Applying Utilitarianism to Business Ethics: The Ford Pinto

Case
Published on February 6, 2009 by annielundy in Major Companies
Comments (2)|0 Liked It
An attempt to unravel the uses and abuses of the theory of utilitarianism. It is interesting to
see how the Ford Motor company fared with this case.

Utilitarianism, in a simple definition, can be described as a consequentialist, normative theory and, according to
Fieser, means that “correct moral conduct is determined solely by a cost-benefit analysis of an action’s
consequences” (Ethics, 7). To examine the definitions and concepts of the theory, in relation to business
ethics, c reference to the Ford Pinto Case will be used. It should then illustrate how utilitarian methods and
cost-benefit analysis impacted on the whole events.

Utilitarianism: The basic ethical principle of this theory is of consequences, weighing them up to determine
how every person involved in any event, issue, proposal, project and so forth, would be affected. The aim in
doing so would be to decide on a morally right action, one that would result in “the greatest overall positive
consequences for everyone” (Hinman, 136). So every aspect must be examined to evaluate potential good
and bad outcomes; if the goods outweigh the bads, then morally, the action can be deemed right. If there are
more bad consequences predicted, then the opposite applies. As with all ethical and philosophical theories,
there are more issues to be considered, nothing is quite so simple. Different forms of utilitarianism have been
described over the centuries, like Bentham’s pain – pleasure as bad and good consequences. (Ethics, 8), but
all seemed to attempt to measure and define what ‘utility’ actually means.
Read more in Major Companies
« McDonald’s or Starbucks?
Las Vegas Trip on Bailout Package Canceled by Wells Fargo »
If utilitarians consider morality to be all about consequences, then how are consequences measured, which
calls into question how utility can be measured and how much of it is the ideal level to aim for? Hinman
states: “utilitarians must answer the question of whom these are consequences for?” (137). This question is
highly relevant when applied to using utilitarian ethics in business, and in particular, within the context of the
Ford Pinto case, to be discussed later. There are many different versions of the theory, all trying to define what
consequences are applied to and how they may be applied. One version, rule-utilitarianism, considers that a
rule or code of behaviour is morally right if, by its application, the consequences are more favourable that
unfavourable to everyone. The actions driven by the rule would result in benefits, or goods for all of society.

One example might be a Council’s Urban Regeneration Programme, funded by Council Tax. The rule is that
everyone must pay, and in doing so, produce an outcome that creates a better environment for the majority
living in the urban area. The flaw is that those in the suburbs, who contribute the greatest amount, will not
receive as much favourable consequences, on the premise that they already have plenty of utilities. So simply
following a rule would not always be equally favourable.

On the other hand, act-utilitarianism, the most common form used in many circumstances, looks at the
consequences of every case individually and works out the benefits before taking a morally right action.
Leggett (13) in commenting on Ford’s use of utilitarian ethics, says:

“The utilitarian approach evaluates each action separately and the consequences that arise from it. This
analysis would include any ‘harms’ or ‘benefits’ incurred by any people involved in the case.”

Business Ethics: In applying utilitarian principles to business ethics, the cost-benefit analysis is most often
used – it is a good decision making tool. Companies will attempt to work out how much something is going to
cost them before taking action that should, ideally, result in consequences favourable to everyone. That would
mean the company could make a profit, while the consumer benefited from their product. Hopefully, products
are fit for purpose, safe, and give value for money. No business would attempt a project without evaluation of
all relevant factors first, as well as taking other issues or risks into account that might jeopardise success.
Ethical business practice, using utilitarianism, would thus consider the good and bad consequence for
everyone the action would affect, treat everybody as having equal rights, with no bias towards self, and would
use it as an objective, quantitative way to make a moral decision.
In applied business ethics, within the utilitarian theory, many principles exist which may be used to inform the
morality of actions when analysing costs-benefits, or should be, if consequences are to favour more people
overall. These include harm, honesty, justice and rights. So no harm should be done to others, people should
not be deceived and their rights to life, free expression, and safety should be acknowledged. The contention
here is that Ford abandoned these principles, abused the utilitarian theory to suit their needs, stayed within the
laws of the time, but behaved unethically. The ‘utilities’ as a consequence, appeared to be money, and they
used that to define the value of their needs against the value of human life.

Ford Pinto Case and Cost Benefit Analysis: Lacey (580-581) stated that:
“Ford pushed the federal regulators to put some price on auto safety…It was

an agency of the U.S. government [National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis-

tration (NHTSA)] which arrived at this blood-chilling calculation, not the Ford

Motor Company. But the way in which Ford took this government figure

[$250,725] and used it for its own purposes carried a chill…”

So the Ford Pinto went on sale with dangerous design faults in the position of the fuel tank and nearby bolts,
and the tendency for the fuel valve to leak in rollover accidents. Design and production was rushed and cost of
the vehicle kept down to sell it at $2000. It sold well, until 1972 when four people died and one young boy was
horrendously burned and disfigured; these are only a few of the incidents that resulted from the Pinto’s flaws,
many more followed, costing Ford millions in compensation. The cost-benefit analysis demonstrated an abuse
of utilitarian principles, and the engineers were fully aware of the flaws, yet the company continued to sell the
car as it was, without safety modifications. They “weighed the risk of harm and the overall cost of avoiding it.”
Leggett, (1999).

The government figure, mentioned earlier, was made up of 12 ‘societal components’ that included $10,000 for
‘victim’s pain and suffering’ and was meant to determine the cost to society for each estimated death. Ford
decided to predict or estimate 180 deaths, 180 serious burn injuries, 2100 vehicles lost, and calculated $49.5
million overall, a figure that would be a benefit to the company, if they put things right with the car. The
estimated cost of doing so came to $137 million, for 11 million vehicles at $11 dollars per tank and $11 per unit
for other modifications. So costs outweighed benefits and the value of human life was quantified as an
economic commodity.

It also emerged that some evidence suggested the actual costs to correct matters were over-estimated and
would have been nearer to $63.5 million. Though these did not equate to the benefits, there would seem to be
a moral duty somewhere for a huge corporation like Ford, to bear the cost of $15 million. That way, utilitarian
ethics, normative principles and the most good and positive consequences for most people overall would have
resulted. There seems to be some form of justice or divine retribution in the way the benefits dwindled and the
costs grew over the years, as lawsuits and penalties took millions of dollars from Ford. The company did
noting illegal in terms of design at that time; they took advantage of the cost-benefit analysis, ignored ethical
principles and abused the moral aspects in utilitarianism. As Lacey (577) put it:

“The question is whether Ford and Iacocca [Executive vice president] exhibited all due care for their customers’
safety when balanced in the complex car making equation that involves cost, time, marketability and profit.”

Conclusion: Utilitarianism, business ethics and the Ford Pinto case present a dilemma, as the theory appears
to be one of moral strength and a good guideline for ethical practice. In relating its consequential content to the
Ford Pinto case, it would seem that the application of ethics had been dismissed in favour of profits, reputation
and unethical practices. The theory cannot possibly be used to put a value on human life, as Ford attempted
to do. The dangers in utilitarianism lie with the potential for abuse, and in abandoning the inherent principles,
Ford demonstrated those dangers in action.
The decision not to rectify faults represented a denial of doing no harm, not deceiving others, justice and the
rights to life and safety. Nor can the theory measure human suffering or loss, as Ford found, to its cost; it
cannot predict consequences accurately or quantify benefits and harms, simply by applying a cost-benefit
analytical tool. In considering that the ends justify the means, another aspect of utilitarianism, and determining
the pain of actions, volume and not ‘who’ suffers, has significance. In principle, evaluating of good and bad
consequences provides one way of ensuring that companies consider the morality of their actions, which may
suggest that utilitarianism can be a positive influence for ethical business practice.

Reference List As Follows:

Fieser, J. Ethics: Consequentialist Theories Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy

2006. University of Tennessee at Martin. 24 April 2007

http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/ethics.htm
Hinman, L. M. Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory: Chapter 5:

The Ethics of Consequences: Utilitarianism. 3rd Edition. Belmont, CA:

Wadsworth: 2003

Lacey, R. Ford. London: Book Club Associates by Arrangement with William

Heinemann Ltd. 1988

Leggett, C. The Ford Pinto Case: The Valuation of Life as it Applies to the

Negligence Efficiency Argument. Law and Valuation Papers, Spring 1999

at Wake Forest University. 24 April 2007

http://www.wfu.edu/~palmitar/Law&Valuation/Papers/1999/Leggett-pinto.html
Home | Jeremy Bentham: His Life and Impact--jk | UTILITARIAN ETHICS: an introductory
explanation | JAMES MILL ON RELIGION | BENTHAM ON BUGGERY, and other crimes
against oneself | The Bentham Brothers, their adventure in Russia | Panopticon, Bentham's
design of prisons | Bentham's final resting place | Bentham's Utilitarianism in Victorian
England | Bentham, Life and Involvement with University College London | JOHN STUART
MILL ON JEREMY BENTHAM |Bentham, a Deeper Look | John Stuart Mill: a brief
account | Jeremy Bentham's Will | The Rationale of Reward--Bentham| BENTHAM: THE
RATIONAL OF PUNISHMENT IMMORAL | BENTHAM: ON THE RATIONAL OF
REWARD | JEREMY BENTHAM: Shorter Britannica Article | UTILITARIANISM - - John Stuart
Mill | Taylor Harriet Mill | John Stuart Mill: a fuller account | Betham and His Works | Betham:
A Short Accounting | Utilitarianism as adopted by theologians: a review |Utilitarianism, an
historical survey | James Mill | Samuel Bentham | THE SPRINGS OF ACTION--Jeremy
Bentham |JEREMY BENTHAM ON PLEASURE | Prof. Singer, the utilitarian, 2
articles | UTILITARIAN LINKS

UTILITARIANISM: the ethical theory

for all times.

THOUGHT IS WHAT SEPARATES US FROM

THE ANIMALS, AND THE CONJUNCTION OF
VALUES AND COMPLETENESS SEPARATES
US FROM THE COMMON HERD.
UTILITARIANISM WHILE JUSTIFYING
MANY OF THE COMMON-SENSE ETHICAL
BELIEFS, IT GOES BEYOND THAT TO
GUIDE US (AND SOCIETY) INTO NEW AND
BETTER WAYS. COME ON THIS THOUGHT
CHALLANGE, PLEASE.

To him who little is not enough,

nothing will be enough--Epicurus

Jeremy Bentham: His Life and

Impact--jk

Now averaging over

 32/3million pages
viewed per year
The greatest problem of man is that
322,276 x 12 = 3,735,3112

he can’t sit in a room alone—Blasé General Summary

1. Host name jeromekahn123

Program Apr 18,

Pascal 2.
start time 200802:21
MALT DONE MORE THAN
MILTON CAN, TO SHOW GOD'S Time of
May 31,
WAY TO MAN. 3. first
200403:47
request
--A.E.Housman

Time of
Apr 17,
4. last
200823:59
request

Time last 7
Apr 18,
5. days lasts
200802:21
until

Successful
6,688,901
6. server
Requests
requests

Successful
69,386
7. requests in
Requests
last 7 days

Successful 3,971,643
8. requests Requests for
for pages pages

9. Successful 69,386
 requests Requests for
for pages pages
in last 7
days

Your site had 11,006 page views

yesterday and 311,2768 page views so far
this month

This report was generated on April 09, 2008 02:07.

Report time frame May 31, 2004 03:47 to April 14,
2008 23:59. This site has been up since the spring
of 01

Site # 2 develops utilitarian ethics

into a general theory of utopia,
one which delves into economics,
To him who little is not enough, nothing will be politics, ethics, and
enough--Epicurus
psychology. There is continuity
Meditate upon pleasure, for without it ones does
all to get it back--Epicurus
between Epicurus and Bentham,
and between Bentham and site #
{Mean that pleasure is the prime mover in
human behavior. Jeremy Bentham said the 2. With each step there is
same" "We have to soverigns, pain and
pleasure. To put it in psychological terms:
progress.
Operant (respondent) conditioning is
determined by positive and negative Click to receive e-mail
reinforcement and by positive and negative when this page is updated
punishment
(see http://skeptically.org/scpsy/id9.html).

N. C. Escher

Powered by NetMind
 Since love with its conjunction of loving
copulation will yield the greatest amount of
pleasure, special attention has been given
this topic.

In a site dedicated to skepticism,

utilitarianism is on the fringe of
relevance. The argument for
inclusion goes as follows:

A. For to what to be skeptical

about in a topic (especially
one that is both logical
and accepted by well
educated people) one must
know a more reasonable
alternative.

B. Among the topics under the

umbrella of skepticism are
those about our economic and
political systems.

C. Utilitarianism had as its

principle early function (by
skeptically
Bentham and his circle) been
Gadgets powered by Google used to bring moral
considerations as a
measurement of then current
economic policies and political
agendas.

D. Ethical arguments based on

 common sense have been
and are used to justify the
existing order. They are
grossly misplaced.

E. Utilitarianism brings order to

the chaos of common-sense
ethics, and in so
doing supports far reaching
changes in economics and
politics.
M. C. Escher

Every site by California Skeptics has

high quality artwork on its homepage,
and there is a site on just the
 featured artists, with links.

The Truth About Drug Companies by

Marcia Angell, MD. Absolutely the
best book onprofits and drugs for it
reveals—without being technical and
tedious--more about the workings of
the profit system and its relationship
to government than all others—and
it’s available on audio CD. (1-20)

For chapter 6 of her book.

N, C, Escher
 This site is one of 3 sites maintained by California Skeptics

A ll wi th c oo l ar t and in f or mat i v e ar t i cl es

A = sites where the articles have with them art. All home pages have art.

#7 TABLE OF CONTENTS skeptically, a dozen major topic, over 1,000

articles, averages over 5,500 pages downloaded per weekday.

#201 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR CURRENT NEWS ISSUES, 400 current political
news, international news, corporate news & archives—over 600 pages downloaded per day
A

#31 TABLE OF CONTENTS healthfully, 600 health & medical articles, many topics,
averages over 1,000 pages downloaded per day. A

#209 THE ARTISTS, bios and samples of their art A

# 125 The Crash On the economic collapse of 2008

# 220 POD CASTS & U-TUBE, for those who like the visuals A

#1 Enlightenment, our favorites, the flagship articles A

Skeptical sites:
#1 Enlightenment, collection of the best A

#4 Logical threads

#6 Thinkers on Religion

#9 Spiritualism
#17 Quackery

#19 Skepticism

#29 For skeptics

#37 Biographical

#102 Quacks, theories & practice

Religious sites:
#1 Enlightenment A

#5 Cartoons Mostly Religious

#6 Thinkers on Religion A

#8 Old Testament Analysis

#26 Ancient Sacred Works of the Hebrews

#9 Spiritualism

#10 Literary Works on Religion

#15 Christian Apocrypha and Essays

#16 New Testament

#18 Against Religious foolishness A

#20 Ancient Sacred Works of the Christians

#22 Christianity

#24 Bible Studies More

#107 Holy Horrors

#109 Philosophy & religion

Political-economic sites:
#111 World Trade Organization A
#123 Neoliberalism at Work

#125 The Crash

#106 Economics A

#119 Economic Developments A

#121 Economics the Dismal Science

#116 OIL A

#21 Muckraking Political Articles

#23 Critical of capitalism A

#126 Corporate system

#25 Bush Bashing

#112 Bush watch A

#103 Parliament of Whores A

#104 Government, Presidency, Congress, Courts

#117 Federal court system

#12 Penal system

#14 Labor A

#28 Nuclear war threat A

#118 Iraq war, wars A

#127 Military war

#120 Election reform A

#124 Managed-Corporate Press

#41 Medical business abuses

#130 Big Pharma at work

Utopia, ethics, happiness, misc. sites:
#2 Utopia A

#3 Utilitarianism

#5 Cartoons & satire

#7 Table of contents & links

#101 Links & quotes

#105 Scientific psychology

#108 Psychoanalysis, their weird theories

#27 Recreational drugs A

#110 Recreational drug research A

#113 Environmental & animals

#114 B.F. Skinner, works and life

#115 Ethics humanistic

#122 Pod casts & u-tube A

JK’s Poetry, Satire & Short Stories sites:

#32 Short stories, etc.

#33 Satire

#34 Rhymed poems

#39 Rhymed poems romantic

#40 Rhymed poems melancholy

#42 Rhymed poems social message

#43 Rhymed poems satire

 Featured artists with links:

HELP!!!

We think that deceptions need to be debunked. Help publicize this site. We appreciate
feedback. Contact US

at thinker@skeptically.org.

Moreover, JK has something to say, and he likes saying it. He has written several works of
fiction in need of a publisher. Can you help?

California Skeptics has an excellent collection of political cartoons and huge collection of
links to sites with political cartoons and animation

OUTSTANDING SITES
QuackWatch, guide to health fraud by Dr. Stephen Barrett

http://www.worstpills.org/: Part of the Nader network of Public Citizen

http://skepdic.com: Contains The Skeptic Dictionary by Robert Carroll, over

460 first rate articles on all the topics of interest to a skeptic

The Truth About Drug Companies by Marcia Angell, MD. Absolutely the best book on profits
and drugs for it reveals—without being technical and tedious--more about the workings of the
profit system and its relationship to government than all others—and it’s available on audio
CD. (1-20)

For chapter 6 of her book.

SEARCH: Tripod The Web