Process of Analyzing a Case Study in Case Study Report

Introduction

Times have changed and as result learning methodologies have to change with them. The rapid changes in the world systems today have fuelled the growth of case study owing to the unavailability and unreliability of the traditional sources of data. Researchers use case studies for purposes of exploring new issues and areas that have not been adequately covered in theory. It also helps to describe events and the effects of those events as well as explaining complex phenomena (Thomas 2015). The information deduced from the analysis; decisions can be made to suit the problem identified and reviewed. Case analysis takes a process, and some common requirements for a case analysis have been established. Some of these requirements include the identification of the problem and identifying the most suitable way to tackle the problem taken to solve the problem (Houghton et. Al 2015). After that, it follows that the complicated situations are comprehended. The major issues are then identified, and finally, all these factors are considered wholesomely, and inferences are drawn from.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In carrying out a case analysis, it is important to decide which approach will be used for which particular case, and what skills will apply to the case (Lewis, 2015). To accomplish this task efficiently, it is important to first to read through the case and make an assessment. In the assessment of the case, it is important to consider the questions attached to the case. The questions will point in the direction of how to effectively analyze the case. It is important to understand what the question requires of you and then briefly note what this task is. The case may require the understanding of the case, drawing conclusions from the case to help pinpoint the problem and coming up a solution for the problem.

The first step in the process is reading the case carefully. While doing so, you will be expected to identify the main features of the case. The first reading also helps identify the people involved, their knowledge and skill, the professional practices involved and to establish whether there are connections with theories. After reading the first time, you locate the case as precisely as possible in the situation of its occurrence.

The second reading of the case will be for an analytical agenda. You read the case carefully marking relevant issues carefully. At this stage, your approach to the case will be with the aim of answering the questions identified during the first reading of the case. Essentially, the second reading will endeavor to break down the case into its major facets while looking for signs in the text indicating to the specific theory areas that will be important in analysis.

After the second reading, it is important to revisit the questions for a closer look at them. This look will look at the data in the material in the case to establish questions. Based on the questions, you then proceed to make appropriate deductions from an in-depth analysis of the cases and draft responses connected with them. It is also important to incorporate the established technical drawings and the knowledge obtained from the analysis into the final response to the question. When analyzing a case, it is important to remember that comprehensive case studies contain more information of trivial importance to the main issue. Therefore, you must consider the insinuations of the theoretical framework you have established for the analysis.

The very final step of the analysis is coming up with recommendations for solutions applicable to the problems established. At this stage, you take a final look at the assignment again to look at the issues identified from the case and compare them to those identified by the instructor. After that, you analyze the issues established by the case study and come up with suitable recommendations for solutions to the issues identified.

Review of the Pinto Fires Case

Case study analysis is very important in decision making. When a company is making decisions, they must consider the urgency of the matter. There are some decisions that must be made within the spur of the moment. Such decisions require the decision maker to be sharp on their feet and consider a decision that will not be detrimental in the future. Similarly, it is important to consider the social responsibility that befalls you as well as what the society will perceive you based on that decision. For example, it is important to consider decisions that promote life as opposed to those that destroy it.

The Pinto Fires case is the landmark case in the United States jurisprudence that addressed the biggest problem that arose from Ford's Pinto model released to the in 1970 and the various challenges and the tragedies accompanied with this model. In the incident case, two young girls were driving the said car to a church event in Indiana in August 1978. During the journey, the vehicle was involved in an accident; it was hit from behind by a truck, and as a result, the fuel tank ruptures and the vehicle burst into flames. One of the ladies in the vehicle was burned to death in the vehicle while the other one was rushed to the hospital where she subsequently died in agony from severe burns.

These two deaths were just but a statistic in a long list of people who have died from similar accidents wherein the vehicle exploded and caught fire. By the time the girls fell victim, the car was already under a lot of public scrutinies owing to its habit of bursting into flames when hit from the rear even when the collisions were at very low speeds. The case concerning the two girls set precedence because the prosecution brought charges of reckless homicide against the manufacturing company, Ford Motors Co. as opposed to the traditional negligence cause. Additionally, this case set precedence in bringing criminal action against a corporation.

If found guilty, the company stood to lose thirty thousand dollars in fines, not to mention the fact that if found guilty, the trajectory of another forty pending civil cases would have changed and cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars in punitive damages (Yin, 2017).

Ford Motors found themselves in this situation following a tad bit too ambitious move by the president of the Company and the Chief Executive Officer. The then president of the company wanted to introduce small model vehicles into the market departing from their traditional larger models to compete with other motor vehicles companies in Germany and Japan. The president, Lee Iacocca, wanted the Pinto in showrooms by 1971 (Zhao, 2014). This decision gave then a period of barely two years through the whole process of making the vehicle. At this point in history, that meant the Pinto would be created in the shortest production and planning time ever. Most of the production processes were run concurrently owing to the limited time. During the testing stages, it was realized that the fuel tanks were unable to withstand rear-end collisions, but at this time any changes to the fuel tank system would be too costly for the company.

The court analyzed the accident reports more closely and established that Ford was aware that the design of the tank was faulty. During a test run, the vehicles had exhibited failures in the gas tanks except for the gas tanks that had been reinforced with plastic between the housing of the axle and the fuel tank, a rubber lining in the fuel tank, and a steel plate between the tank and the bumper at the back. All these measures had worked effectively to prevent the explosion, but Ford decided to use the original design anyway even though they had seen that it was prone to explosion. The company believed that the potential customers were more cautious about the price rather than the safety of the automotive. Ford tried different locations to place the fuel tank, but all the other alternatives reduced the space available in the trunk. Another reason as to why Ford opted to forego improvements was the idea that a cost-effective analysis would be more appropriate in determining the feasibility of standards of safety in designs. This analysis meant that the human life was to be valued and that value considered against the cost of production of the safety design. In the incident case, Ford considered an improvement to the tank uneconomical. Their calculations showed that adding a fuel tank that would cost $11 was projected to save only 180 lives from crashes and subsequent explosions and these statistics showed that the cost overweighed the outcomes by three times.

Ford suffered damages for the harm and death caused by the Pinto as well as scathing comments from reporters and the public rebuking the callous nonchalance for human life displayed by Ford (Trevino 2014).

In place of Ford, having to make an important business decision about exploring new markets, I would have considered taking on the new market, but I also would have exercised more caution. Going into a new aspect of motor vehicle production would mean that a lot of risks was being made. Therefore, with all that risk it would be important to ensure that minimal mistakes are made. It was not wise for Ford to rush to complete the making of a new brand of motor vehicles in a shorter time than had ever been accomplished in history. That was overly ambitious and not well thought through (Veeravalli, 2015). The implication of such rush actions was evident in the subsequent failure of the motor vehicle.

Additionally, considering the field reports obtained from the tests carried out, the prudent and ethical thing to do for the company would be to make improvements to the faulty parts rather than gamble with human life, placing a value on it and considering minor improvements to a single car more costly than saving 180 lives.

From the Pinto Fires case, it is evident that some ethical conflicts arise. The management and the entire workforce of Ford should have set their values straight, considering their corporate social responsibility, requirements to make ethical decisions, and the initiative by individuals to make ethical decisions. Observance of these things would have meant that Ford would have carried out business in the modern day in the proper way avoiding the action that followed.

If every individual working with ford had considered an ethical ground for decision making, then they would have considered the ethical issues that arose from the decisions they made. That way all the problems that arose from the faulty tank including the many cases against the company in court would have been avoided. Additionally, the controversy associated with the attachment of value to human life and consequently valuing a vehicle more than several lives. It is impossible to place a tag on human life let alone 180 lives. Ford was clearly out of line in considering it a better option to save $11 at the expense of 180 lives.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is important to consider decision making with the weight and gravity that it deserves. If decisions are made without proper consideration to all the aspects that will be affected by that decision, then that decision has not been made right, and the implications will be evident when many challenges become evident as a result of ill-made decisions. Ethics must always be considered taking into account the fact that for a business to succeed, it must have a consuming population and the consumer's needs must come before stringent business policies.

References

Ferguson, C., Inglis, S. C., Newton, P. J., Cripps, P. J., Macdonald, P. S., & Davidson, P. M. (2014). Social media: a tool to spread information: a case study analysis of twitter conversation at the Cardiac Society of Australia & New Zealand 61st annual scientific meeting 2013. Coll...