Ford Pinto- Ethics
September 6, 2010
Lance O 'Dell
Current Ethical Issues in Business: The Ford Pinto Fires
In early 1968, the Ford Motor Company decided to take on the foreign car competition by introducing a compact, affordable vehicle they named the Pinto. What began as the decision to enter the race for the top small car ultimately led to an unprecedented court case wherein the Ford Motor Company found itself charged with reckless homicide and was the first corporation charged with criminal conduct. In this paper, the authors delve into the tragedy of the Ford Pinto fires and the ethical standards and boundaries of the Ford Motor Company at that time.
History
For two years, then-president Semon "Bunky" Knudson and Lee Iacocca engaged in a battle of power regarding the Pinto (Gioia, n.d.). Knudson was of the opinion that Ford should stay out of the small car market and focus instead on the more profitable areas of medium and large model vehicles. Iacocca, on the other hand, held firm in his belief that Ford should try to outdo the competition and join the race in the small car arena. Ultimately, Iacocca was authorized to move forward with production of the Pinto (Gioia, n.d.). Because Iacocca wanted the Pinto released with the 1971 vehicle models, the production planning period was dramatically reduced from three and one-half years to approximately two years. Additionally, he implemented a specific goal known as "the limits of 2,000" (Gioia, n.d.). This goal meant that the Pinto could not cost more than $2,000 and could not weigh more than 2,000 pounds. Consequently, the rush for completion led to the Pinto 's inadequate gas tank design resulting in the tank exploding upon contact in rear-end collisions. Despite crash test results that made Ford fully aware of the faulty tank design, Ford opted to stick with its original gas tank design rather than spend the extra $11 per vehicle. To correct the faults in design as identified in Ford 's cost benefits analysis
Lance O 'Dell
Current Ethical Issues in Business: The Ford Pinto Fires
In early 1968, the Ford Motor Company decided to take on the foreign car competition by introducing a compact, affordable vehicle they named the Pinto. What began as the decision to enter the race for the top small car ultimately led to an unprecedented court case wherein the Ford Motor Company found itself charged with reckless homicide and was the first corporation charged with criminal conduct. In this paper, the authors delve into the tragedy of the Ford Pinto fires and the ethical standards and boundaries of the Ford Motor Company at that time.
History
For two years, then-president Semon "Bunky" Knudson and Lee Iacocca engaged in a battle of power regarding the Pinto (Gioia, n.d.). Knudson was of the opinion that Ford should stay out of the small car market and focus instead on the more profitable areas of medium and large model vehicles. Iacocca, on the other hand, held firm in his belief that Ford should try to outdo the competition and join the race in the small car arena. Ultimately, Iacocca was authorized to move forward with production of the Pinto (Gioia, n.d.). Because Iacocca wanted the Pinto released with the 1971 vehicle models, the production planning period was dramatically reduced from three and one-half years to approximately two years. Additionally, he implemented a specific goal known as "the limits of 2,000" (Gioia, n.d.). This goal meant that the Pinto could not cost more than $2,000 and could not weigh more than 2,000 pounds. Consequently, the rush for completion led to the Pinto 's inadequate gas tank design resulting in the tank exploding upon contact in rear-end collisions. Despite crash test results that made Ford fully aware of the faulty tank design, Ford opted to stick with its original gas tank design rather than spend the extra $11 per vehicle. To correct the faults in design as identified in Ford 's cost benefits analysis
References: Casotti, L., Lafler, N. & Lindaman, J. (2004, October). Ford Pinto Case [PowerPoint slides]. Right (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Peabody, M. (2009). Once there was a way to get back home. Mugsy Peabody Online. Retrieved from http://mugsypeabody.blogspot.com/search?q=ford+pinto Schwartz, G.T. (1990). The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case. Point of Law. Retrieved from http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/archives/000023.php Valdes-Dapena, P. (2010). Tagged: 10 cars with bad reputations. CNNmoney.com. Retrieved