% market share compared to General Motors at 46.4%, a very significant difference.
According to a particularist, there is something defective with the whole process of coming up with a general standard of action of current problems. The acknowledgment of a judgment of what you should do, and then doing whatever the theory says depends on the involvement of a person and the situation. The theory that I can best relate to would be particularism due to the fact I don’t believe in following just one specific rule, being having to pick right from wrong. Particularism comes from the category of teleology, which are methods that are out to find the meaning or purpose of our lives, and judge our success or failure based on how well we have pursued that purpose.
This case depicts about the success stories of the collaboration in the automobile industry by the Japanese and US firm though they were obviously competitors. One significant success story emerging from the alliance involves Ford probe and Mazda MX-6. There were swapping of resources and capabilities between the two firms. Mazda designers design the basic platform, engine and drive train for the cars. Mazda then design the outside of the MX-6 and Ford does same for the probe. Finally both cars are assembled at a factory owned by the two firms. Ford escort was another successful offspring of the alliance where again the Mazda engineers designed the car and Ford made it. But the alliance was not without spots. Mazda Navaho one of the offspring of the alliance which was basically build upon the on of the Ford popular product Ford explorer and build by the Ford makers. Ford made an opposite step by denying to provide the Japanese partners Navaho production to continue production of its own product line. The partner Mazda in addition fell into financial distress and Ford got the effective management control of Mazda and took some bold steps which eventually went against the collaboration.
Many economic factors exist that impact the development of Ford Motor Company's strategic plan and it’s no small task to project how some of these factors might change as the strategy is being realized. Consider the prospect of expansion into a new market like China or Mexico. Economic changes like currency devaluation will make Ford’s product more expensive to their target market potentially reducing overall sales revenue. Oil prices as we’ve seen in the U.S. economy can also play a big factor as large vehicles become less desirable and more fuel efficient compact cars gain market share.
...when the company focused on further improvements of its pickups and SUVs instead of focusing on innovations required by the changing demand. If the management had not been ignorant and would have developed sound strategy as soon as it spotted the change, the company would have avoided the crisis. However the company just recently adjusted its production plan and plans to continue realigning its manufacturing capacity, product mix and cut costs to fix the situation (“Ford Adjusts Production”).