Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Class Case The Ford Pinto Car Case Study.pdf
Similar to Class Case The Ford Pinto Car Case Study.pdf (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Class Case The Ford Pinto Car Case Study.pdf
- 3. Class Case Ford Pinto Car I. Facts of the Case Background Company Profile TOWS Analysis II. Objectives of the Case III. Ethical Issue IV. Stakeholders V. Alternatives Courses of Action VI. Effects of Alternatives on Stakeholders VII. Choosing the Best Alternative Decision Criteria and Weights Evaluation of Alternative Courses of Action VIII. Discussion of Results IX. Implementation Plan X. References THREATS Strong competition with Volkswagen Inflicting damage due to brand reputation Lawsuits Closing of company Credibility issues Media reports Potential losses due to market pullout OPPORTUNITIES Rising market of compact cars Marketability of the patented tech Intro of new design to the marke acceptable to the public and safety standards Car loan offers WEAKNESSES Faulty design of the fuel tank Opportunistic Employees (bigger market share without considering tech issues) Value profit over safety Poor quality mgt control Dollar over life STRENGTHS Low cost-affordability Trusted brand Profitability due to product itself Faster to produce Patented tech
- 4. Class Case Ford Pinto Car I. Facts of the Case Background Company Profile TOWS Analysis II. Objectives of the Case III. Ethical Issue IV. Stakeholders V. Alternatives Courses of Action VI. Effects of Alternatives on Stakeholders VII. Choosing the Best Alternative Decision Criteria and Weights Evaluation of Alternative Courses of Action VIII. Discussion of Results IX. Implementation Plan X. References THREATS Lawsuits + strong presence of compact cars Competition Govt restrictions Cost analysis is lacking in terms of basis in assigning costs Volkswagen competition Available document that put Ford down OPPORTUNITIES Tapping the compact car markets High demand Product devt National Highway… car industry support Strengthen their case by other brands WEAKNESSES Product recalls Unsafe car -gas tank position Authoritarian mgt Less production budget (?) Poor design Poor product dev planning Negligence Inhumane cost-benefit analysis Ford delayed ethical decision for 8 years STRENGTHS Connection with lobbying Strong brand recall Operating in home market Globally competitive Good crisis mgt Massive resources
- 5. 2. Objectives of the Case In the context of business ethics, this case study aims to: ● Objective 1 ● Objective 2 3. Ethical Issue: Statement of the problem. If more than one problem, cite all and state how your chosen problem is more important than the others Point of View: Whose point of view are you taking?
- 6. 2. Objectives of the Case In the context of business ethics, this case study aims to: ● Objective 1 Know realities in the conduct of business, responsibilities and maximization of profits as just one of the focus of ethical behavior ● Objective 2 Brand strategy based on honesty, authenticity and transparency Prepare readers to ethically do the right thing Exercise and consider decisions to reach an ethical decisions 3. Ethical Issue: Statement of the problem. If more than one problem, cite all and state how your chosen problem is more important than the others Placing dollar value on human life Neglecting safety issues Ford Transparency on the issue human life Legal rights over moral rights Stakeholders’ asymmetric info bet Ford and society Ford’s Sense of Accountability Govt standards are substandard Justice for the rich and powerful ONLY
- 7. 4. Stakeholders Stakeholder Group Ford Customers Victims and their families Government Competitors Employees of Ford Suppliers Impact on the Stakeholder Ford: Customer loyalty, trust, loss of profit Customer: pay more for car improvement, higher quality and safe cars Victims/Families: Justice Government: people trusting govt more easier way implementing prod stds; save time Competitors: improved products to save lives Employees of Ford: Boost morale Suppliers: better quality of raw materials 5. Alternative Courses Of Action ● Alternative 1 : Product recall, ensure safety protocols in place Acknowledgment of fault++ Description of the alternative Effect on Ford: positive attraction to customers ● Alternative 2: Ensure quality cars to produce, customers options for refund, just compensation to victims Description of the alternative ● Alternative 3: Ford uses influence with government to advance safety protocols+ Compliance regulatory stds set by government Ford will be associated with safe cars Description of the alternative
- 8. 4. Stakeholders Stakeholder Group Impact on the Stakeholder 5. Alternative Courses Of Action ● Alternative 1 ● Alternative 2: Description of the alternative ● Alternative 3:
- 9. 4. Stakeholders Stakeholder Group Ford Customers Victims and their families Government Competitors Employees of Ford Suppliers Impact on the Stakeholder Ford: Customer loyalty, trust, loss of profit Customer: pay more for car improvement, higher quality and safe cars Victims/Families: Justice Government: people trusting govt more easier way implementing prod stds; save time Competitors: improved products to save lives Employees of Ford: Boost morale Suppliers: better quality of raw materials 5. Alternative Courses Of Action ● Alternative 1 : Product recall, ensure safety protocols in place Acknowledgment of fault++ Description of the alternative Effect on Ford: positive attraction to customers ● Alternative 2: Ensure quality cars to produce, customers options for refund, just compensation to victims Description of the alternative ● Alternative 3: Ford uses influence with government to advance safety protocols+ Compliance regulatory stds set by government Ford will be associated with safe cars Description of the alternative
- 10. 6. Effects of Alternatives on Stakeholders Alternative 1: : Product recall, ensure safety protocols in place Stakeholder Effects Stakeholder Group 1: Ford Management: Profits, reputation Stakeholder Group 2: Employees: loss of job? Stakeholder Group 3: Suppliers: belief of good standards of Ford 7. Choosing the Best Alternative
- 11. Markulla Framework Utilitarian Approach Who benefit from the act? Who are burdened? Does the act maximize the total net benefit to everyone concerned (stakeholders)? Discussion Ethics of Care Does the act show proper care to people we have special relationships with? Will it earn the trust of people we value? Discussion Rights & Duties Approach Does the act respect the moral rights of everyone concerned? Does it treat everyone as persons and not merely as things? Justice & Fairness Approach Will the act lead to a fair distribution of benefits and burdens? If it will cause inequality, will it improve the situation of the least advantaged persons? Human Dignity and Common Good Approach Does the act promote dignity and allow total human development for everyone? Virtue Approach Will this option lead me to act as the sort of person I want to be?
- 12. Decision Criteria Definition Weights Rationale Utilitarian Approach Who benefit from the act? Who are burdened? Does the act maximize the total net benefit to everyone concerned (stakeholders)? Ford Employees Victims Etc. 50% 30 20 10 30% Rights and Duties Approach Does the act respect the moral rights of everyone concerned? Does it treat everyone as persons and not merely as things? 10 20 10 20% Justice and Fairness Approach Will the act lead to a fair distribution of benefits and burdens? If it will cause inequality, will it improve the situation of the least advantaged persons? 15 20 15 30% Ethics of Care approach 15 20 15 10% Human Dignity and Common Good Approach 50% 30 20 50 10% ACA1
- 13. Reporter Critique Case Group 1 3 1, Enron Group 2 4 2, Google Group 3 5 3, Fb Targeting a Broken Heart Group 4 1 4 Walmart Group 5 2 5 Silent Initiative