Firestone and ford: the tire tread separation strategy (case for discusiion for bba iii b on Tuesday 21 May 2013) It is often tricky to know when an ethical orsocial issue really begins. Does it begin before it is “recognized” or “identified” as an issue? Does it begin when an isolated manager recognizes an incident or a trend and reports it via a memo to his superiors? Does it begin once the media get hold of information and the frenzy begins? Such questions arise in the case of the Firestone–Ford
Premium Ford Motor Company
One of the latest recalls involves two companies‚ which are the Ford Motor Company and Firestone. About 290‚000 Firestone tires will be replaced on Ford cars; this action was taken after several accidents happened. Some of the accidents were associated with the death of the drivers. Firestone and Ford Motor’s reputation and public image were affected after this recall (Hakim‚ 2004). Newsweek specified that some of the worst companies in the plant are companies that concentrate on utilities. Peabody
Premium Management Ford Motor Company General Motors
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
Premium Ford Motor Company
Case 8: Questions 1-6 Firestone and Ford: The Tire Tread Separation Tragedy 1. What are the major and minor ethical issues in this case? The major ethical issue in this case is the ignoring an obvious crisis for so long‚ one in which people are being injured and in cases killed. The minor ethical issues include the organizations involved in this case pointing fingers at both the consumers and each other and covering up evidence proving there is a problem. 2. Who are the stakeholders and what
Premium Ethics Business ethics Virtue
Report In August 2000‚ Ford Motor Company and Firestone Tire Company recalled 6.5 Million ATX and AT tires that had been installed on Ford’s Explorer model SUV. At the time‚ it appeared as though Ford and Firestone were doing the right thing. They had found out that the tread separated on Ford Explorers in states with intense heat‚ such as Florida and Texas. However‚ it later came to light that both Ford and Firestone had known about these problems earlier than 2000 and that Ford had even had a similar
Premium Ford Motor Company
Bridgestone/Firestone‚ Inc. officially announced that it was recalling 6.5 million of its Wilderness AT tires‚ most of which had been installed on Ford’s popular SUV‚ the Explorer. It was reported that Explorers equipped with Wilderness AT tires had been involved in a large number of rollover accidents on the USA high way leading to more than 170 deaths and over 700 injuries‚ and more than 40 deaths in the other countries. After August 2000‚ Ford announced a recall of more than 1 million Firestone tires
Premium Quality management Quality control Ford Motor Company
The Firestone/Ford Tire Controversy (A) 1.) Why did Sears‚ Ford and Firestone react differently to the same incident? Sears was one of the largest retailers of Firestone tires in the United States during the 2000 controversy. As they were simply just a dealer of tires to the public‚ they were inclined to halt sales of the tires before the official recall was announced for the benefit of their customers. Even though they had a longstanding relationship with Firestone‚ they had to pull the tires
Premium Ford Motor Company
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
Premium Ethics Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company
Business Ethics Ford Motor Company In the simplest form of utilitarianism‚ promoting the greatest pleasure for the greatest number of people; is a popular ethical business practice. Sometimes this utilitarian theory is considered a controversial theory of morality especially when linked to the cost-benefit analysis versus the risk-benefit analysis‚ ultimately eliminating the human quality of making business decisions. Ford Motor Company‚ Ford Pinto Case‚ is one of the most debatable utilitarian
Premium Ethics Business ethics Morality
4/25/2012 Kyra M. Tracy Business Ethics- Paper 7 Article: Hiring Character‚ From Intergity Works‚ Strategies for becoming Respected‚ Trusted and Admired Leader. By Dana Telford and Adrian Gostick . Clearly‚ Ford’s CEO Iacocca was an Egoist. People were definitely considered morally irrelevant in his 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
Premium Morality Risk Human