I would rather the car go through vigorous testing to cut down on some of the cost-benefit analysis that weighed the cost of adding the Ford pinto executive summary against the estimated cost of lawsuits. The administration was pressured by safety advocates Center for Auto Safety as well as the public respose.
Knudsen wanted to focus on medium and large cars, Iacocca on profit and market control, regardless of impact to customers. The external pressure that was most important was from the people.
As a moral decision there would be a dilemma. A large "bullet car" was used instead of a standard moving barrier.
De George, p. It was also being forced into action due to the ways in which both the courts and executive branch were limiting the ability of the NHTSA to address systematic auto safety issues.
They aim to eliminate wastes in their Ford pinto executive summary and produce high quality parts at faster production rates. In my opinion, Ford was making a cheap automobile to be on top of the small car industry over all other automobile makers, domestic and foreign.
The NHTSA investigation found that 27 deaths were found to have occurred between and mid in rear-impact crashes that resulted in fire. The vehicle headlights were turned on to provide a possible ignition source.
Retrieved December 4, from http: In total,Bobcats were produced from to Only when considering the narrow subset of rear-impact, fire fatalities is the car somewhat worse than the average for subcompact cars. They purposefully overlooked all safety concerns when producing this vehicle.
As a cost-efficient decision there would be a no question choice of not adding the baffle. Ford hid crash results from the government and posed questions to make more paperwork, which postponed the government in implementing regulations.
Although the text stated that Ford Pinto lost more than 50 million dollars in lawsuits and bad publicity, other text found on Engineering.
The products must be thoroughly inspected and approved by quality representatives from the companies that produce them and in some product lines government agencies must audit the products.
The larger inline-4 found in the Chevrolet Vega was an innovative, brand new design using an aluminum alloy block and iron head, but needed more development work as initially released. Is their production unethical? Iacocca was eventually promoted to President forcing Knudsen to resign.
The people that lost their lives are what made us think of the solution. The questions that come about when determining how unethical it all was are: They tried to lean out their manufacturing process without the proper business tools in place. External social pressures influenced the decision because people were more concerned with low costs than safety and this lead to preventable deaths.
There is no price for a human life, even though Ford felt there was a price! The Bobcat was never offered as a 2-door sedan with an enclosed trunk for the U. While acknowledging this is an important legal point, Schwartz rejects the portrayal of the car as a firetrap.
They overlooked standards and neglected the customer. When I discovered that the gas tank was unsafe, I would have pictured my family riding in the death trap and all of the horrible conclusions that could arise from the gas tank rupturing.
As far as the other issues with fords finances and reputation I feel that they were in it for the good of the company and not the good of the consumer.
This mission still holds true today. Reference De George, R.Ford Pinto Executive Summary Your Name University of Phoenix MGT/ Teacher Date Ford Pinto Executive Summary The Ford Pinto case is a classic example of ethics versus money.
Ford decided to make a decision that was unethical in order to save time and money. The questions that come about when determining how unethical it all [ ].
Ethics Ford Pinto Case Study Discussion and Executive Summary This paper explores “The Ford Pinto Case” managing of business ethics. Numerous factors suggest within this research that Ford Motor Company was negligent and violated its code of ethics%(26).
Ford Motor Company introduced the Ford Pinto into the consumer market place and the end result was profit over human life - Ford Pinto - Executive Summary introduction.
Ford Motor Company analyzed the cost of replacing an inexpensive part and found that it was cheaper to pay for suits resulting in accidental deaths and injuries. Running head: CASE STUDY PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 1 CASE STUDY AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE \* MERGEFORMAT 2 Ford Pinto Case Study and Executive SummaryMgmt.
Ford Pinto Executive Summary The Ford Pinto case is a classic example of ethics versus money. Ford decided to make a decision that was unethical in order to save time and money.
Ford Pinto Fires Case Study and Executive Summary John Bonner, Scotti Greenleaf, Rose Scarbrough MGT University of Phoenix October 18, Sarah Nelson.Download