Unit II Assignment Case Analysis The Ford Pinto case is a well-known case that is often discussed in the context of business ethics. To summarize, Ford′s design of the Pinto′s fuel tank was defective, causing fires if the Pinto was involved in even minor rear-end collisions. Ford came to learn of the defect, but the company failed to correct it; Ford then predicted, based on a cost-benefit analysis, that it would cost more to repair the defect ($11 per vehicle, or $137 million total) than it would to pay for damages resulting from burn deaths, burn injuries, and burned vehicles ($47.5 million).
Consider the Ford Pinto case in light of the who-how (WH) framework for business ethics. Would Ford′s decision to forego repairing the defective design comply with these ethical guidelines? If so, why? If not, then what actions should Ford have taken to satisfy them? Explain your reasoning. Your response to this question should be a minimum of 500 words. Cite any direct quotes or paraphrased material from outside sources. Use APA format.
Even though the cost of repairing the defective engine parts is higher than compensating the affected victims, the decision to forego the faulty design does not abide by ethical guidelines. A reflection of the decision under WH (who-how) framework for business ethics the situation indicates a lose-lose situation to both the company’s clients and the code of ethics that the company should follow. Stipulations provided by the WH framework aims at finding out who gets affected by a prevailing situation. In Ford’s situation, customers are most affected by the stakeholders suffering a small effect. To facilitate an ethical decision making Ford should stick to three guidelines. The first guideline should be based on the fact that ford had first-hand information that Pinto was a death trap, thus should have rectified the defective engines regardless of the cost they would have incurred.