Leadership Communication in the USA - Toyota Company - Term Paper Example

Toyota Toyota Motor Corporation recalled most of its different vehicles due to issues of “sticking” accelerator pedals. The controversy and recall surrounding the case can be traced back to 2007 where accelerator glitches had first appeared on the Toyota Tundra truck models. This paper analyzes the case study of Toyota in regards to the accelerator recall initiative and presents a discussion about the ethical concerns. The initial recalls had been issued on Lexus model cars due to defective floor mats. These defects had been brought to light when a family died after the Lexus ES 350 accelerator on their stuck under the vehicle’s floor mat. The accelerator issue gradually turned to be one of the engineering defects with the vehicle’s software that caused the poor response of the pedals. It was not a simple issue for defective floor mats (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). Further, the controversy developed from Toyota amounted to delays in public response and action from Toyota following the accident. In most cases, the matter was downplayed by public informing and news releases from Toyota’s management. The absence of urgency from Toyota’s part was an illustration of poor handling and management of previously unseen risks resulting from poor planning. There are various ethical issues feeding into from the accelerator recall. In recent years, Toyota gathered a reputation for safe and reliable vehicles. The defective pedals raised concerns, and Toyota sought to surpass and grow General Motors as a global performer in the automobile company. The desire to advance growth called for an expansion of manufacturing plants from home country, Japan (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). This resulted in the expansion of the capacities of supply. Toyota continues to pride itself on “genchigenbutsu” and “kaizen” principles that translated to “continuous improvement” as well as “inspecting problems from the source”. Toyota’s reputation and culture for excellence coupled with cultures of hesitance to take up the responsibility in the rise of accidents. Establishing a warning label such as “Accelerator may stick, apply caution” on its vehicles would be negligent on Toyota’s part as the users of the automobiles were put at fatality risks in defective vehicles. Caution does not involve adequate cover conditions up of deaths by user within the automobile industry. The firm appeared hesitant to broach ethical issues on its advertising. During the period, Toyota’s advertising reputation and focus were established concepts of durability, reliability, and quality, with the safety concept implying features of modern automobiles. This means that Toyota was unethical in not advertising unexpected engineering issues. However, this is not to excuse the mishandling of public information during recall processes (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). The absence of recognition of serious issues and absence of action in remedying the issues is a representation of unethical behavior by Toyota. The takeaway approach is based on the rapid growth and expansion of the company with equal measure of risk management as well as mitigation strategies. This surpasses letting greed and growth propels the company and project priorities. Toyota allowed growth goals inhibit the kaizen principle that includes meeting increased growth for the company with vigilance in the inspection modes for elements such as safety and quality of the components produced in the growing supply chain. Conversations of market and growth dominance went hand in hand with the growth and domination of the quality standards that Toyota failed to accomplish (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). The entire event is a representation of ethical failure from Toyota in upholding their external reputation and internal standards as manufacturer of safe and reliable vehicles. The approaches towards which task forces are created to address matters of quality continue to raise expectations. For the restoration of trust within the brand, it is important for the public to bear audience from Toyota’s leadership on the actions being taken and how it will ensure potential defect information is handled differently. The periodic progress updates that employees should be aware of include the websites, formal remarks, as well as media releases. Toyota was established on fundamental leadership in lean manufacturing. It is important to establish and speak about industry best practices while dealing with issues of quality globally and protection of customers. Inclusion of the complaints adds on information regarding company memo as discussed within the efforts of minimized outcomes of the crisis, as well as instructions for employees. The involvement included marking emails for sudden acceleration as top “secret,” and removing attachments. This tells them of the need to exclude executive names (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). The communication is one of the rogue efforts by people who still do not understand rules of rebuilding trust. The approach makes it possible to sanction ways of constricting public information. In such case, it plays to greatest liability for Toyota in developing trust. The essence of the case includes developing Japanese companies while sharing information on transparency and limits as a priority. Toyota failed to deliver on ethical leadership. Delivery of values of safety and high-quality standards is ethics should have been seen as the drivers of action. Ethics is at the core of generating customer loyalty, creation of an engaged workforce as well as provision of reality behind differentiating qualities for which marketers describe brands. Failure to build on high-quality products is unethical. For Toyota and the industry at large, business ethics and success are entwined. The lesson proves painful and costly in having to establish cause and re-learn trend. Reputation is easy to lose, and Toyota’s reputation is threatened despite the high likelihood that the firm may collapse. That is one of the major lessons that other companies within the scale emerged from similar recall crises. The case of Toyota positioned the management for recovery and owed performance of large measure to reputation for corporate responsibility and quality products which were developed in recent decades (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). The reputation remains to be a valuable asset that Toyota cites and calls upon. The CEO should form appropriate approaches to managing multi-functional teams for purposes of designing solutions and problems; internal processes and personnel. Other aspects of concern include duties to regulators, management of litigation, and communications strategy with constituencies. The top business leaders should develop periodic, prompt and direct reports until a good understanding of interrelated issues is established (Spaller, Willms, O’Connor & Daniels, 2014). The people make decisions regarding appropriate responses. On the important safety cases, the CEO of Toyota should avail more information to the board and the public. In conclusion, top business leadership will exercise oversight over processes and systems by the board while advancing well-thought-out approaches to managing the health and safety crises. Preventive testing and systems should be established to lower the issues of defects to the absolute minimum. Toyota’s CEO should appoint head of a rapid response and safety teams in receiving reports regarding serious harms to property or persons linked to the product issues. Further, the ombuds system reports should concern top level management on seriousness of commercial, ethical or legal issues. Rapid response teams can take issues of potential consequences to top level management CEO through well-defined leadership channels. References Spaller, E., Willms, J., O’Connor, P., & Daniels, T., (2014). Case study Toyota – Leadership communication in the USA. Organizational Culture and Communication Read More