Ford Pinto

Amanda Nevill Pinto Case Study February 6, 2012 1. Put yourself in the role of the recall coordinator for Ford Motor CO. It’s 1973, and field reports have been coming in about rear-end collisions, fires, and fatalities. You must decide whether to recall the automobile. A. Identify the relevant facts. In August of 1978 three teenage girls were driving a Ford Pinto and were struck from behind

Ford Pinto Case Study The Ford pinto lasted from the 1960’s to the late 1970s and was highly controversial. This poorly made automobile came from a production race between the USA and Japan, where the United States promised an affordable, fuel efficient, and reliable car. Because of the hasty production, it left Ford with a flawed, dangerous, and untested product. The outrage over the obvious safety flaws of the Ford Pinto caused leaders to call upon their values, mission statement, and ethics

Case study: Ford Pinto The actions of the Ford Motor Company during the manufacturing of its infamous Pinto vehicle are an illustration of how a negative organizational culture can impede clear thinking, even amongst highly-accomplished executives. Ford wished to create a vehicle that was inexpensive for consumers, but early tests of the Pinto showed that the Pinto had a tendency to 'blow up' upon rear impact. Redesigning the vehicle would mean a long and costly delay, and Ford did not think it

point A to point B. In a business, you have several positions that are high up in the corporation that keep it running. A CEO for example is someone who makes decisions for the business and its products it sells. The case we are dealing with is the Ford Pinto that was made back in 1970. The problem with the making of this car was it was cheap, affordable and got people where they needed to be. But what people were finding out was that if you went 20mph and got rear ended your car could have the possibility

Running head: FORD PINTO 1 FORD PINTO 8 Introduction Context This paper explores how ethical issues of Pinto case have affected the Ford Motor Company business environment. A number of factors suggest that Ford Motor Company was negligent and violated its code of ethics. In this paper, we will review the corporate culture mindset which prioritizes profit over the value of human life for the purpose financial gain. Purpose There are many different cases where people

As a former owner of a Ford car, I was interested in what consumer opinion has been for this brand. The Ford Motor Company has pioneered the auto industry in America (Ford, 2015). This being said, the environment surrounding the Ford Motor Company is not what it was since the origins of the company. Back in the early 1900’s, the Model T had little competition and was “one of the best-selling vehicles of all time, and arguably the most famous car in the world” (Ford, 2015). With few choices, consumers

Christopher Nagel and David Cabrera presented the Ford Pinto rear-impact defect, with Christopher going first. He explained that the purpose of the Pinto was to compete in the automobile industry with its German and Japanese counterparts. It was a compact and inexpensive car that anyone would have been able to purchase. However, Christopher revealed that the Pinto had a major defect in its fuel compartment. A single impact at about 35mph resulted in a fiery explosion, which ultimately cut the Pinto’s

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. 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 new vehicle is put into production. The Ford engineers were aware that rear-end impact safety tests were pretty standard at the time, but they were not required

are unsafe and strict liability torts do not depend on the degree of care a person used. In the history of the Ford Pinto of the 1970’s, the case against Ford for their ethical behavior in letting a car be released to the public knowing that there was failure with the gas tank if hit from

organizationally-based business crimes is pure greed, whether it be for the benefit of the company or individual. Two cases come to mind. The first is the Ford Pinto fiasco of the 1970s and 1980s. Ford has a gas tank design flaw in the pinto that caused many horrific burn deaths and injuries. Instead of fixing the problem, the leaders of Ford decided to take the cheaper way out and pay injury and death claims instead. Greed caused the company to spend $49.5 million instead of ethically spending