Who-How (WH) framework is a strategy is useful when it comes to making business decisions but n an ethical manner (Kubasek, Browne, Herron, Dhooge, & Barkacs, 2016). It is mainly concerned with two aspects that a decision will affect, the, who and how. In this case, who are often not only the stakeholders of the business but the society it serves in general. How has to question the process of the decision making to result for the better good of everyone who will be affected by the outcomes. There are guidelines, in term of questions that the WH framework puts into consideration for businesses to use. In reference to these guidelines, it would appear that Ford as a company failed to ethically comply with the guidelines as given.
The reason for the above is due to the fact that they applied more rationalization to their decision making. According to Harris, Parmar & Wicks (2015), this is when a decision is made to serve one’s interest and also as an easy way out. It is understandable that Ford is a business and its main objective is to make profits while lowering their operational costs. However, from their decision, it can be observed that they choose to forego the repairing because it would make financial sense for them to compensate rather than attempt the latter. As such, it is evident that their decision was rational because it was the easier way out for the company.
The decision can also question their social responsibility morals. Ford is more of an international company which means it serves an array of customers who have family and friends. The question of social responsibility is derived from the concerned risk that the company was subjecting their customers. Arguably, one would say it is the responsibility of the customer to ensure they are buying something of quality. However, it is also the role of the company to provide the quality. The Pinto model must have been a favorite for many who had no idea of the faulty fuel tank thus it should have been the decision either not to sell something faulty or have the customer know about it for them to make their own decisions.
Given the above, what Ford should have done in the first place was to come out clear with the problem and then recall all purchased Pinto models in order to repair the faulty fuel tank. The reason for this has to do more with being responsible. As an organization, Ford can be ranked amongst the most competitive motor car business in the industry which means it has a responsibility towards its customer’s to offer them the best. An organization that provides products or services to its potential market has the obligation to ensure their safety at all times (Consumer Protection, 2018). As such, Ford should have been socially responsible towards its clients and not only thought of its profits margins. The decision they made should have been well informed through effective data to include the risk they were subjecting their customers. Furthermore, Kubasek et al (2016) add that the decision should be defensible in that it can be well argued from all points of view in reference to the WH framework. Therefore, in conclusion, Ford acted in an ethical manner when it chose to rationalize its decisions for selfish benefits instead of considering the risks other stakeholders were going to incur.
References
Consumer Protection (2018). Making Sure Products are Safe. Retrieved from https://www.consumerprotection.govt.nz/tradingstandards/product-safety/about-product-safety/making-sure-products-are-safe/
Harris, J., Parmar, B. & Wicks, A. (2015). Ethical Business Decisions: The Framework. Retrieved from https://ideas.darden.virginia.edu/2015/07/ethical-business-decisions-the-framework/
Kubasek, N., Browne, M. N., Herron, D. J., Dhooge, L. J., & Barkacs, L. (2016). Dynamic business law: The essentials (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
