It's as certain as the sun rises that it's going to happen. Everyone will face death at some point, it's just a matter of time. If you drove a subcompact car designed by Ford in the early 1970s, it might arrive sooner than you'd like. We often buy vehicles for convenience, to help us get from one point to another, faster and, hopefully, more safely. Now what if security was a little out of reach and your life had a dollar amount that determined its value? Well, it turns out the car rolled, which set this equation in motion. Doesn’t that seem ethically or morally wrong? Ford Motor Company didn't think so and ignored the concern for ethics. Ultimately, Ford created exactly that, a predetermined equation for determining the value of human life. And the basis for establishing this shocking solution is to save a few dollars. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay If you haven't figured it out yet, we're referring to the Ford Pinto. The famous explosive car delivered by the Ford Motor Company to compete with foreign imports while combating rising fuel costs. You might think that safety is top of mind on the minds of automotive designers and CEOs, but in this case, only the basics were. This belief can be compared to that of the still controversial theorist Milton Friedman. He believed that “there is one and only one social responsibility for businesses: to use their resources and engage in activities designed to increase their profits” (Fox, 2012). Does this theory put safety and precautions second to profits? Can anyone intentionally make a product knowing that innocent and unknowing consumers may be at risk? One might wonder if the president (Lee Lacocca at the time) of Ford Motor Company believed and followed this ethical theory of Friedman. Since then, he has approved and rushed the production of the formidable Pinto. It would appear that Lacocca had problems with the ethical dilemma surrounding the design and failure of the Pintos. In a leaked Ford memo, the Pinto suffered from a faulty design involving the fuel tank exploding in minor rear-end collisions, while eventually blocking the doors from closing, trapping its occupants inside. Hence the creation of a crematorium on wheels. The car earned a nickname after dozens of people died: "Pinto leaves you with that warm feeling." Despite this well-known defect, production continued. This troubleshooting note included the cost and method of remedying the problem. One $11-$13 piece of plastic installed per vehicle (price varies by item). Initially, this figure seems relatively low, but when multiplying this number by the number of cars on the road and future production, this number skyrocketed. Ford calculated a figure that compares the cost associated with recalling and repairing defective Pintos or paying for potential lawsuits filed by injured occupants or families of the deceased. Unfortunately for the drivers of the Ford Pinto and according to the "risk-benefit analysis" and Friedman's theory, the loss of profit seemed too costly for the repairs. Ford's estimates estimated that human life was worth about $200,000, with an estimate that 1,000 people could perish in fiery crashes, recalling and repairing the pinto had alljust doesn’t make financial sense. So life is only worth $200,000? Well, that's the idea and Lacocca pursued it. Unfortunately, a time machine isn't a thing that exists and we can't somehow manipulate Lacocca's state of mind. If we could, I had injected a revised theory of ethics that could change his mentality regarding the Pintos and, more importantly, human life. Using utilitarianism, for example, this form of ethics "maintains that ethical behavior consists of actions that create the greatest good for the greatest number of people." If we could go back in time, changing Lacocca's decision not to produce the Pinto without changing the fuel tank defect and strengthening the entire build would have proven less expensive and perhaps had a positive impact on the story of the car. But it is safe to say that Lacocca had an ethical problem, his actions of rushing manufacturing despite the problems led to the recall of 1.5 million Pintos (Eckhold, 1978) and jeopardized the safety of his consumers. It's fair to say that his choice was not partly for the greater good. Since Lacocca did not apply the best decision-making choices, there could be generalized legal topics that could show how this case may have been influenced. Although properly administering codes of ethics, creating positive work environments with a reliable workforce, and defending future whistleblowers, are just a few examples worth mentioning. We hope that every company and its staff, whether employees, supervisors, management, etc., are above the temptation to commit wrongdoing, deliberately. But unfortunately there isn't one. To counter this, many companies have implemented a measurement tool, a code of ethics. This simple but effective “systematic procedure” helps protect you, your products, your businesses, and hopefully your consumers. When adhering to a code of ethics, you will probably need to ask yourself some of these questions if you are faced with a dilemma: Is this the right thing to do? Am I loyal to my family, my business and myself? distort information or deviate from normal procedures? What would it look like if it made the news or became public? Will what I do cause harm? These issues mentioned are just some of the few issues one might find regarding a code of ethics. We can ask ourselves these questions when evaluating a problem; too bad Lacocca didn't do it. As a business owner, the importance of a reliable and ethical workforce is crucial. Looking back to the 1970s, some might think of the work environment of that time period. The 1970s were a time when strikes were regular. The desire to improve working conditions, to increase job security, to end jobs restricted to men and women, to demand higher wages, have all played an important role in the creation of a better workplace and in initiating strikes. These and many other reasons could have led to the need for skilled and reliable workers. Companies like Ford may have chosen workers willing to do their jobs without hesitation and perhaps without being upfront about potential problems. Hiring the wrong type of employee who might overlook a potential problem rather than one who mentions problems before they manifest could have played a significant role for Ford. This factor may have contributed to the ethical problems of Lacocca and the.