Firestone and Ford: the Tire Tread Separation Tragedy
Firestone and Ford: The Tire Tread Separation Tragedy
Business Ethics
November 8, 2011
Executive summary.
Firestone/Bridgestone and Ford companies caught public negative attention in the end of 1990s because of their relation to tire tread separation cases, which caused numerous car accidents not only in US, but also abroad. Because they did not take proper actions to eliminate the number of this cases and remove all dangerous products from the market timely, even if they knew that something was wrong, it lead to injuries, rollovers and even deaths. In this work I tried to investigate what were the reasons of this crisis, what action, that caused this scandal, had been undertaken or had not been undertaken, who were those that influenced it and who is responsible for injured people.
Introduction.
100 years long relations between global tire manufacturer Bridgestone/Firestone and world-known automobile producer Ford Motors were ended after a huge scandal with car accidents and rollovers, where Ford 's Explorer was equipped with Firestone tires. The second largest recall of tires in the history of US, which aroused because of the more than 200 deaths only in United States related to Firestone tires and Ford 's Explorer SUV, still remains in the memory of people. Many of the recalled tires were equipped to Ford 's Explorer, however both companies were denying their fault. Thus, disputable questions appeared with regard to the question, who is morally responsible and whose mistake lead to such numerous fatalities and injuries.
Reasons of tire tread.
Launched in 1990, from 1990 to 2001 Ford 's Explorer was the best selling SUV on the market. Firestone tires were made with taking into considerations specifications of Explorer (Moll, 2003). Also Firestone tried to participate in the modification of Explorer to improve its instability and weight distribution, to use smaller tires or widen wheel base, however Ford 's management team decided not to do
Business Ethics
November 8, 2011
Executive summary.
Firestone/Bridgestone and Ford companies caught public negative attention in the end of 1990s because of their relation to tire tread separation cases, which caused numerous car accidents not only in US, but also abroad. Because they did not take proper actions to eliminate the number of this cases and remove all dangerous products from the market timely, even if they knew that something was wrong, it lead to injuries, rollovers and even deaths. In this work I tried to investigate what were the reasons of this crisis, what action, that caused this scandal, had been undertaken or had not been undertaken, who were those that influenced it and who is responsible for injured people.
Introduction.
100 years long relations between global tire manufacturer Bridgestone/Firestone and world-known automobile producer Ford Motors were ended after a huge scandal with car accidents and rollovers, where Ford 's Explorer was equipped with Firestone tires. The second largest recall of tires in the history of US, which aroused because of the more than 200 deaths only in United States related to Firestone tires and Ford 's Explorer SUV, still remains in the memory of people. Many of the recalled tires were equipped to Ford 's Explorer, however both companies were denying their fault. Thus, disputable questions appeared with regard to the question, who is morally responsible and whose mistake lead to such numerous fatalities and injuries.
Reasons of tire tread.
Launched in 1990, from 1990 to 2001 Ford 's Explorer was the best selling SUV on the market. Firestone tires were made with taking into considerations specifications of Explorer (Moll, 2003). Also Firestone tried to participate in the modification of Explorer to improve its instability and weight distribution, to use smaller tires or widen wheel base, however Ford 's management team decided not to do
References: 1. Anonymous (2011). Ford Motor Company/ 2010 Annual Report. pp.20,17,19. Available:http://corporate.ford.com/doc/ir_2010_annual_report.pdf (accessed 8 November 2011). 2. Anonymous (2011). Bridgestone. Annual Report 2010. Operational Review. pp.02-05. Available:http://www.bridgestone.co.jp/corporate/library/pdf/bs_annual_2010_operational.pdf (accessed 8 November 2011). 3. Carroll & Buchholtz. (2006) Firestone and Ford: The Tire Tread Separation Tragedy. Business ethics, pp. 885,888-889. 4. Krueger A. B, Mas A. (2004, April). Strikes, Scabs, and Tread Separations: Labor Strife and the Production of Defective Bridgestone/Firestone Tires. Journal of Political Economy, 254-256. November 4, 2011, from JSTOR. 5. Moll R. (2003, May). Ford Motor Company and the Firestone tyre recall. Journal of Public Affairs, 202-207. November 4, 2011, from EBSCOhost 6. Noggle R., Palmer D. E (2005, January) Radials, Rollovers and Responsibility: An Examination of the Ford-Firestone Case. Journal of Business Ethics, 188. November 4, 2011, from JSTOR. 7. O 'Rourke J. (2004) Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. and Ford Motor Company: How a Product Safety Crisis Ended a Hundred-Year Relationship. 4-6. November 4, 2011, from EBSCOhost 8. Venette S. J., Sellnow T. L., Lang P. A. (2003, July). Metanarration 's Role in Restructuring Perceptions of Crisis: NHTSA 's Failure in the Ford-Firestone Crisis. Journal of Business Communication, 237-232. November 4, 2011, from EBSCOhost