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 on a human life. It also questions what responsibilities
Premium Ford Pinto Cost-benefit analysis Cost
Running head: FORD PINTO FORD PINTO Insert Name Here Insert Affiliation Here The case of Ford Motor Company producing the Pinto is a clear example of unethical behavior on the part of an automobile manufacturer‚ where a potentially dangerous product was knowingly released into the market. While there are some good consequences from the action‚ such as the jobs that were provided to American employees producing the car‚ and the individuals provided with an affordable vehicle‚ these were
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Station wagon
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 cases; when
Premium Ethics Business ethics Morality
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
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
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
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
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
Mr. Gioia’s decisions regarding the Pinto fires highlights the disengagement from emotion often associated with business decisions. From a business stand point‚ decisions have to be based on facts and financial repercussions are the ultimate deciding factor in which action to pursue. If a defect in a certain make or model of car is classified as an extremely rare incident then no action will be taken. This is governed by the premise of statistical probability. Coupled with a detailed cost versus
Premium Employment Management Ethics
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