How Did Ford Recall Coordinator Followed Deontological Approach To Make Decisions

754 Words4 Pages

the safety than making the profit. However, according to the Ford’s calculation, making the car more safely would have cost almost three times more than the profit so they decided not to improve the faulty fuel tank design. It shows that the company does not show any integrity for either customers or the society.
Creative Actions To be creative is the key to solve many problems. As Ford is an automobile company, they should have people who can come up with interesting creative ideas. In this case, reducing the production on the hand and making enough cars with safety fuel tank could have been a good solution. Doing so, they did not have to leave this stained accident on their profile, and people would not have to die. It will also give the …show more content…

As mention before, this approach focuses on what is right thing to do regardless of the consequences. For him, the right thing was to keep his loyalty to the company and to look out for well-being of the company. In order to do so, he closed his eyes on the problem that involved with the safety of the human life. According to Dennis, from his point of view, at the time when he made not to recall decision, he did not think that he made any mistake. This statement proves that at that time, they did not demonstrate any moral awareness. If I were in the recall coordinator position for Ford that time, I would have use the virtue ethics approach. The reason for using this approach is that this approach focuses on the integrity of the moral person than the moral act. As a person who is working within the professional community, I would like to make sure that what I am doing on a personal basis will not lead others to do something unethical. Therefore, when i first heard about the problem with fuel tank, I should have thought about what people will see me as if this problem caused something bad since I had the authority to stop it from the beginning. Even if I am an employee, I am still an individual who can see what the president of the company, who can only see the company and himself, might not have been able to