Business Ethics: MBA Admissions Breach and Ford Pinto Case
This paper examines two distinct business ethics scenarios through the lenses of deontological and consequentialist moral theory. The first case addresses MBA applicants who accessed confidential admissions files without authorization, analyzing their breach of trust, the categorical imperative of honesty, and how their actions conflicted with business schools' standards of integrity and character. The second case revisits Ford Motor Company's decision not to recall the defective Pinto, critiquing the company's narrow cost-benefit analysis and its failure to account for all relevant stakeholders. Together, the two cases illustrate how ethical frameworks, when applied rigorously and inclusively, lead to morally superior decisions than purely financial calculations.
- Unauthorized Access to Admissions Files: Why viewing closed files was ethically wrong
- Trust, Deontology, and the Categorical Imperative: Schools' deontological view versus applicants' consequentialism
- Reputation, Integrity, and Consequentialist Blind Spots: Applicants ignored reputational consequences and school standards
- Internet Ethics and the Real-World Parallel: Online ethics mirror real-world ethical obligations
- Ford's Financial Calculus and the Pinto Decision: Ford prioritized shareholder value over human safety
- Applying Deontological and Consequentialist Frameworks to Ford: What proper ethical frameworks would have demanded of Ford
- Quantifying Human Life: Ford's Flawed Stakeholder Analysis: Ford's cost-benefit analysis excluded key stakeholders
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Applies two major ethical frameworks — deontology and consequentialism — consistently across both cases, allowing direct comparison and contrast.
- Uses concrete real-world scenarios (admissions file access, the Pinto recall decision) to ground abstract ethical theory in recognizable situations.
- Identifies the stakeholder dimension explicitly in the Ford case, showing how narrowing the analysis to one stakeholder corrupts an otherwise valid consequentialist method.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates multi-framework ethical analysis: for each case it first names the framework the decision-maker actually used, then reconstructs what a more complete application of deontological or consequentialist reasoning would have required. This before/after structure makes the normative argument clear without simply asserting an opinion.
Structure breakdown
The paper is divided into two case analyses. Case 1 (MBA applicants) moves from the specific act of file-viewing → breach of trust → reputational obligation → generational attitudes toward internet ethics. Case 2 (Ford Pinto) moves from Ford's purely financial framing → what deontology would have required → what a full consequentialist calculus would have required → critique of Ford's use of NHTSA figures. Each section builds on the previous one rather than standing alone.
Unauthorized Access to Admissions Files
It was wrong for the applicants to take an unauthorized look at their application files. The intent of the school was clearly to keep those files closed, so viewing them constituted a breach of the school's intentions. There is an implicit duty on the part of the applicant to avoid looking at those files, even if the opportunity presents itself.
Trust, Deontology, and the Categorical Imperative
Many of the candidates in question applied a consequentialist view of the ethics surrounding this situation. However, the schools applied a deontological view. The fact that there were no negative consequences related to viewing the files is irrelevant, because the issue relates to trust. With trust, there is always a categorical imperative, and trust therefore needs to be maintained at all times. The candidates in question violated the trust they were attempting to form between themselves and the school. As a result, these candidates committed an act they should not have.
Reputation, Integrity, and Consequentialist Blind Spots
The applicants should have considered that they have an obligation to uphold the reputation of the school. These business schools all have very good reputations, and they wish to be seen as having the highest standards not only of performance but of integrity as well. The candidates should have been aware that looking at the files would reflect poorly on themselves, and that the schools would view someone with questionable ethics as unsuitable for admission.
This ties in with the ideals that the schools hold. Those ideals center on integrity, excellence, and character. When an applicant demonstrates a lack of these qualities, the school sees that candidate as someone who will not represent the school well in the future. It is important for these schools that their graduates reflect well on them, so they are careful to ensure that the students they accept have a high level of integrity and strong ethical standards.
The applicants should have considered that they might face negative consequences for their actions. They should have realized that they are not anonymous when accessing web pages — especially ones specific to a single person — and acted accordingly. In analyzing the situation from a consequentialist point of view, they neglected to consider the potential consequences for themselves.
Ford's Financial Calculus and the Pinto Decision
Ford did not address the Pinto situation from any moral theory. Ford evaluated the Pinto situation from a purely financial point of view. Essentially, the company took the position that its duty is strictly to its shareholders, and it gambled that the blowback from the Pinto fiasco would not cause long-run damage to its stock value. The decision was entirely mathematical.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.