Analyzing Ethical Failures: Convair DC Airplane Door Case Study

This case study examines the ethical responsibilities of Convair in the context of the DC airplane door design and production. The analysis delves into the company's ethical duties towards customers, employees, and the environment, highlighting the importance of maintaining product quality and safety. The study explores the implications of leaking confidential information, particularly regarding safety risks, and the ensuing conflicts between Convair and DC. It investigates Convair's ability to meet objectives while adhering to ethical standards, emphasizing the need for open communication with relevant authorities like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The case study concludes by assessing the responsibilities of various parties involved, including the director and FAA, in the event of an accident, underscoring the significance of ethical policies and the consequences of ethical breaches in business operations. The analysis references various books and journals to support the ethical considerations.

Ethics case study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION:..........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY ..................................................................................................................................1
CONCLUSION:...............................................................................................................................3
REFERENCES:...............................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION:
Ethics means applied policies and principles that are followed or implemented in
organisation. It is applied principle that has to be followed by company with its customers,
suppliers, etc. (Biller-Andorno and Capron, 2016). it describes that how information is shared
between companies. This case study is related to companies who were in contract of designing
products and supplying it. Convair produced door of DC air planes. Confidential information
regarding door safety was leaked and it resulted in the deadliest plane crash.
MAIN BODY
1) Organisation owns its ethical responsibilities towards its customer, government, society, etc. It
ensures that goods provided to them are of proper quality and fair price.
Responsibility to employees – A business is responsible for maintaining its laws and
regulations. It consists of polices of taking decisions (Miller and Blackler, 2017). Moreover, a
company should not expose its decision to any other company.
Responsibility to customers- Company must follow its obligations to customers. It means that
they must provide effective products to consumer ensuring its safety, usefulness and quality.
However, it must protect its brand image in the market by solving issues.
Responsibility to supply chain- A business must act honestly with its suppliers and distributors.
It means that it must supply fair quality goods to them. Also, any change in products should be
informed to them.
Responsibility to environment – It is the ethical duty of business to protect environment. It
should interact with external and internal stakeholders to take decisions. Any change in
environment must be responded and according products are produced.
These ethical duties are performed by business. It enables business to regulate its policies
about decision making. Also, it helps in maintaining better relationship with customers and
suppliers.
2) A business should not disclose any confidential information regarding risk associated with
product to customers. It is the duty of business to discuss it with management and government.
This will help in making some changes in product (Harriss and Atkinson, 2015). Convair
duties are incompatible wit DC. It is because change in door safety has not been effective
1

enough. Also, Convair was performing its ethical duty and leaked information about product.
Hence, it lead to clash between DC and Convair. Resulting in any accident will impact their
ethical policy. Also, no company will take responsibility of accident.
3) DC provided design of door to Convair to produce it. The design provided by DC was very
complex. It was not possible to produce door accordingly. This feature restricted convair in
designing door. Also, they have set some standards that has to be met. An ethical approach was
followed in this. However, convair have to be follow their ethical responsibility. They also have
to provide safe products to customers. This can only be possible if DC provided them design that
was meeting safety measures (Dugan and Taylor, 2016). Also, if any information is leaked it
will directly affect organisation image. On this contrary if any incident took place then Convair
will be held responsible for it because they were supplying door to DC.
4) No, Convair can not meet its objectives without restricting the flow of safety information. It is
because providing safety to their customers is their first opinion. Company ensure that products
manufactured by them are according to safety standards set up by Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). If information is freely shared with DC and government it will be easy
for them to maintain quality of product. Also, it must be limited with organisation so that
measures can be to improve safety of product. With this convair will set standards so that
product quality can be measured. Also, all decisions will be taken accoridng to set standards.
5) leaking any information about the product safety and mechanism will not come under Convair
ethics. By doing this their will be bad impact on their image. Also, their role is to produce
products according to design provided by company (Gallagher, and Haworth, 2015). By leaking
information about door locking system Convair will not be able to take any decision. It is
because both McDonnell Douglas DC will not be responsible for this. Also, ethics shows that
confidential information should not be leaked. If any kind of information is leaked by director
then necessary action must be taken. Ethical policies have to be improved so that no employee or
manager is able to do that again. Yes, this decision might have depended upon occurring of
accident. This is because it would create conflicts among two companies for this. Government
must have interrupted. They might have taken some legal action against them (Gunn, and
Taylor, 2014.).
2

6) No, the director should not feel responsible for accident. It is because he already leaked
information about safety of doors. By this Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) also, took
action and discussed it with DC to change its door design. So if DC didn't took any action on
safety then Convair is not responsible for this. Moreover, it was the duty of Convair to inform
DC regarding this. If nay accident happens DC was solely responsible. FAA should also take
some action to ensure door are been properly designed (Gunn and Taylor, 2014). the director is
not responsible as it was duty of FAA to check whether door safety is proper or not. Also,
despite making some changes in door the design was not improved. So it was duty of FAA to
ensure proper safety of door. Hence, DC is responsible for accident.
CONCLUSION:
This case study highlights about ethics that should be followed in organisation.
Organisation owns its ethical responsibilities towards its customer, government, society, etc.
Also, any confidential or sensitive information should be leaked. This affects the image of
organisation and leads to conflicts. Moreover, ethics are related to how polices and principles are
followed. What was happened due to design of door produced by Conviar.
3

REFERENCES:
Books and journals:
Biller-Andorno, N. and Capron, A.M., 2016. Ethical issues in governing biobanks: global
perspectives. Routledge.
Dugan, M.T. and Taylor, G., 2016. Ethical Issues Related to Earnings Management: An
Instructional Case. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies.22(3). p.84.
Gallagher, T. and Haworth, R., 2015. Professional and ethical issues. Handbook of Professional
and Ethical Practice for Psychologists, Counsellors and Psychotherapists. p.108.
Gunn, J. and Taylor, P., 2014. Forensic psychiatry: clinical, legal and ethical issues. CRC
Press.
Harriss, D.J. and Atkinson, G., 2015. Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research:
2016 update. Int J Sports Med.36(14). pp.1121-1124
Miller, S. and Blackler, J., 2017. Ethical issues in policing. Routledge.
4

5