Firestone and Ford Case Analysis Essay Example

expose this issue to the public.He discovered key issues regarding this case: •Numerous complaints were successfully kept confidential •Other lawyers had tried to sue Bridgestone / Firestone for its faulty tires •State Farm Insurance received an unusually high number of insurance claims in which the tires were associated With this evidence, the National Highway Traffic Safety Association suddenly had an interest regarding this case.

What are the ethical and social issues in this case? The major issues involve Bridgestone / Firestone, Ford Motor Company, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.Bridgestone / Firestone produced faulty tires especially those that were manufactured in one of its plants in Decatur, Illinois. The tires that were faulty were said to have been mass produced at the same time its employees were involved in a strike. Bridgestone / Firestone knew about the incidents that involved their products produced in the Decatur plant.

They have spent a lot of money to settle claims which involve these faulty tires. They kept the issues confidential and failed to inform the public. This caused numerous accidents to occur and many lives lost.Bridgestone / Firestone instead placed the blame on Ford Motor Company. The SUV involved in this case was a Ford Explorer. It has been argued that the SUV is prone to roll over because of its design.

Also Ford Motor Company failed to place the adequate amount of pressure in the tires. Instead of filling the tires with 30 psi it placed on 26 psi. Ford Motor Company also failed in the same manner as Bridgestone / Firestone because they did not quickly take action to resolve this issue and instead pointed

the blame back to Bridgestone / Firestone.The public was not informed promptly by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration because they stated that tire makers are not legally required to share these types of reports to the public. They said that there needs to be adequate funding to perform its job effectively. Clarence Ditlow of the Center for Auto Safety, states that the federal government requires companies to surrender adjustment data only after the tragedy happens.

Who are the stakeholders and what are their stakes? How do legitimacy, power, and urgency factor in? Do these companies care about consumers?Discuss. The stakeholders involved are Bridgestone / Firestone, Ford Motor Company, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the consumers. Bridgestone / Firestone own the produced tires involved in this case. It depends on the automobile company to make its sale. Ford Motor Company owns the Ford Explorer that requires tires to properly function.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration involves the safety of the consumers who purchase these vehicles. They allow these vehicles to be used if they meet certain criteria’s and standards.Finally the consumer closes the transaction by their purchase of these vehicles. They are affected by the decisions that these different companies make. In other words they become the victims if these companies make the wrong decisions about the product that was sold.

Legitimacy, power, and urgency play an important role in this case. Someone needs to be responsible for these accidents that occurred because of manufacturing defects involved in these vehicles. The decisions made by these companies affected the lives of their consumers and their company.Lawful acts and righteous acts are two separate

things. The companies did not break the law when they exercised their right to withhold information. But they failed to do what is right when they knew something was wrong with their product.

Sometimes there are loop holes in the law that needs to be patched up or improvised because it affects the lives of innocent people. In this case the companies were given the right to withhold vital information to the public simply to protect the image of their company and avoid loss of millions of dollars.They exercised their rights but jeopardized their consumer’s lives. These companies were completely aware of the numerous accidents that occurred because of these defects but failed to correct it promptly and waited for more people to be seriously injured or killed before they took action. Power played a big factor in this case because it required the persistence of a victim’s family lawyer to expose the issues at hand. Without his perseverance, this case would have been swept under the rug and nothing would have been done.

It requires the use of power to change and revise what is written in the law. This case certainly needed an addendum attached to not only do what is lawful but what is right. These companies need to balance power and responsibility. They had the power to withhold information that is detrimental to the public but had to be responsible for the criticism it received in regards to their product.

This case would have been resolved easier if the companies involved were proactive and dealt with the issue promptly. If they did not hesitate these companies could have avoided many lawsuits.Consumers could

have avoided these accidents if they were aware that their vehicle had defects. Conduct a CSR analysis of both Firestone and Ford. How do they measure up in fulfilling their various social responsibilities? Bridgestone / Firestone and Ford Motor Company fulfilled its economic responsibilities. Despite this tragic incident it is a company that involves multimillion transactions.

Society and other businesses want their goods and create adequate profits for its investors. Bridgestone / Firestone and Ford Motor Company also fulfilled its legal responsibilities.They did not break the law because they were given certain rights to withhold vital information to the public in regards to these defects. Both companies failed to do what was ethical because they did not inform their customers and correct the issue of these faulty products. Their failure to act ethically was the result of the following: •many lawsuits which involve both companies •manufacturing plants closed down (Decatur Plant) •CEO of Ford was fired •Ties between the two companies was cut The two companies later recalled their products which cost millions of dollars.

Though their action was late they made the effort to make the wrong things right. Who is at fault in the tire separation controversy? Bridgestone / Firestone? Ford Motor Company? The NHTSA? Each company has its share of blame in this case. Bridgestone / Firestone had produced faulty tires that became the stepping stone of this dilemma. Ford Explorers design would not be an issue if the tires were reliable.

Any model vehicle would be prone to an accident if it travelled at high speeds and the tire treads came off.NHTSA should have been more proactive in the correction of this

case. They should have noticed a trend in these accidents and informed the companies to take the proper actions. In conclusion Bridgestone / Firestone and Ford Motor Company should have acted on behalf of their consumers instead of trying to cover up its mistakes. They need to take responsibility for their actions and make the right decisions in how they handle these types of cases especially when people lives are at stake. In the end there are always consequences for the wrong decisions that are made.