Firestone and Ford: the Tire Tread Separation Strategy
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 tire tread separation debacle that began dominating business news in the fall of
2000, with implications for passenger safety thatcontinue today.
Ask any consumer about the two most critical features of safety on their automobiles, and most will quickly respond—brakes and tires. It is not surprising, then, that the tire tread separations that began appearing on certain categories of Firestone tires, especially those associated with the Ford
Explorer, caught the public’s attention like few other recent product safety issues.
Was this a tire problem or an SUV problem?Was this Firestone’s problem or Ford’s problem?
Were both companies responsible for what happened? Were government regulations administered through the National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration (NHTSA) adequate to protect the public? These questions are simple to ask but difficult to answer because they are complex.
Let’s start where the “public” knowledge of the product dangers began to surface—with a couple of accidents reported since 1998.
TWO KEY ACCIDENTS
Jessica LeAnn Taylor was a 14-year-old junior high school cheerleader on the way to a homecoming football game near her hometown of Mexia, Texas, on October 16, 1998. She was in a Ford Explorer
SUV, driven by a friend of her mother’s, when the tread on the left-rear Firestone ATX tire allegedly
“peeled off like a banana,” leading the Explorer to veer left and roll over. Jessica died in this accident.1 In another incident, two
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 tire tread separation debacle that began dominating business news in the fall of
2000, with implications for passenger safety thatcontinue today.
Ask any consumer about the two most critical features of safety on their automobiles, and most will quickly respond—brakes and tires. It is not surprising, then, that the tire tread separations that began appearing on certain categories of Firestone tires, especially those associated with the Ford
Explorer, caught the public’s attention like few other recent product safety issues.
Was this a tire problem or an SUV problem?Was this Firestone’s problem or Ford’s problem?
Were both companies responsible for what happened? Were government regulations administered through the National Highway Traffic SafetyAdministration (NHTSA) adequate to protect the public? These questions are simple to ask but difficult to answer because they are complex.
Let’s start where the “public” knowledge of the product dangers began to surface—with a couple of accidents reported since 1998.
TWO KEY ACCIDENTS
Jessica LeAnn Taylor was a 14-year-old junior high school cheerleader on the way to a homecoming football game near her hometown of Mexia, Texas, on October 16, 1998. She was in a Ford Explorer
SUV, driven by a friend of her mother’s, when the tread on the left-rear Firestone ATX tire allegedly
“peeled off like a banana,” leading the Explorer to veer left and roll over. Jessica died in this accident.1 In another incident, two