Read case pages 24-26 .

Answer question 1-5

Due Monday Feb. 5 at class time

1. If you were in Mark’s position, would you recommend a recall today? Why or why
not? Would you be following the principle of egoism or the principle of utility?

If I was in Marks position, in a position of control I must consider the wellbeing of

everybody involved in the situation. Therefore, I would recall the product today. I
believe this situation falls under the concept of principle of utility, because think
recalling the product who result in the best consequences for everyone involved.

2. If you were in Mark’s position, would you recommend a recall in two months, after
the deal will have been completed? Why or why not? Would you be following the
principle of egoism or the principle of utility?

If I was Marks position, I would not recommend a recall in two months after the deal
would have been completed. Although there is a chance that a problem may not occur
in that time frame with the fan, I believe if one were to occur its consequences would be
more devastating to the business than recalling immediately. So, in this situation I would
follow the principle of utility because I think it would look better for the company’s
business deal trying to maintain a positive outcome with everyone involved.

3. Do the Cooper Fan Company’s customers have a right to be warned about the defect?
Does the company have a duty to warn them?

I think the company must offer disclosures regarding all the facts about their products
and their functionality. Companies don’t have any right to hide information that could
potentially cause harm to a customer. So, yes the customers have a right to warned, as
well as the producers of the defective product, the Cooper Fan company has a duty to
release any information pertaining to products they distribute.

4. How can Mark best follow the golden mean?

Mark can best follow the golden rule by maintaining a level of truthfulness and integrity
with his consumers. Even though there is a chance that no harm could have come from
the faulty setting, without being truthful to the people who purchase and use the
product could lead to any undesirable extremes. Therefore, by giving people the option
of knowing about the problems, Mark balances the situation out, so people can either
run the risk themselves at that point, or take action to fix the problem.
5. Ann’s testing showed 6 percent “bad” results (sparks) and 4 percent “really bad”
results (fire and thrown metal). Would your answers to Questions 1 and 2 change if
Ann’s testing had shown 18 percent “bad” and 12 percent “really bad” results? What if
it had shown 6 percent “bad” results but no “really bad” results?

My answers would not change either way. I believe the company must inform
consumers immediately after finding any flaws in a product. Even if the percentages
were low, or high, consumers need to be aware of any potential risks and know they
have the option to either potentially suffer the consequences of a faulty product or
change the product for a different one.