Essay Sample Describing the Ford Pinto Scandal

The ford pinto is a car that was designed and manufactured by the Ford motor company. It had so much positive and negative effects on the human being. The paper will, therefore, focus on discussing the ford pinto scandal that may have resulted from its innovation.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In the cases involving the pinto automobile, there exist the counter-arguments that came along with his design. For example, Ford invented the car that couldn't easily explode but further decided not to implement the design though he had researched the accepted risks. This was because he feared the costs that would have emerged when comparing the prices of the deaths or accidents in general to that of the benefits to the society. In reference to the values Ford used during the design, the cost could magnify up to a sum of $137 million instead of $49.5million a total cost that would have been put aside for the accidents. Here, he felt not satisfied to incorporate the changes in the design. The danger or the monetary analysis came as a result of the device culpability in which if the cost of the harm expected surpasses that of the precaution then the company will have no option but to go for the possibility of care and if the value is amenable, it would have to go by the later(Cullen, Francis, William, Maakestad, and Gray 107-30).

About the scrutiny, the ford motor company decided not to make the design improvements that would make the pinto car safer. This is because if something is legal doesn't mean it is ethical. This makes it hard to comprehend how human life can be saved by a price.

Besides, there are some of the theories that can be used to explain some of the activities that happen in the business field. For instance is the shareholders and stakeholders theory. These theories act like the standardizing theories of the public authority that dictates the role or the responsibilities of the corporation. They can also be viewed as the regulating theories of the trade as the managers of the organizations or the corporation ought to take or make the choices about the relevant method. Sadly, the two approaches are so much different in the way they perceive the business concepts.

First, the Shareholder theory affirms that the investors forward the money to the relevant company executives, those who are to use the amount in accordance with the shareholder's authority. As highlighted by Milton Friedman that there exists one sole responsibility of the business which is to manage the resources to employ them into the activities that are meant to increase or boost its gains or profits as long as the market is open and free for competition with no fraud( Gioia, Dennis, 379-389).

Contrarily, stakeholder theory argues that the administrations have a role to all the shareholders and to those who in a way contributed both voluntarily or involuntarily to the wealth creation of the company. The stakeholder's theory defines the executive as the assistance of all the associates and has got two roles: to protect the moral freedom and to harmonize the appropriate concerns of the colleagues during the decision making process.

The difference between the two theories is that, the stakeholder theory appeal that all the interests of all the stakeholders are to be taken into account.This is to be done in whether it reduces or increases the company's profits. On the hand, the shareholder's theory is meant to ensure a benefit. It is a unidirectional form of activity since it only allows the managers to do everything possible to yield the profit to the company. It further dictates that the mentioned can just be done in a legal way and many circumstances; it only operates in the short term profits at the expense of the long-term benefits.

In the business filed, managers play a more significant role in the management and have the following obligations: First, they have a responsibility of making the decisions that they think will be of value to the company. This will help boost the profits in many ways as it would be used by everyone or all employees to carry out their activities effectively. Again, they have the mandate to hire or recruit persons whom they think will be of importance to the organization. These people would be required to work smartly for the betterment of the company hence a hike in the profit. Also, managers have a role of giving precise feedback whenever necessary to improve on the performance of the employees, and lastly, managers will ensure resilience and candid coverage for all employees or members so that they can perform to their very best (Lee & Matthew, 390-401.)

The shareholder's theory has been in most cases adulterer as it could urge the executive to do all they can to ensure the profits flow to the company. It further alleged that this would only be done legally and not through the fraud. This theory may not be satisfactory as it can subject the managers to unnecessary pressure in the dire need to perform thereby creating an unfavorable environment for their performance. In return, the theory will only operate on the short-term benefits at the expense of the long-term benefits (Reidenbach, Eric, Donald, Robin, 273-284)

The invention had a long-term effect on society. Ford uplifted the economy by increasing the sales of the vehicle as he broke the monopoly that was being enjoyed by the haves, the rich, who would afford the automobiles during the time. Ford made it possible for the economy to grow; as a result the increase in sales of the motor vehicles.

The inventions in the Ford Motor company brought down the cost of the motor vehicle and raised the sales. During this period, cars were made available and affordable to all the workers as compared to the era before the invention. These automobiles attracted so many people as they could provide accessible transport and also were easy to maintain (Gioia & Dennis 379-389)

In conclusion, Ford made the world proud as he could narrow the gap between the poor and rich. In his invention, he ensures that everyone could have a smoother transport. This could be done by the availability of the automobiles that were affordable to all kinds of people, whether poor or rich.

Work Cited

Cullen, Francis T., William J. Maakestad, and Gray Cavender. "The Ford Pinto case and beyond: corporate crime, moral boundaries, and criminal sanction." E. Hochstedler (1984): 107-30.

Gioia, Dennis A. "Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities." Journal of Business Ethics 11.5-6 (1992): 379-389.

Lee, Matthew T. "The Ford Pinto Case and the Development of Auto Safety Regulations, 1893-1978." Business and Economic History (1998): 390-401.

Reidenbach, R. Eric, and Donald P. Robin. "A conceptual model of corporate moral development." Journal of Business ethics 10.4 (1991): 273-284.