Running head: Ford Pinto Case Study – Was Ford to Blame in the Pinto Case? Taking a Side Mayo Smith‚ George Deese‚ Josh Eubank‚ Mignon Waller‚ Michelle Stower and Jaime Arnold University of Phoenix Take a Side Bad business decisions can be seen throughout history; however none has stirred such controversy as the error made by Ford Motor Credit concerning the 1971 Ford Pinto. Despite many safety concerns Ford CEO‚ Lee Iacocca and Ford executives began the production and distribution
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Station wagon
The Ford Pinto Project The Ford Motor Company has been the leading car company for many decades. In the late 1960’s early 1970’s the company was losing the battle with Japanese with the small efficient cars. Lee Iacocca‚ Chief Executive Officer the Ford Motor Company wanted a car that will be competitive to these Japanese compact cars. With this intention in mind‚ the company wanted to manufacture a sub-compact vehicle that weighs less than 2‚000 pounds and costs under $2‚000. The result is
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Station wagon
Coordinator for Ford Motor Company. Field reports are coming in reporting the following: Rear-end collisions‚ Fires‚ and Fatalities. I must decide whether to recall the Pinto. (Case: Pinto Fires‚ Trevino & Nelson‚ p. 115) 3. Before the Pinto‚ Ford was immersed in an intense‚ internal struggle between “Bunky” Knudson and Lee Iacocca over the company’s product line. ● Major pressure to compete with German & Japanese compact cars. Iacocca and the compact car won the struggle. ● The Pinto debuted in
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Ford Mustang
The Ford Pinto Case In the late 1960’s Ford Motor Company wanted to produce a small model car to compete with small Japanese and German imports like Volkswagen‚ Datsun and Toyota (Danley). In 1969 Ford’s Board approved the plan to produce the Pinto. The CEO‚ Lee Iacocca‚ wanted a car that was low weight‚ under 2‚000 pounds‚ and low cost‚ under $2‚000. Lee “Iaccoca imposed the 2000/2000 rule‚ i.e.‚ the Pinto could weigh no more than 2000 pounds and cost no more than $2000” (Danley). The engineers
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Ford Mustang
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
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
In 1968 Lee Iacocca and the Ford Motor Company wanted to produce a inexpensive vehicle to appeal to the first time buyers market. Mr. Iacocca philosophy was for consumers to remember Ford as the very first vehicle that they owned so that when it was time for them to invest in another vehicle it would be a Ford. But‚ in order for Ford to develop a inexpensive vehicle to fit the philosophy of Lee Iacocca‚ they had to cut corners. Unfortunately‚ the one corner they cut was the placement of the fuel
Premium Ford Motor Company Ford Pinto Life
Running head: FORD PINTO CASE (Newton‚ Ford‚ 2007‚ p. 1)Ford Pinto Case External social pressures play a big part in the decision reached about the Ford Motor Company. When you have highly respected individuals such as retired NASA engineer Dr. Leslie Ball say “The release to production of the Pinto was the most reprehensible decision in the history of American Engineering” (Newton‚ Ford‚ 2007‚ p. 1); there is cause for concern. There would be more
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Station wagon
Discussion: https://www2.bc.edu/~sannella/Case.htm SULLIVAN’S AUTO WORLD. The owner of a Ford car dealership dies unexpectedly. His 28-year ... Compare the sales and service departments at Auto World. What useful.... Provide supporting quantitative analysis where appropriate. What ... 2. term paper on Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis) www.termpapermasters.com/.../Analysis-of-the-Sullivan-Ford-Auto-... Sullivan Ford Auto World Case (Analysis). [ send me this term paper ]. This 6 page paper examines
Premium Ford Pinto Ford Motor Company Case study
Ford Pinto Case study The moral issue of the Ford Pinto case is whether or not Ford Company is responsible for the explosion caused by the failed tank. Ford is morally responsible for the incident since it could have been prevented‚ public safety should be their top priority when designing their products‚ and they have disregarded the utilitarianism principle. Ford is responsible for the Ford Pinto incident because of many reasons. First of all the engineers and the top managers of the company
Premium Ford Pinto Cost-benefit analysis Decision making