The Case about the GM Ignition recall revolves around the theme of organizational ethics, issue management, and stakeholder analysis. GM ignition had a product defect that puts many consumers in danger and this public issue created the intervention of the government, community, and consumers. The Government acts and created the NHTSA, which is a government organization that makes sure that all Car products compile with the national safety laws of having proper airbags, ignition switch, car engine, and seat belts. In business, the relationship between business and the government is always revolving, sometimes they work together, and sometimes they work in opposite direction. In this case, GM and the government works in opposite direction because …show more content…
In this case, the public opinion formulated was bad and this affected the company’s reputation. The community, consumers, and government involvement shows that GM operates under the interactive system theory which means that Businesses involves the interaction among different members of society. The main cause of this problem is because of lack of ethics, poor corporate culture, and failure to address the problem on time. Ethics is knowing what is right and wrong, one ethical dilemma that occur in the case was that the head Engineer of the company decided to switch the product features without letting anyone know, and this caused more problems in the future. This example highlights the benefits of ethics, Ethics helps the company increase profit overtime, compile with law, minimize harm, and promote personal morality that would reduce stress among individuals. In this case, GM did not keep their profits because at the end they had to repay 250 million dollars for all their damages they have done, they experience a lot of lawsuits that slowed down the company’s growth, and many employees were being laid off which caused a lot of stress for many
...t be in business very long. But, for instance, what if RGIS was offered the chance to perform one “test” inventory for a company that had many stores and the inventory went extremely well because of the customer service levels provided? RGIS would have the opportunity to service this customer’s other stores not because of the data, but because of the service they received. This human factor played huge role in garnering business for the RGIS and yet their employees have no chance in earning any more compensation than they would have for simply putting data into a machine. Let’s look at other ethics principles and see where an example like the one above would fit in.
The six basic guidelines outlined by the George S. May International Company (GMS) for making ethical business decisions are so simplistic and common sensible that it is hard
Many organizations have been destroyed or heavily damaged financially and took a hit in terms of reputation, for example, Enron. The word Ethics is derived from a Greek word called Ethos, meaning “The character or values particular to a specific person, people, culture or movement” (The American Heritage Dictionary, 2007, p. 295). Ethics has always played and will continue to play a huge role within the corporate world. Ethics is one of the important topics that are debated at lengths without reaching a conclusion, since there isn’t a right or wrong answer. It’s basically depends on how each individual perceives a particular situation. Over the past few years we have seen very poor unethical business practices by companies like Enron, which has affected many stakeholders. Poor unethical practices affect the society in many ways; employees lose their job, investors lose their money, and the country’s economy gets affected. This leads to people start losing confidence in the economy and the organizations that are being run by the so-called “educated” top executives that had one goal in their minds, personal gain. When Enron entered the scene in the mid-1980s, it was little more than a stodgy energy distribution system. Ten years later, it was a multi-billion dollar corporation, considered the poster child of the “new economy” for its willingness to use technology and the Internet in managing energy. Fifteen years later, the company is filing for bankruptcy on the heels of a massive financial collapse, likely the largest in corporate America’s history. As this paper is being written, the scope of Enron collapse is still being researched, poked and prodded. It will take years to determine what, exactly; the impact of the demise of this energy giant will be both on the industry and the
Maintaining an ethical culture has been a struggle for the company for decades but when Hugh Grant took over as CEO, he the reformed the companies ethical culture. Before Grant, Monsanto was knowingly polluting a creek in Alabama with toxic waste, as a result, the polychlorinated biphenyls levels were outrageously high and many fish became deformed. The company had been doing this for forty years, “Once the cover-up was discovered, thousands of plaintiffs from the city filed a lawsuit against the company” (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2017, p. 383). Consequently, trust amongst stakeholders was broken, the companies stocks was impacted, dropping nearly by 50 percent. Grant worked to turn the company around and did just that by focusing on GM foods. “Today, Monsanto employs approxi- mately 22,000 people worldwide. It is recognized as one of the 100 best corporate citizens by Corporate Responsibility Magazine”. (Ferrell, Fraedrich, & Ferrell, 2017, p. 384) Despite all the legal battles the company has faced and ethical blunders, the company today now does maintain a better ethical
The national spotlight is dominated today with the debate over how much control should the government have in an individual’s life. With this in mind the question is asked, should the government be allowed to dictate the quality of gasoline that individuals use in their vehicles? Unbeknownst to consumers the Environmental Protection Agency recently approved the sale of E15 gasoline which contains harmfully high levels of ethanol. John Tomlin states, a “recent survey showed that a majority of consumers (95 percent) had not heard of E15 gasoline or the damage it may cause” (1). Is it ethical for the government to make this determination without notifying the public? Merriam-Webster dictionary defines ethical behavior as, “following accepted rules of morally right and good behavior” (1). Based on this definition, changing to E15 gasoline without the publics’ knowledge is ethically wrong because it can cause accelerated engine wear, fuel system damage, and ultimately result in car warranties being voided. This change in the quality of gasoline blends has proven to be more cost effective to producers, but in the long run it will end up being more costly to consumers.
Ethical dilemmas have long been issues that have plagued all of mankind for generations. Since the beginning, the majority of humanity has struggled to do what is right when the answer wasn’t clear. Sometimes, however, the answer is not as difficult to realize, but is much more difficult to accept. In the case of the Gee-Whiz Mark 2 (GWM2), the dilemma that faces its respective company is whether or not the units that are defective should be exported to countries that have no enforceable rules to punish the marketing of said defective units. If the company does not do so and instead decides to scrap the units, there will be a loss of profit. For the company though, the answer is clear; though it may be challenging for its leaders to accept,
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.
Ethics in business is a highly important concept, as it can affect a company’s profits, salaries paid to employees and CEOs, and public opinion, among many other aspects of a business. Ethics can be enforced by company policies and guidelines, set a precedent when a company is faced with an important decision, and are also evolving thanks to new technology and situations that arise due to technology usage. Businesses have a duty to maintain their ethical responsibilities and also to help their employees enforce these responsibilities in and out of the workplace. However, ethics and the foundation for them are not always black and white. There are many different ethical theories, however Utilitarianism, Kant’s Deontological ethics, and Virtue ethics are three of the most well known theories in existence. Each theory is distinct in that it has a different quality used to determine ethicality and allows for a person to choose which system of ethics works best with both the situation and his or her personal ethical preferences.
This case involves Ford and the Japanese tire manufacturer, Bridgestone/Firestone. The Ford Explorers which were prone to rolling over, came equipped with Firestone defected tires. The tire seemed to have a defect that caused the tread to separate from the whole of the tire and cause the vehicle to flip. Although Firestone knew about such defects, they continued to produce despite knowing the deadly consequences that lay behind their actions. The Explorer also had a bad reputation of rolling over and Ford knew it. As a result, fatal accidents occurred from these two combinations. Since this was a very serious safety issue, Ford and Firestone were ordering the recall of problem tires in Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Asia but not in the United States. So, did the company act ethically in resolving this crisis? No, the companies failed to fix the problem in the United States. According to NHTSA, the tires have caused many deaths and injuries in the United States. In fact, these accidents would have not occurred if both companies have solved the problem immediately. Thus, despite the obvious safety issues, there were also fundamental ethical issues.
The business world has always been a very risky business. There is a lot to worry about no matter what position a person fulfills; everyone has some level of responsibility. The Gap Incorporated is a multinational specialty retail company (Gap Inc. 2014). The company was created by a Doris and Don Fisher (Joslin et. al. 2010). Don Fisher and his wife was a very wealthy couple, Don was a real estate developer (Joslin et. al. 2010). They decided to open up a clothing store when Don realized how popular jeans were becoming in the fashion industry. Another reason that Don Fisher wanted to open a clothing store is because he has an extremely difficult time finding jeans that fit him properly in department stores (Joslin et. al. 2010). So in the year of 1969 the Fishers opened the very first Gap store in San Francisco, California (Gap Inc. 2014). In this paper I will explore The Gap Incorporated and discuss the company’s ethical culture and behavior past and present. Based on preliminary information, I hypothesize that The Gap Incorporated is an ethical company.
In conclusion, companies that seek to integrate into global markets usually encounter several problems because of the effect of globalization on business practices. The challenges originating from such integration is attributed to the differences in cultures in various societies across the globe. As evident in Google’s dilemma in China, there is no single set of universal ethics that are applicable to all settings and societies across the globe. Companies such as Google need to develop varying ethical standards that are relevant and appropriate to various nations and cultures in the world. This would enable the companies that are integrating into global markets to avoid ethical issues while maintaining effective business practices.
Our week five case study, Mattel and Toy Safety, involves toy safety inspection and product recall concerns among outside contractors. In 2007, the infamous toy company, Mattel, recalled a very large number of toy products covered with lead-based paint that were manufactured in China. Mattel responded to the massive toy recall by increasing the testing of all products and reassuring its customers that they will take affirmative action to correct the recall issues as soon possible. In my opinion, I believe Mattel acted in a socially responsible and ethical manner regarding the safety of it toys because as soon as Mattel was aware of a European merchant finding lead paint on their toy products, Mattel conducted an immediate investigation.
Toyota issues in automotive industry resulted from a lack of moral and ethical obligations to loyal customers. In fact, people encounter ethics at one time or another. A business expectation is to act in manner upholding society values. According to authors Trevino and Nelson, (2004) states, “a set of moral principals or values, or the principals, norm, and standards of conduct governing a group or individual.” On the other hand, three ethical criteria determined in this discussion like obligation, moral ideas, and consequences which this article highlights an ethical dilemma with automobiles makers.
In today’s fast paced business world many managers face tough decisions when walking the thin line between what’s legal and what’s socially unacceptable. It is becoming more and more important for organisations to consider many more factors, especially ethically, other than maximising profits in order to be more competitive or even survive in today’s business arena. The first part of this essay will discuss managerial ethics[1] and the relevant concepts and theories that affect ethical decision making, such as the Utilitarian, Individualism, Moral rights approach theories, the social responsibility of organisations to stakeholders and their responses to social demands, with specific reference to a case study presenting an ethical dilemma[2], where Mobil halts product sales to a garage, forcing the garage owner to stop selling solvents to young people. The second section of this essay will focus on advice that should be given to any manager in a similar position to the garage owner with relevance to the organisational strategic management, the corporate objective and the evaluation of corporate social performance by measuring economic, legal, ethical and discretionary responsibilities. It will address whom to think of as stakeholders and why the different aspect could cost more than a manager or an organisation could have imagined.
It seems obvious that large corporations have a tendency to ignore the negative effects of their actions in favor of profit. This example, although sensationalized, still says to me that with power comes responsibility. It affirmed my belief that a corporation’s goal cannot be just to provide profit to shareholders, but there must also be an element of social responsibility.