3 Approaches to Ethical Decision Making and My Ford Pinto
Considering the fact that my to start with car or truck was a Ford Pinto, I have generally been fascinated in the Ford Pinto explosions that ended up brought on by a defective gasoline tank design and style presents an intriguing case research into techniques to ethical conclusion producing. There are a few attainable approaches to make when making moral choices a consequentialist method, a deontological solution and a psychological approach. In a consequentialist approach, the choice maker would base their determination by focusing awareness on the consequences of their action (Trevino and Nelson, 2005, p. 89). In the deontological method, the selection maker would foundation their final decision by focusing on what is appropriate or improper based mostly on prevalent values and legal rights of folks and/or teams (p. 91). A decision maker basing their action on a psychological tactic may possibly vary their actions primarily based on the level of their cognitive ethical progress (p. 115).
In the Ford Pinto case, an individual who took a consequentialist solution could quickly make the selection which Ford did and create the automobile irrespective of the risk of possessing the gas tank explode on minimal velocity rear-conclude collisions. In addition, they would probably agree with Ford that the car did not need to have to be recalled at the time it was on the market place. A selection maker applying the consequentialist solution would search at the outcomes for the broadest variety of person and groups as probable and make their determination primarily based on doing the minimum harm and the most sum of superior to all. Due to the fact the facts must that there ended up no additional accidents with the Pinto than with other autos and the providers stakeholders would significantly benefit from maintaining the costs minimal and bringing the motor vehicle to marketplace as rapidly as achievable they effortlessly could have decided that the most gain would come from heading forward with the design and style because there would be a lot of who would gain and probable no extra than what current specifications permitted would be harmed.
On the other hand, a decision maker making use of the deontological technique would effortlessly have resolved not to go forward with manufacturing and/or to recall the auto at the time it was on the market. Due to the fact this particular person would base their conclusion on a set of moral values and/or the legal rights of people, they would likely argue that the car or truck really should not be manufactured unless of course the rights of the minority team who would be harmed could be confident.
The success of a decision of an personal following a psychological solution would change dependent on their stage of cognitive moral improvement (p. 115). If for case in point, they were being at a preconventional stage they likely would have agreed to go forward with the sale of the Pinto and/or not to recall it from the market for the reason that they would have been hugely influenced by other individuals in the company. They would have feared punishment from administration or they would have hoped that by supporting the the greater part viewpoint that they would have been rewarded in some way. Even if the personal was at the conventional stage they might even now not have made the decision to redesign the Pinto’s tank. Whilst striving for “great habits” they would have been extremely influenced by the bulk of decision makers in the company and not long gone versus their will. They also would have adopted the “letter of the regulation” which supported the scenario of not needing to make a adjust to the layout. Only if they experienced a extremely designed postconventional or principled level of moral growth would they have felt the will need to go from the trend inside the firm in purchase to uphold the legal rights of the minority “regardless of the bulk belief (p. 115).
By the way, I survived my 1974 Ford Pinto! Thank goodness I was not rear-finished!
References:
Trevino, L., and Nelson, K., (2005). Company social responsibility and managerial ethics. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.