Business Ethics January 2013
Business Ethics CA
by Brendan Traynor
D00110015
Introduction
In the following article we will discuss how multi-national organisations such as Ford, and Nestle saw fit to exploit Customers through clever lobbying, marketing, and pricing to buy their product over nature and competitors at the expense of human lives. We will discuss how Ford placed a price on human life, and how Nestle manipulated millions to die, as the provided false information. We discuss the ethical dilemmas around these issues.
The Ford Pinto
Infamously remembered as the very definition of 'Business ethics gone wrong '. Ford, in a bid to compete in the American small-car market, rushed their production of their Pinto model, this was to catastrophic repercussions, as in nearly all rear-end crash test, the car 's gas tank would explode. After been reported as a flaw, Ford decided that correction would be too time consuming and costly, $11 too costly. The general public were outraged by Ford 's sheer disregard for human life.
For every Ethical decision, one must consider the three steps to decision-making involved:
Analyze the consequences:
A report by Mark Dowie in 1977 entitled 'Pinto Madness ', claimed that Ford had knowingly put an unsafe car on the road, a car in which hundreds of people needlessly suffered burn deaths. Dowie goes on to explain that Ford engineers discovered, after testing, that rear-collisions would rupture the Pinto 's fuel system extremely easily. Ford owned the patent for a much safer fuel tank design, however, deemed that because production procedures were already in place, they would proceed with the original, unsafe tank. Dowie claims the result of all this claimed at least 500, if not 900 lives, 42% of all road-burn tragedies.
Ford admitted the fault and in-tastefully remarked 'Pinto leaves you with that warm feeling '. Their admission of failing the rear-collision standard test, prompted Ford to conduct a
by Brendan Traynor
D00110015
Introduction
In the following article we will discuss how multi-national organisations such as Ford, and Nestle saw fit to exploit Customers through clever lobbying, marketing, and pricing to buy their product over nature and competitors at the expense of human lives. We will discuss how Ford placed a price on human life, and how Nestle manipulated millions to die, as the provided false information. We discuss the ethical dilemmas around these issues.
The Ford Pinto
Infamously remembered as the very definition of 'Business ethics gone wrong '. Ford, in a bid to compete in the American small-car market, rushed their production of their Pinto model, this was to catastrophic repercussions, as in nearly all rear-end crash test, the car 's gas tank would explode. After been reported as a flaw, Ford decided that correction would be too time consuming and costly, $11 too costly. The general public were outraged by Ford 's sheer disregard for human life.
For every Ethical decision, one must consider the three steps to decision-making involved:
Analyze the consequences:
A report by Mark Dowie in 1977 entitled 'Pinto Madness ', claimed that Ford had knowingly put an unsafe car on the road, a car in which hundreds of people needlessly suffered burn deaths. Dowie goes on to explain that Ford engineers discovered, after testing, that rear-collisions would rupture the Pinto 's fuel system extremely easily. Ford owned the patent for a much safer fuel tank design, however, deemed that because production procedures were already in place, they would proceed with the original, unsafe tank. Dowie claims the result of all this claimed at least 500, if not 900 lives, 42% of all road-burn tragedies.
Ford admitted the fault and in-tastefully remarked 'Pinto leaves you with that warm feeling '. Their admission of failing the rear-collision standard test, prompted Ford to conduct a
References: Maeve McArdle (2013). Business Ethics January 2013. DkIT: DkIT College . 56.