Ethical Dilemma in the Ford Pinto Case
Insert Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Ethical Dilemma in the Ford Pinto Case
Introductions and ethical dilemma
The Ford Pinto case was one of the most famous Pinto models that exploded after collision in 1970. The engine’s problem was its fuel design that needed to be upgraded to prevent an explosion. The incident that brought the attention of the world to the defective flue system involved the explosion of a car belonging to Lily Gar and her 13-year-old son Richard (Hester & Adams, 2017). There are several ethical and legal implications of the Ford Pinto case due to the negligence in the pinto car fuel system’s design and development. The ford pinto’s ethical dilemma case was the use of cost-benefit analysis and the unethical decisions not to upgrade the fuel system based on this analysis.
The engine explored after the collusion killing Lily and injuring Richard badly. After the incident, a closer look was taken on the engine and fuel system’s development and design. It was determined that the fuel system was designed and implemented at an accelerated pace without thorough research on any defects it may have. According to the police reports on the scene the collusions could not have killed lily Gary, she, therefore, died from the explosion caused by the fuel system (Lin, 2016). The case’s primary focus was the legal and ethical implications of failing to use the designs that could have otherwise improved the safety of the car to its users.
The case study presents an ethical dilemma and legal implications for the Ford motor company. From the case analysis, it is evident that negligence was the main reason for the development of a faulty fuel design in the pinto ford vehicles. Apparently, after its release to the market, car sales were somewhat high as the vehicles were locally made cheaper and more reliable (Lutge, 2018). However, despite the cost-benefit analysis being perceived as an important aspect in companies’ decision-making, ford Pinto case raised questions on ethical implications in cases of accidents. The primary questions raised on the risk and benefits analysis were whether it could be applicable in cases where a faulty design like the pinto case leads to injuries or deaths of the customers.
Ethical analysis
Studies show that Ford had access to a new design that would have to improve the efficiency of the engine and correct the faults in the fuel designs initially used in the Ford Pinto cars. These modifications would have drastically decreased the possibility of pinto cars exploding after collusions. However, the company chose to disregard these new designs and improvements due to the additional cost per car that it could incur. This is a rather unethical and questionable choice made that led to the explosion of one of their cars, which led to Lily Grey’s death and left Richard her son with serious injuries. Several more cases of the explosion confirmed the availability of a defective fuel design the vehicles (Hester & Adams, 2017). The company’s primary argument was its own assessment of the risk benefits analysis in the implementations of the changes to its design. Studies show that the w designs’ implementations would have cost the company a total of $137 million instead of the $49 million that led to the deaths injuries and damages worth millions of dollars.
Ford justified these deaths and damages as worth the cost they would have otherwise incurred to some extent. Although car accidents are common in any vehicle model, these caused by ford pinto led to explosions that further limited the possibilities of survival by the victims. The primary reason for the development of the Ford Pinto was to gain a competitive advantage of vehicles from Japan. Ford, therefore, had one main agenda in mind, which was economic development through increased revenue and profit margins. Indeed after the released ford Pinto into the market, the sales were remarkable a show that it penetrated the market and increased its market shares (Lin, 2016). The risk and benefit analysis was done based on product liability development. In this sense, the organizations were more concerned about the one spend in developing the vehicles and its designs as opposed to the funds enquired to make the necessary upgrades to improve the safety of the vehicles.
According to the judge, in cases where the potential harm is more than the expected cost of corrections, on the precautions, the precautions need to be taken into account immediately hence the upgrades of the fire engines (Hester & Adams, 2017). In this case, therefore Ford legally declined to make the necessary upgrades to the fuel engine an aspect that would have made the Pinto cars safer for its customer. However, this decline can be regarded as the cause of explosion incidences to most car aspects that minimized the users’ ability to survive a crash (Lutge, 2018). From this analysis, it can be deduced that the decisions to ignore the recommended upgrades to the engine were legal. Hence no liabilities were directed towards the company. However, from an ethical perspective, it can be deduced that this was a significant shortcoming on this of the organizations. Their emphasis was making profits for their organizations as opposed to the safety of its users in the long run.
The successes of the company are based on this relationship with consumers. Therefore the refusal to make necessary upgrades implied that the management of the Ford Company was more interested in making profits than public relations through an emphasis on the safety of the road users. From an ethical perspective, Ford had an obligation to ensure products’ safety regardless of how it could cost. The BPL formula is more concerned on specific incidence to make decisions as opposed to the risk cost analysis that takes into account the cost of the precautions needed to make the necessary safety measures (Lin, 2016). Ethics is based on the obligations that organizations have to their users and how they make decisions based on rationality and regards to life. The case illustrates the legal framework in the decision to decline to make the upgrades to the engines. These upgrades would have saved many lives in the process. However, there was a possibility that it would have resulted in bankrupts of the ford company; hence the decisions to decline the upgrades.
The risk/benefits analysis is a rather strict policy that affects the overall public relations with consumers. Milton Friedman’s provides insight into the leadership’s decision-making process in the organizations. The management answers to the shareholders and the directors. The decision to spend much money on upgrades when they are not legally required to was rather easy to make. In this case, the Ford leadership’s primary concern was profit for the organization through market shares expansion and increasing the sales of the cars in the process (Strother, 2018). The ethical perspective of this decision was ignored as the focus was directed towards a decision that will be acceptable to the shareholders of the organization. Under these circumstances, the regard for human lives and their safety was not taken into considerations.
The management was aware of the potential explosions in cases of an accident. Ethical decisions need to be made based n what the society would perceive as right or wrong. It also takes into account the preservations of human life as a way to increase the chances of better public relations with consumers (Lutge, 2018). The primary stakeholders in the organizations are the consumers; in this case, their needs should be met long before the needs of the organizations. However, the economic perspectives used by the organizations to make the decision were risk/benefits analysis and presented the decision to ignore the required upgrades as necessary for reductions of production cost to the company (Schwartz, 2016).
The ethical framework that could have changed the result
The Ford Company was facing stiff competitions from other motor companies, especially those from Japan. The decision to design and develop the Ford Pinto was a strategic one and, hence, market penetration success. However, since the cost of implementing the designs was somewhat expensive, other primary strategies would have been adopted to reduce the chances of exposing in collusions and minimize the costs needed to make the upgrades (Strother, 2018). After a few sales for instances, the organizations had significant profits from the sales. This profits could then be used to redesign the rest of the engines for the cars under development. This could have ensured that the new buyers were safer in their cars as opposed to the negligence they showed with the decisions not to make upgrades that would have otherwise saved up to 180 live. In the decision-making process from an ethical perceives conservation of life is expected to be the primary directed, especially with regards to motor vehicle manufacture.
The board of directors and the shareholders should have taken time to assess their decisions’ long-term effects to ignore the improvements that should have been made to the fuel system. Cars are primary designed to increase efficiency in transportation. However, despite the acceptable risks of accidents, the negligence to improve the engines and prevent explosion during accidents was the organization’s ethical obligations (Johnson, 2019). The use of the risk/benefit economic theory was also unethical in the sense that making a decision that people will be killed or badly injured to save the cost of upgrades is very inconsiderate and selfish. The analysis also failed to highlight the public’s potential negative perceptions based on these decisions (Schwartz, 2016). Therefore, there was a significant breach of public trust based on this economic analysis’s applications in the Pinto case’s decision-making process.
Legal implications
In his case, the primary legal issues were accountability for the numerous deaths and lawsuits for those who lost their loved ones based on the negligence of the Ford Company. The cars that exploded were caused by the faulty fuel system design that was already known to the Ford Company (Strother, 2018). Therefore, these deaths were the responsibility of the ford company, and they had to take responsibility for their actions. The company was aware of the upgrades needed to ensure the safety of Ford pinto users but failed to implement this changes on the basis of the cost it would have incurred the company (Lutge, 2018). In this regard, therefore, the company is fully responsible for all the deaths and injuries caused by the explosion of pinto cars. The company also sold vehicles that had the potential to cause harm to the customers, which was a significant violation of consumer rights to safety.
The company was liable for all the damages and deaths caused by their vehicles’ explosions. Several people were injured, and over 180 people died from the fuel systems’ explosions in the engines. The company was liable for these damages; hence laws suits were filed against it for compensations. Those who were injured sued for compensations, and so did those who lost their loved ones (Johnson, 2019).
Lack of sufficient information about the gas tank’s faulty nature was also considered a criminal offence. This act amounts to fraud as people were used into thinking the car was safe to drive. The company management was aware of the gas tank’s faulty nature and its potential to explode in cases of an accident (Strother, 2018). However, this information was hidden from the consumers. Therefore, the buyers willingly bought the cars without the slightest knowledge of how dangerous its gas tanks were. If the customers were aware of the fuels in the tank and bought the cars anyway, the company would not have been held responsible for the deaths and injuries caused by the gas tanks’ explosions. This is a criminal offence that requires the people responsible to b held accountable for their actions in any given capacity.
Conclusions
In conclusions, the Ford Pinto case had both legal and ethical implications, especially in the applications of the risk/benefit analysis as an economic theory for the decision making process. The company developed the Pinto cars as a way to counter the growing influence of Japanese cars in the country. However, the design and manufacturing process was accelerated without regards to safety implications that would have arisen in the future. After the manufacture of these vehicles, the researchers determined the fuel system’s faulty nature that would potentially cause explosions in cases o collusions. Some of the notable incidences of death and injuries include the death of Lily Gray and her son Richard’s injury due to explosions after collusion. In this case, the ethical issues include the choice to risk the lives of people and potential injures due to the cost of upgrades and safety precautions.
References
Hester, P. T., & Adams, K. M. (2017). Ford Pinto Case Study. In Systemic Decision Making (pp. 351-384). Springer, Cham.
Johnson, C. E. (2019). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or shadow. SAGE Publications, Incorporated.
Lin, P. (2016). Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. In Autonomous driving (pp. 69-85). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Lütge, C. (2018). Ford Pinto: Is Cost-Benefit Analysis Allowed in Ethical Decision Making?. SAGE Publications: SAGE Business Cases Originals.
Schwartz, M. S. (2016). Ethical decision-making theory: An integrated approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(4), 755-776.
Strother, S. (2018). When Making Money is More Important Than Saving Lives: Revisiting the Ford Pinto Case. Journal of International & Interdisciplinary Business Research, 5(1), 166-181.