Volkswagen has paid a high price for the moral failings that caused “Dieselgate.” Has VW, however, taken note of the scandal? Michael Toebe considers the catastrophe that tarnished the company’s reputation in light of the FTC’s recent release of the case’s final court summary.
In the past four years, Volkswagen’s reputation has been routinely damaged in the media due to its poor judgment and recklessness. As a kind of punishment and corrective action, severe monetary penalties have been imposed. Lessons can be drawn from VW’s mistakes.
Dieselgate, as the incident was known, was a blow to VW’s reputation. In 2015, the firm admitted to falsifying emissions testing on 11 million vehicles worldwide. The financial blow was heavy. The business has given American car owners a stunning $9.5 billion in the last four years.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) refers to this as the “biggest consumer redress program in U.S. history,” making it historically significant.
VW was aware of the issues with its cars. Instead of acting morally in the face of escalating scandals and the reputational crises that goes along with them, leadership made hasty decisions. The necessary adjustments were regarded undesirable, and the temptation to cheat and financial incentives were too strong.
However, according to Bret Hood, director of 21st Century Learning & Consulting and adjunct professor of Corporate Governance and Ethics at the University of Virginia, there is a different school of thinking. “Some claim that VW actively considered the trade-off between danger and return, but I wager that they addressed the problem the same way Ford did with the Pinto. He claims that we analyze the situation from a cost-benefit perspective and choose the one with the lowest cost. Because our automated System 1 minds are working in our subconscious to assist us generate a preset outcomein this example, sales volumewe never perform an objective review, which is where we fall short.
Hood believes that another factor is very likely at play, despite the fact that some may find this to be a dubious justification. The Rest Model, Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, and the Jones Moral Intensity model are only a few examples of ethical models, however as Ann Tenbrunsel and Max Bazerman note, most of the time, the decision-makers have not categorized the challenge as an ethical issue. Daniel Kahneman’s research on System 1 (automatic) and System 2 (rational deliberation) thinking supports this view.
It’s conceivable that moral courage was either insufficient or nonexistent at VW. Governance and compliance will never be carried out with the necessary skill in situations like this. Scandal, as history has repeatedly demonstrated, is much more likely.
In This Article...
What went wrong for Volkswagen?
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined in September 2015 that Volkswagen had violated the Clean Air Act by using “defeat devices in the form of computer software, which was designed to cheat on federal emissions testing” in over 590,000 diesel motor cars.
A defeat device is one that disables or disabling the emission control system of a vehicle. These programs basically have the ability to recognize when a vehicle is conducting an emissions test and activate complete emissions controls at that time. The efficiency of such devices is decreased during routine driving.
Volkswagen’s fault: who was it?
In Bochum, Germany, a Volkswagen dealer’s flag may be seen. March 16,2016. Ina Fassbender for Reuters
In part, Hanno Jelden blamed Volkswagen’s corporate culture, which he described as one in which problems were to be solved quickly rather than thoroughly, for the prolonged silence regarding the software malfunction. Prosecutors claim Hanno Jelden was in charge of developing the illegal software at the center of the scheme.
In a previous hearing, Jelden said that he told supervisors about the software that caused the “Dieselgate” incident but was under pressure to remain silent.
Volkswagen admitted to cheating on U.S. diesel engine testing in 2015, igniting the company’s largest-ever scandal and costing the company more than 32 billion euros ($37.7 billion) so far in vehicle modifications, fines, and legal fees.
In the Braunschweig courtroom where the trial is taking place, Jelden stated, “I never made a secret out of this capability [of the software].” “I would never have allowed it to happen if I had realized the potential legal repercussions,” the person said.
The business has previously claimed that the software feature that ultimately rendered the car’s pollution filter inoperable was created for a different objective, namely to lessen objectionable engine noise, a defense Jelden echoed on Thursday.
Jelden claimed that the function was actually created to enhance the acoustics and labeled the approval procedure for the function as a “major blunder.”
The trial of four current and former Volkswagen managers and engineers began last Thursday, and according to Braunschweig prosecutors, all four are accused of failing to bring up the matter and instead attempting to maximize profits for the automaker and, consequently, their performance bonuses.
According to judicial authorities, the accused either assert that they were unaware of the manipulation or that they had told their superiors about it. View More
What ethical transgressions did Volkswagen commit?
Volkswagen’s moral predicament was brought on by allegations that the automaker had cheated on air quality tests that were administered by the United States. The business sought to market diesel vehicles throughout the country. Interestingly, Volkswagen conducted a marketing effort where they claimed their cars had low emission levels since they were aware of the emission standards utilized in America (Hotten par.3). Before allowing the vehicles into the market, the American authorities had to evaluate them first. Between 2008 and 2015, the firm marketed cars on the American market that did not adhere to the requirements for emissions set by the American government. Volkswagen had installed specialized software that manipulated the emissions in the vehicles used for the emission test (Ewing 40).
The software was essential in persuading the regulators that the automobiles weren’t spewing out dangerous gases at quantities that were too high to handle. However, when cars were released into the market, certain environmental researchers began to have some reservations about the pollutants they were producing, which prompted the government to launch an investigation. Their research revealed that the vehicles were releasing up to forty times more than what was legal. As a result, Volkswagen eventually had to respond to an American government request for information about the abnormalities and admit fitting test vehicles with unique equipment that was not included in production vehicles. The Jetta, Golf, and Passat are a some of the car models that the EPA discovered to have broken the rules (Ewing 48). In response to the accusations, Volkswagen acknowledged fitting the test vehicles with a defeat device that wasn’t utilized on the vehicles that were on the road. Due to this, other nations that had a major market for Volkswagen vehicles began looking into them for possible regulatory infractions.
Why did VW fabricate emissions data?
Volkswagen misrepresented the diesel vehicles for years in order to obtain EPA and CARB certifications that permitted the vehicles to be marketed in the U.S. Volkswagen knew that the diesel vehicles would dodge U.S. emissions rules. Volkswagen hesitated until authorities threatened to withdraw approval when EPA and CARB eventually started to catch on.
Has anyone been imprisoned as a result of the Volkswagen scandal?
When he was detained on suspicions connected to the automaker’s diesel-emissions issue, Schmidt served as VW’s point of contact with American regulators.
Oliver Schmidt, a former official of the Volkswagen Group whose arrest in 2017 at the Miami airport made headlines across the world, was freed from prison after serving almost half of his sentence for the charges he faced in the diesel-emissions crisis.
Schmidt was granted parole on Wednesday, according to a decision made by a court in the German city of Lneburg, according to his attorney Alexander Saettele. Schmidt, 52, was given a seven-year sentence by a U.S. court but was allowed to return home in November to complete his sentence there.
Volkswagen is still plagued by the diesel problem that American regulators revealed in September 2015. The biggest automaker in the world has spent at least 32 billion euros ($38.7 billion) manipulating engines to make it appear that they might pass U.S. emissions tests. Disgruntled investor and customer lawsuits are expected to last for years.
When Schmidt was detained at the Miami airport in January 2017 while returning from a trip, he served as VW’s point of contact with American inspectors. Shock waves from his arrest reverberated throughout corporate Germany.
In Germany, prisoners are eligible for release after completing two thirds of their sentence. Although it is uncommon, first-time offenders who have shown good behavior and are thought unlikely to commit crimes again may be given parole after serving only half the sentence.
What did Volkswagen do following its capture?
Another 20% of the company’s value is lost when the shares collapse once more.
To cover “the necessary service actions and other steps to win back the trust of our consumers,” Volkswagen issued a profit warning and put aside 6.5 billion (4.7 billion). The statement continues, “Discrepancies apply to Type EA 189 engine-equipped vehicles, involving about 11 million vehicles globally.”