"Managers as decision makersFriedman advocated for the state to be qualified to take the decisions but thisperspective is of the view that since managers work under an environment ofuncertainty therefore, they are equally qualified to take the decisions concerningthe stakeholders their firms are influencing and affecting (Mulligan, 1986).Government CapabilitiesIt takes into account the inability or unwillingness of the government of thecountry the firm operates in. That is to say, this view attempts to answer thequestion as to what if the government isn’t willing or knowledgeable enough tosafeguard its citizens and their rights. The corporates, thus, assume or inherit theadditional responsibility towards its stakeholders(Davis, 1975).PAGE 11 Case Study: The Ford Pinto (Gioia, 1992)The Ford Motor Company, in 1970shad met intense competition from German andJapanese compact car imports. To develop a competing model quickly, itreducedthe usualtime period to develop its new car, the Ford Pinto, from 3.5 yearsreduced to 2 years. Consequently, a design flaw in the fuel tank ensued which wasdiscovered at a later stage. The defect could lead to rupture in the fuel tank andthe leaking fuel might ignite to cause an explosion. $11 per car was required tomake the necessary changes with 12.5 million cars requiring to be recalled, totalingthe cost to $137.5 million to fix the defect. Further, the design change was boundreduce the boot size expected to negatively affect its sale.MILTON FRIEDMAN’S PERSPECTIVEHe would have argued that since Ford was acting within the law and ethicalcustom i.e. the norms prevalent in US automobile industry in 1970s.Theloneconcern would be conduct devoid of deception, requiring Ford at least toreveal the fault to the USgovernment if not directly to the customers.SOCIO ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVEThis view would go beyond the mere disclosure by fixing the defect as it cannotsell a defected car produced by it as the risk of life arising out of it is avoidable. Itwould act in an honest manner if it recalls the cars and fix the flaw reflecting itscare and respect for a human life.PAGE 12 WHAT FORD ACTUALLY DID?For seven long years, Ford kept quiet and did nothing to fix it. It was 1978 that ithad to recall 1.5 million cars due to pressure from media, government etc. Thus, in spite of the legal expenditures and reputational harm,the judgement ofnot to repair the defect indicates towards the long-term profit maximizing goalofFord, thus in line with Friedman’s CSR perspective. PAGE 13 "