Jack Connor is facing a dilema with no easy or clear-cut answer. In making his decision he must weigh such concepts as potential harm, acceptable risk, market value, and liability. In the marketing of consumer products and devices, there is always the possibility that some use (or misuse) of the item will result in injury or death. Often these dangers are unforeseen until the product is in wide production and the companies responsible are then judged for their response. Jack’s choice is about whether to proactively avoid the risk, or to continue with the production plan for AutoSensor, hoping that the warnings were unfounded.
The factors complicating Jack’s choice are the dueling demands of financial responsibility and social responsibility. Do the potential monetary benefits outweigh the odds of causing harm to a small group of people? Would the profits be substantial enough to risk a major liability lawsuit? In that case he should continue with the production of the AutoSensor system.
Or, do the risks of harm outweigh the benefits to his company? Are there factors other than financial that Jack should consider, such as the social perception of his company or the human impact on even his own family? In that case he should halt production and either redesign or discontinue the product.
What do you think? What would you recommend for Jack? What would you do?
Group B: Halt Production of AutoSensor
