Case Analysis 2 The Ford Firestone Deb
Ben Lake
Prof Guo
Business Ethics
23/04/2014
Case Analysis #2 – The Ford/Firestone Debacle
I) Case Summary
Introduced to the market in 1990, the Ford Explorer quickly became the most popular sport utility vehicle In America. SUV’s are designed to travel off-road, are built high off the ground to clear rocks and other obstructions underneath. The explorer fulfilled consumers’ desire of comfort and ruggedness. Ford’s engineers designed the Explorer to use the same truck frame as its older Ranger pickup, allowing it to be manufactured on the same assembly lines. The frame being used for the Explorer allowed for more room underneath the car but raised the center of gravity. The suspension for the Explorer was also the same as the old Bronco which was the subject of over 800 lawsuits due to it being susceptible to rolling over. Ford’s engineers suggested several designs to minimize rolling over such as, mounting the wheels further apart, lowering the engine, or replacing the twin I-beam suspension, all of which would have delayed the planned release date. So instead they chose alternatives which would not delay the release date.
The tires for the explorer were manufactured by Firestone who had a long close relationship with Ford, dating back to the late 1800’s. However this relationship was strained when problems began to emerge in 1993 when five lawsuits were filed alleging that the tires when mounted on the Explorer were prone to catastrophic failures that resulted in rollovers on the high vehicle. Firestone claimed the treads would sometimes peel off in hot regions. Countless deaths were attributed to tread-separation incidents leading countless recalls and to Ford eventually cutting ties with Firestone stating, “It had lost confidence in Firestone and would no longer use its tires on the Explorer”.
II) Problem Analysis
There are many issues with reference to this topic as many individuals believe both Ford and Firestone are to blame for the problems with
Prof Guo
Business Ethics
23/04/2014
Case Analysis #2 – The Ford/Firestone Debacle
I) Case Summary
Introduced to the market in 1990, the Ford Explorer quickly became the most popular sport utility vehicle In America. SUV’s are designed to travel off-road, are built high off the ground to clear rocks and other obstructions underneath. The explorer fulfilled consumers’ desire of comfort and ruggedness. Ford’s engineers designed the Explorer to use the same truck frame as its older Ranger pickup, allowing it to be manufactured on the same assembly lines. The frame being used for the Explorer allowed for more room underneath the car but raised the center of gravity. The suspension for the Explorer was also the same as the old Bronco which was the subject of over 800 lawsuits due to it being susceptible to rolling over. Ford’s engineers suggested several designs to minimize rolling over such as, mounting the wheels further apart, lowering the engine, or replacing the twin I-beam suspension, all of which would have delayed the planned release date. So instead they chose alternatives which would not delay the release date.
The tires for the explorer were manufactured by Firestone who had a long close relationship with Ford, dating back to the late 1800’s. However this relationship was strained when problems began to emerge in 1993 when five lawsuits were filed alleging that the tires when mounted on the Explorer were prone to catastrophic failures that resulted in rollovers on the high vehicle. Firestone claimed the treads would sometimes peel off in hot regions. Countless deaths were attributed to tread-separation incidents leading countless recalls and to Ford eventually cutting ties with Firestone stating, “It had lost confidence in Firestone and would no longer use its tires on the Explorer”.
II) Problem Analysis
There are many issues with reference to this topic as many individuals believe both Ford and Firestone are to blame for the problems with