The decision not to recall the cars and let the accidents occur loses utilitarian units of value in terms of obvious life factors. Although the Pinto was initially hugely popular in USA, its sales fell dramatically due to a controversy surrounding the safety of its gas … Ford Motor Company weighed the risk in terms of how much it would cost the company to pay for damages and loss of any human life, which was put into a numeric dollar value by the National Highway Travel Safety Administration (NHTSA) of $200,000 per life and multiplied it by the number of accidents it estimated would occur from the flaw. Change ), You are commenting using your Twitter account. The Ford Pinto is a subcompact car produced by Ford between the years of 1971 to 1980. Before completing a utilitarian analysis of the Ford Pinto case, it is important to note the historical context in which the situation arose. In relations to Ford Pinto, the case study shows that is was about an accident which took place involving a Ford Pinto and a Chevrolet Van which hit the Ford Pinto from behind. Change ), An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, 1971 Ford Pinto – The 50 Worst Cars of All Time”, National Women’s Day-Women Changing the World, Types of People You See on the Metro-North Train. Propinquity is in pleasure’s favor, as the positive effects felt by Ford were immediate to its release of the car, while the deaths and lawsuits took place over the course of several years and the car was not recalled until 1978, seven years after the release date. Additional materials, such as the best quotations, synonyms and word definitions to make your writing easier are Incredibly, the analysis put a price tag on human life—$200,000— and then used that number to compare Ford’s projected cost of settling burn-victim’s lawsuits Forbes, Dan Lienert 1/27/2004. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. There may be some who stand by Ford’s actions and would reject the idea that they acted unethically when releasing the Pinto. However there is a dominant if not obvious consideration that carries more importance than just economics and Ford’s revenue. The vehicle engineers were tasked to develop the vehicle and put it into production within 25 months, which was nearly half the time in … New York NY. The Ford Pinto case is based upon act utilitarianism’s approach to making a decision using a cost benefit analysis and whether that action makes the best ethical outcome for all involved. In 1968, Ford Motor Company had a decision to make as to whether it would compete in the subcompact automotive market. (A paper I wrote for my business ethics class, not particularly a particularly creative or exciting assignment but I wanted to show some of my more formal writing.). Your Answer is very helpful for Us Thank you a lot! Act utilitarianism is part of the utilitarian theory, one of the most widely accepted ethical theories in existence. also offered here. “The Ford Pinto.” Business Ethics: Readings and Cases in Corporate Morality. Ford Motor Company calculated that the cost of compensation for death, injury and damaged cars was significantly less than the cost of recalling all the vehicles with the rear design flaw. utilitarianism, the prevailing ethical doctrine in play at Ford when executives decided not to build additional safety features in the Pinto. The utilitarianism is the framework that Ford’s analysts relied on while conducting a cost-benefit analysis of the release of the Pinto cars (Poel & Royakkers, 2011). Ford's management decisions regarding the Pinto do not seem to hold up well to ethical analysis (especially rights or duty ethics) but, there does seem to be potential for justification when a utilitarian ethics analysis is applied. Death however, is permanent, and clearly represents more pain for the deceased and their families than the pleasure for the few Ford executives who could have benefitted from the Pinto doing well. Consider negative ideas forming in the minds of the American public as they look to the foreign auto makers to seek retribution on Ford by using their own consumer given purchasing power, and hurting the domestic economy by buying foreign cars and labeling Ford Motor Company, a company founded over 70 years prior by Henry Ford from Detroit, as a fraud and never to be trusted again! The Pinto was being driven by an 18 years old Judy Ann Ulrich accompanies by her sister Lynn Marie who was 16 at the time and cousin called Donna Ulrich … (348), 4.7 With over 3 million pintos sold over a ten year production run, the Pinto competed in the United States car market against the competition such as AMC Gremlin and Chevrolet Vega .The Pinto also … Pain also wins out in the duration category, as the success of company like Ford is constantly changing due to a variety of factors; the success of the Pinto could not determine Ford’s overall success as a company. Dover                Publications Inc.. pp. Ford realized this but made its decision to not recall the cars based of their own company formulated utilitarian cost benefit analysis and fear of negative company effects. The decision by Ford to not recall any of its cars, and not fix design flaws, conceal the truth of their mistake and roll the dice future incoming lawsuits, damages and loss of human life is the one that I will dissect. Summary of the Case In May 1968, the Ford Motor Company, based upon a recommendation by then vice-president Lee Iacocca, decided to produce the Ford Pinto … Likewise in the Pinto case, Ford’s management whatever its exact reasoning, decided to … all those who purchase their vehicles around the world better. In this context, in the following discussion, the utilitarianism concept has been explored with the case study of Pinto model launched by Ford motors.// Ford produced a car named Pinto in the year 1971, which proved to be a great success for the company (Ford Pinto Explained 2016). McGraw-Hill, 2001. I will show how this action uses the “greatest happiness and greatest pleasure” form of Utilitarianism and the true moral flaws that it exposes. ...Utilitarian Analysis The Case of the Ford Pinto The Ford Pinto first rolled off the Ford Motor Co. production lines in 1971 and stayed in production in its original state until 1978. Don’t waste Your Time Searching For a Sample, Get Your Job Done By a Professional Skilled Writer. 4.7 Get a verified writer to help you with A Utilitarian Argument in the Ford Pinto Case. Basically they thought they would save money, keep up their shareholder price, and have less damage to all involved by not doing anything except “taking it on the chin” with regards to predicted accidents caused by the accident prone fuel tank. It was developed by Jeremy Bentham and introduced to the world in his book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, which was released in 1789. Paper Topic: BUSINESS ETHICS – Utilitarian Analysis of the Pinto Case Running head : Utilitarian Analysis of the Pinto Case Utilitarian Analysis of the Pinto Case Client ‘s Name University Affiliation Utilitarian Analysis of the Pinto Case The Pinto Case Safety features of cars are good subjects of ethical inquiry because they … Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Ford Pinto and utilitarian ethics What are the essential features of utilitarianism? The flaw of Utilitarianism: the Ford Pinto case background information background information. In 1971 Ford Motor Company decided they wanted to create a compact car that could compete with the other Japanese manufactured cars. Its basic principle is that human nature is ruled by our reactions to pain and pleasure, and the good is the action that maximizes the overall pleasure for the greatest number of people. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 3, Ask Writer For More specifically, it was Ford's decision to use the cost/benefit analysis detailed in section 11 to make production decisions that … The decision really applies Jeremy Bentham’s idea of more pleasure (money) for the most people is the right thing. However it is narrow minded because it only considers the aspects of living and society status in terms of money values at the current time. CASE 2.2 THE FORD PINTO Discussion Questions 1. Anyone in the Ford family could not have been thinking rationally if they made the decision not to recall because they were risking too many important values that did not carry immediate economic value in 1971, but certainly did after 1976 just five years later! But the Pinto case ended utilitarianism; as Chewning notes, “Utilitarianism as a defense against personal harm and injury promptly died, never to be argued again in the public domain” … First of all, consider the possible damage to the company’s reputation created by media and public when having multiple accident from the same automobile model. Also, there were roughly 40 European and Japanese cars of similar price, design, yet better features out at the time, meaning that it was not an unreasonable option to make the safety changes to the car and remain competitive in the market. Case Analysis: Ford Pinto Utilitarian Stance Section 1: Introduction and Situational Analysis Using mid-size compact cars, international automobile industries had invaded the United States market threatening Ford’s revenues. About the Ford Pinto. This calculus makes weighing in on an ethical decision much easier because it allows all the factors involved in the choice to be given equal consideration and when applied correctly, the right choice will be obvious in the end. It is interesting to see how the Ford Motor company fared with this case.. Utilitarianism… What are three key facts you can find? Hoffman, W. Michael. While testing the Pinto, it became apparent that due to the gas tank in the car was at great risk for fire hazard when struck from the rear, even at low speeds. Creating a stable product with quality in mind is a solid business decision and will create profitability for years to come. In order to determine whether an action produces more pain or pleasure for the majority, the hedonistic calculus is used. The cost-benefit analysis showing the different outcomes of redesigning a faulty fuel tank lead Ford to make the decision that … The future is what costs them. This alternate idea produces more good for more people using a utilitarian way of thinking as well. Ford president Lee Iacocca wanted the Pinto to be less than 2,000 pounds and less than $2,000 so it could stand out when released into a division of automobiles Ford did not have much experience in. They hadn’t even done their due diligence when making the decision, as they relied on mathematical formulas as opposed to road tests in their testing. If we lived in a world where money was equally valuable to reputations, emotions, and even life then their decision may be utilitarian but it is still not ethical. Utilitarianism calls for the most good for the most people. They even concluded they would need to pay 87 million dollars less by doing no recalls and just paying for these other future damage costs. Varian Patella Philosophy 131 Michael F. Martin 03/08/2010 The Ford Pinto Case and Utilitarianism In this essay, I will talk about the ford Pinto case, and how the information was withheld from public in order to save company from huge losses and at the same time keep company’s reputation Intact. “1971 Ford Pinto – The 50 Worst Cars of All Time”. They could convince the consumer markets, and the media that this decision is why Ford is who they are, and although they may not be as fast as other auto makers, at least they are concerned about doing things the right moral way. Mill (77 -78), in arguing in favor of that school of philosophy and ethics called Utilitarianism, made the point that the maximization of personal human happiness is a desirable and even necessary end. ( Log Out /  There were various ways of making the Pinto’s gas tank safer. When looking at the cost benefit analysis, Ford should have also considered the bigger picture; that lives hung in the balance of their decision and they were gambling with merely at $11 per car. The problem is that Ford used a cost-benefit analysis not to upgrade the fuel system even if it lead to more deaths. After all the factors are considered, pain wins with five categories in the calculus compared to pleasure’s two, making it clearly unethical for the Pinto to have been released early without the necessary safety features. Mill's Utilitarianism and the Ford Pinto Case J.S. Web. However, there are several ways to rebut these counterarguments. Get a verified writer to help you with A Utilitarian Argument in the Ford Pinto Case. The effectiveness of the hedonistic calculus is best demonstrated when used on a serious ethical issue, and the Ford Pinto dilemma is a perfect example for this. Let’s take another look at the Ford Pinto case now that we have the concepts from the Stockholder and Stakeholder views in mind. Certainty goes to Ford and pleasure, as the early release of the Pinto bringing in more revenue and helping them capture more of a competitive market is practically a foregone conclusion, while deaths associated due to the design flaw, although likely, are not certain. Ford Pinto Case Study. While Ford was found not guilty in that one specific case where they were charged with criminal homicide, the fact that roughly 50 lawsuits were brought against Ford, many of which Ford lost, and 21 to 475 lives could have been saved … The necessary improvements to make the Pinto safer were not complex or costly; they simply needed a barrier between the gas tank and the bumper of the car, which meant an added $5 to $8 to produce each car. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy. Ford was presented with a dilemma: to release the Pinto as scheduled and risk the safety of those who purchased it or spend more time designing the car, thereby seceding more of the subcompact auto market to the competition. To prevent the gas tank leaking during rollovers, another $11 would have to be spent on production. In relating its consequential content to the Ford Pinto case, it would seem that the application of ethics had been dismissed in favour of profits, reputation and unethical practices. Act Utilitarianism Applied to the Ford Pinto Release. Utilitarian Analysis Ford Pinto 1303 Words | 6 Pages. 4. Actually no one escapes the ripple effect of this decision. The vehicle engineers were tasked to develop the vehicle and put it into production within 25 months, which was nearly half the time in which the average … Iacocca was reacting to specific market forces. In particular, foreign automobile manufacturers were creating and selling cheap cars that were cutting into Ford's market share . In addition to these facts, they would argue that despite appearing inhumane on the surface, cost-benefit analyses are the basis of many important business determinations and Ford should not be faulted for using a standard technique to make their decision. The evidence suggests that Ford relied, at least in part, on cost-benefit reasoning, which is an analysis in monetary terms of the expected costs and benefits of doing something. Ford Motor Company, led by President Lee Iacocca, discovered that during the sped up engineering and production process it had created the fuel tank vulnerable to fiery rear crashes because of the layout of the car. In 1972, a Ford Pinto … Bentham, Jeremy (January 2009). ( Log Out /  Second, in line with utilitarian factors, Ford calculates all the collateral damage in terms of money and nothing else. The Ford Pinto Case From a Utilitarian perspective In utilitarianism, the merit or demerit of an action is entirely determined by the effect it has on everyone affected by the action. Utilitarianism is the moral doctrine that we should always act to produce the greatest possible balance of good over bad for everyone affected by our actions (Shaw, 2009). Ed. Money creates pleasure for some, and pain for others. The company could lose big from media and public backlash. Applying Utilitarianism to Business Ethics: The Ford Pinto. A Utilitarian Argument in the Ford Pinto Case. Consequentialist Maximise pleasure (Bentham) or happiness (Mill) Calculate empirically balance of pleasure over pain or happiness over misery Tends to ignore individual rights, classic criticism minority is sacrificed for majority Does Mill s rule utilitarianism … DeGeorge, Richard T. Business Ethics 7th Edition. RELEVANT FACTS Question: 1 29/07/13 MVBE 2 3. As a strategic plan back in 1970, Ford quickly mass produced their own version of mid-size … (657). Ford Motor Company’s decision uses ideas from one of the utilitarianism founders in Jeremy Bentham. PHIL-186 Paper #1: Utilitarianism in The Ford Pinto Case and Blackwater Case Through the lens of utilitarianism, I will be analyzing The Ford Pinto Case and The Blackwater Case to determine if they promote overall harm or benefit. ( Log Out /  They should have recalled all the Pintos because the good still outweighs the bad in the end. Help. Ford Motor company did a really did a neat job of estimating life values and social components cost of property damage, insurance costs, legal fees, employer losses, funeral, assets and value of each human life in society. I will show how this action uses the “greatest happiness and greatest pleasure” form of Utilitarianism and the true moral flaws that it exposes. It was developed by Jeremy Bentham and introduced to the world in his book An Introduction to the Principles … The Pinto was a … Propinquity is clearly in favor of the pain, as approximately 50 lawsuits were brought against Ford as a result of rear-end collisions in the Pinto, and Forbes and Time magazines both listed it in their “Worst Cars of All Time” lists in 2004 and 2008, respectively. 15 April, 2010. The lawsuits brought by injured people and their survivors uncovered how the company rushed the Pinto through production and onto the market. Also sparing lives adds tremendous moral value to a decision that corrects the problem and announces it as it is which is an engineering design flaw that they are aware of. They would have several facts to draw upon in their argument, the most impactful being that the Pinto did not break any of the standards set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and in certain areas surpassed the government standards. However they should have bore the cost of the recalls as a way of upholding their own company character through honestly admitting their technical mistake, which in the end, has a lot more value. By this alternative way, they uphold American Christian values which were at the heart of the inception of the United States values and hold higher moral value any Japanese auto company can hope to have. It rushed from its inception to its actual production. This was a seemingly good consequence for Ford Motor Company, only until four people died in 1972 and other incidents happened that created a downward spiral for them. First off is intensity, which is obvious. It seems really ideal that when creating a calculus in utilitarian ethics to think in terms of dollars because dollars carry a numeric value anyway! 1. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that promotes consequences which bring the greatest … An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (Dover Philosophical Classics). Second you have to think in terms of the imminent possibility of Ford’s reputation to be ruined beyond foreseeable repair with the unsafe cars. Case Published on February 6, 2009 by annielundy in Major Companies Comments (2)|0 Liked It An attempt to unravel the uses and abuses of the theory of utilitarianism. (2016, Mar 06). ( Log Out /  The main controversy surrounding the Ford Pinto case was The Ford Motor Company's choices made during development to compromise safety for efficiency and profit maximization. When Ford began development of the Pinto in 1968, the company hoped that the car’s smaller size and price tag would help it compete with Japanese and German competition, who were mounting their takeover of the subcompact auto market. They would also claim that in one of the most emotionally compelling cases, that of Ulrich family, Ford was found not guilty of criminal homicide. Additionally, the faulty cost-benefit analysis played a role as well. For a non-corporate minute, don’t think in terms of insurance claims, lawsuits paid, and annual profits gained or lost, but for competitors looking at the company as stupid, and the American public devaluing Ford in their own minds when they find out the truth about the cover up. It is also so narrow minded that I would consider it not rational. First, it is focused way too much on numeric dollar values when considering human injuries, company futures, and life lost. “The worst cars of all time”. Stockholders. They also assumed that if they made a recall, their share price would plummet and shareholders would lose money, and that possibly employees would lose jobs. The theory cannot possibly be used to put a value on human lif… Ford calculates money as a positive value, and that is all. However, the core of the decisions that the head management of Ford Motor Company had to make to resolve the key issues go far beyond the concept of cost-benefit analysis. Print. In order to get the Pinto released as soon as possible, the design and manufacturing process was cut from three and a half years down to two. To earn a profit, a business produces goods or provides services and engages in buying and selling. Abstract: This case is about the design of Ford Pinto specifically the gas tank that was in a dangerous place that would ignite the car in a rear-end collision.
What Is Phenomenology, Bdo Mandragora Essence, Coke Meaning In Telugu, Is Matthew A Good Name, University Of Tennessee Neurology Residency, English Broadside Ballad Archive, Alina Written In Arabic,