THE FORD PINTO CASE A Dangerous Product On 10 August 1978 Judy Ann Ulrich‚ eighteen‚ was driving a 1973 Ford Pinto to volley-ball practice in Goshen‚ Indiana. Inside the car with her were her sister Lynn Marie‚ sixteen‚ and their cousin Donna Ulrich‚ eighteen. As they were heading north on U.S. Route 33‚ their car was struck from behind by a 1972 Chevrolet van. The Pinto collapsed like an accordion; the fuel tank ruptured; and the car exploded in flames. Lynn Marie and Donna burned to death in
Premium Ford Motor Company English-language films Automobile
Question 7: In our opinion‚ we think that Ford Company is morally wrong if the savings resulting from not improving the Pinto gas tank had been passed on to force’s customers. We will say is morally wrong because Pinto do not meet the safety standard propose by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The safety standard of NHTSA is to reduce fires from traffic collisions. This standard required that all new cars produced by 1972 should be able to withstand a rear-end impact
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Station wagon
decision-making framework. The Pinto safety issue was evaluated utilizing a Utilitarian framework motivated by the CEO’s Egoism. From a risk management standpoint‚ this may be the most dangerous combination in a decision-making. The Procedural steps of the decision making framework was Utilitarian in nature‚ Ford chose the action that would cause the least amount of harm for the majority involved‚ therefore allowing the minority to be harmed by death. Apparently‚ Ford did not care about the type
Premium Morality Risk Human
Lottie George Part‚ Two Water for Profit‚ John Luoma February 26‚ 2013 Should Water be Free? Today’s economy is mostly comprised of wealthy business investors and major corporations. Fresh water resources are being controlled or being angle drilled by private corporations from across the world. This article by John Luoma‚ Privatization refers to: To change (an industry or business) from Government or public ownership or control to a private enterprise dealing with private water companies
Premium Minimum wage Water resources Wage
Cazul Ford Pinto Acesta caz s-a petrecut la sfarsitul anilor ’60‚ cand cererea pentru masini sub-compacte a fost in crestere pe piata. Specificatiile Iacocca pentru proiectarea masinii au fost fara compromisuri: "Pinto trebuia sa fie cu nici macar o uncie mai greu de 2.000 de pounds (aprox. 900 kg) si sa nu coste un cent peste 2.000 de dolari." In timpul proiectarii si productiei‚ totusi‚ testele de coliziune a relevat un defect serios la rezervorul de benzina. In accidente
Premium
1. Case Summaries and Guide Questions for Discussion: https://www2.bc.edu/~sannella/Case.htm SULLIVAN’S AUTO WORLD. The owner of a Ford car dealership dies unexpectedly. His 28-year ... Compare the sales and service departments at Auto World. What useful.... Provide supporting quantitative analysis where appropriate. What ... 2. term paper on Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis) www.termpapermasters.com/.../Analysis-of-the-Sullivan-Ford-Auto-... Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis)
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Case study
price on life - $200 725 (adjusted for inflation). The Ford Motor Company used this data along with other statistical studies to determine the cost benefit of improving the safety of the Ford Pinto compared to the cost of loss of life. It was determined that the cost of the suggested improvements outweighed their benefits. This essay aims to address whether cost-benefit analysis is a legitimate tool and what role‚ if any‚ it should play in moral deliberation‚ especially when placing a monetary value
Premium Ford Pinto Cost-benefit analysis Cost
Case Study: Ford Pinto MGT/216 07/17/20 Case Study: Ford Pinto Abstract In 1971‚ Ford Motor Company (FMC)‚ on the advice of then vice-president Lee Iacocca‚ introduced the first subcompact vehicle‚ the Ford Pinto. After production had begun and the release of the Pinto in the United States‚ Ford discovered a defect in the design on the fuel system; the gas tank was placed in the rear of the vehicle. This error could cause the vehicle to explode on low speed rear end collisions due to a
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto
Ford Pinto Executive Summary Your Name University of Phoenix MGT/216 Teacher Date Ford Pinto Executive Summary The Ford Pinto case is a classic example of ethics versus money. Ford decided to make a decision that was unethical in order to save time and money. The questions that come about when determining how unethical it all was are: What solutions would be recommended to make it better? How did external social pressures influence the decisions? Through the period eye would the decision
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company
Ford Pinto Case: The Invisible Corporate Human Pricetag In this essay‚ I will argue that Ford Motor Company’s business behavior was unethical as demonstrated in the Ford Pinto Case. Ford did not reveal all the facts to consumers about a harmful gas tank design in the Ford Pinto. They tried to justify their decision to sell an unsafe car by using a Cost-Benefit Analysis which determined it was cheaper to sell the cars without changing to a safer gas tank. The price of not fixing the gas tanks
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Automobile