Abstract
For ten years, General Motors (GM) denied that an ignition switch that could easily be turned to ‘Off’ constituted a safety defect. Accidents, deaths and injuries resulted. Despite many, many suits against GM, the problem remained uncorrected. The explanations that have been proffered are interrogated in this article and others are suggested. It concludes that a bureaucratic legal department is partly to blame, and criticises how the legal department evaluated cases by their settlement value. It criticises GM’s culture of blaming drivers for accidents. It concludes that the main problem at GM was not bureaucracy, but poor organisation of team management. GM was not organised for accountability without hierarchy. The article suggests that lawyers can play a key role in improving corporate decision making.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 97-111 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Legal Ethics |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 2016 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Automobiles
- Bureaucracy
- Computerisation
- Corporations
- Legal departments
- Management
- Product liability
- Regulation and governance
- Team management
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Law
- Philosophy
Cite this
The sociological imagination and legal ethics. / Rosen, Robert.
In: Legal Ethics, Vol. 19, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 97-111.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - The sociological imagination and legal ethics
AU - Rosen, Robert
PY - 2016/1/1
Y1 - 2016/1/1
N2 - For ten years, General Motors (GM) denied that an ignition switch that could easily be turned to ‘Off’ constituted a safety defect. Accidents, deaths and injuries resulted. Despite many, many suits against GM, the problem remained uncorrected. The explanations that have been proffered are interrogated in this article and others are suggested. It concludes that a bureaucratic legal department is partly to blame, and criticises how the legal department evaluated cases by their settlement value. It criticises GM’s culture of blaming drivers for accidents. It concludes that the main problem at GM was not bureaucracy, but poor organisation of team management. GM was not organised for accountability without hierarchy. The article suggests that lawyers can play a key role in improving corporate decision making.
AB - For ten years, General Motors (GM) denied that an ignition switch that could easily be turned to ‘Off’ constituted a safety defect. Accidents, deaths and injuries resulted. Despite many, many suits against GM, the problem remained uncorrected. The explanations that have been proffered are interrogated in this article and others are suggested. It concludes that a bureaucratic legal department is partly to blame, and criticises how the legal department evaluated cases by their settlement value. It criticises GM’s culture of blaming drivers for accidents. It concludes that the main problem at GM was not bureaucracy, but poor organisation of team management. GM was not organised for accountability without hierarchy. The article suggests that lawyers can play a key role in improving corporate decision making.
KW - Automobiles
KW - Bureaucracy
KW - Computerisation
KW - Corporations
KW - Legal departments
KW - Management
KW - Product liability
KW - Regulation and governance
KW - Team management
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042295848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042295848&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116
DO - 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85042295848
VL - 19
SP - 97
EP - 111
JO - Legal Ethics
JF - Legal Ethics
SN - 1460-728X
IS - 1
ER -