Running Head: Ford Pinto case analysis

Student Name:

Year of Study:

University:

Date of Submission:  

Introduction

Despite the eminent failures by the concerned parties in the Pinto-related accidents to minimize or completely avoid the predicament, Ford Company’s pursuit of financial gains at the expense of consumer safety is a matter of great concern to the public in general. Since the introduction of the subcompact car way back in May1968, lives have been lost and the devastating injuries from the accidents associated with the product’s technological failure continue to rise on every occasion. At the outset, Ford Company designed a car upon recommendation by the then company’s vice-president Lee Iacocca in an attempt to increase the market share. However, the introduction was done in a harried manner thereby raising questions whether satisfactory research was carried out on the feasibility of the technology relative to the cost and benefit of the product as well as its safety to the users.

Stakeholders in the predicament

To begin with, the ineffectiveness of the fuel system design of the Ford subcompact car was eminent in an accident involving the car in May 1972 that caused the death of Lily Gray as well as injuring a thirteen year old Grimshaw. According to the available information, the car which struck Gray’s Pinto was traveling at a lower speed of about thirty miles per hour and that the death and the devastating injury resulted from the fire ignited by the impact. The company had to release approximately six and half million Dollars as compensation for the damages in the accident. In another similar occurrence, three women using Pinto car lost their lives six moths later as a result of fire ignited by the impact upon being struck by an equally slowly driven car. Even though the ethical behavior of the driver in this case is questionable having been found with marijuana, beer bottles and caffeine pills, the speed of the car was relatively low and that the fatalities resulted from the fuel system failure and not direct impact. Furthermore, Pinto car was again involved in an accident on August 10, 1978 where deaths of three people occurred after their car busted into flames upon being struck by another van on the U.S Highway. It is noteworthy that the three teenagers never took precaution while reapplying the gas cap as well as parking on the highway which might have highly precipitated the occurrence of the accident. However, the deaths resulted from the fire ignited as a result of the impact thereby sending a clear message of the defective nature of the Pinto fueling system.

Ethical analysis

The saga that Pinto has found itself in is worrying to the consumers, authorities as well as public in general as it jeopardizes the safety of the users. More importantly, the Ford Company should be more concerned as such incidences tarnish the company’s reputation thereby hindering its performance in the market contrary to enhancement of market share as earlier thought. The lives that have been lost as well as the devastating injuries caused by the failure of the fueling system outmatch the benefits that the company was entitled to enjoy. According to absolutism principle of the ethical analysis, the human beings should not be injured of harmed in any way as a result of implementation of any technology as witnessed in the Pinto saga. Such a perspective has been witnessed in the punitive measures so far implemented by the jury against the Ford Company.

On the other hand, carelessness so far exhibited by the users of the Pinto car such as failure to reapply the gas cap by the teenagers, using stimulants such as caffeine, alcohol while driving as well as poor parking on the roadway are some of the improper behaviors that have precipitated the road accidents with which Pinto is associated.

Utilitarianism is another ethical analysis principle that embraces the legitimacy of some ethical problems as well as ethical conflicts and suggests analysis of such issues based on what is considered to provide greatest benefits to a great number of people. The market share of the Ford Company might have expanded in the early years of Pinto introduction into the market but the problems associated with the technology are immense. Ford Company’s continuous neglect on the evident desire by the public to upgrade its fueling system is an unethical behavior as the company only considers the benefits accruing from the sales of the car and not the safety of the consumers (Mishan, & Quah, 2007).

Cost/Benefit Assessment of Company Actions

The introduction of Pinto into the market boosted the market share for the Ford Company as well as enormously improving sales in the early years hence enhancing a short-term benefit to the Ford Company. However, the problems associated with the product were yet to follow. At the outset, the company was forced to pay $560000 in compensation to the family of Gray following his death as a result of using the defective Pinto car. Moreover, Ford had to settle additional $2.5million compensation fees to Grimshaw in the same accident. Finally, the jury further subjected the company to financial melt-down of $3.5million in punitive compensation resulting from problems caused by the defective Pinto car (Mishan, & Quah, 2007).

Through the Pinto car, Ford Company has been associated with causing of deaths as well as devastating injuries resulting from the failure of the car’s fueling system. So far the deaths of Gray, the three women in Indiana and the three teenagers in addition to the injuries suffered by Grimshaw are losses both to the public and the company. This has an adverse impact on the company reputation.

Conclusion

Advancement in technology is an optimistic development that everyone is willing to be associated with. However, the cost of such developments should be carefully weighed against the expected benefits both in the short and long-term. Introduction of Pinto car into the market was hurriedly executed without proper research and the associated problems have proven to be enormous than expected. The benefits of such technologies become infeasible especially in cases where lives of human beings are lost. According to the absolutism principle, it is unethical to harm human being in the process of implementing certain business measures aimed at benefiting the company.

Reference:

Mishan, E. & Quah, E. (2007). Cost-benefit analysis. 5th Ed. Routledge.