Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.
IR/PS CSR Case #08-06

Ford Motor Company:
Sustainability
By: Sun Mi HaGRADUATE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND PACIFIC STUDIESUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO

Prepared for Professor Peter Gourevitch
Edited by Kristen Parks
Corporate Social Responsibility
Fall 2008

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

2

Table of Contents
Corporate Overview ......................................................................................................... 3
Ford Motor Company...................................................................................................... 3
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)........................................................................... 4
View of Company ............................................................................................................ 4
View of Consumers.......................................................................................................... 6
Motor Industry and CSR ................................................................................................. 7
Ford Motor Company’s CSR........................................................................................... 9
Climate Change............................................................................................................. 10
Mobility ......................................................................................................................... 12Road Safety Project................................................................................................... 12
Human Rights................................................................................................................ 12
Human Rights........................................................................................................... 12
Evaluation of Ford’s CSR .............................................................................................. 15
S&P 100 Sustainability Report Comparison by SIRAN ................................................ 16
CERES RANKS.............................................................................................................. 18
Suggestions and Improvement....................................................................................... 19
Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 20
Discussion Questions....................................................................................................... 22
References........................................................................................................................ 23

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

3

Corporate Overview
Ford Motor Company
Ford Motor Company is an American multinational corporation and the world’s fourthlargest automaker based on worldwide vehicle sales, following Toyota, General Motors,
and Volkswagen. Based in Dearborn, Michigan, a suburb of Detroit, the automaker was
founded by Henry Ford and incorporated on June 16, 1903. In addition to the Ford,
Lincoln, and Mercury brands, Ford also owns Volvo Cars of Sweden, and a small stake in
Mazda of Japan and Aston Martin of England. Ford’s former UK subsidiaries Jaguar andLand Rover were sold to Tata Motors of India in March of 2008.
In 2007, Ford fell from the second-ranked automaker to the third-ranked automaker in
US sales for the first time in 56 years, behind General Motors and Toyota. Based on 2007
Global sales, Ford fell to the fourth-ranked spot behind Volkswagen. Ford is the seventhranked overall American-based company in the 2007 Fortune 500 list, based on global
revenues in 2007 of $172.5 billion.1 In 2007, Ford produced 6.553 million automobilesand employed about 245,000 employees at around 100 plants and facilities
worldwide.2 Also in 2007, Ford received more initial quality survey awards from J. D.
Power and Associates than any other automaker. Five of Ford's vehicles ranked at the topof their categories and fourteen vehicles ranked in the top three.3
Ford was launched in a converted factory in 1903 with $28,000 in cash from twelve
investors, most notably John and Horace Dodge. During its early years, the company
produced just a few cars a day at its factory on Mack Avenue in Detroit, Michigan.

1

Fortune 1000 list for 2008 – based on 2007 sales
www.Ford.com (search 2008.10.30)
3
Edmunds AutoObserver.com – J.D. Power: Ford is Winner - 7 June 20072

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

4Groups of two or three men worked on each car from components made to order by othercompanies. Henry Ford was 40 years old when founded the Ford Motor Company, which
would go on to become one of the world’s largest and most profitable companies, as well
as being one to survive the Great Depression. As one of largest family-controlled
companies in the world, the Ford Motor Company has been in continuous family control
for over 100years.
Ford introduced methods for large-scale manufacturing of cars and large-scale
management of an industrial workforce using elaborately engineered manufacturing
sequences typified by moving assembly lines. Henry Ford's methods came to be known
around the world as ‘Fordism’ by 1914.4

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
View of Company
In recent years, “corporate social responsibility” has become the supposed answer tothe paradox of democratic capitalism. Numerous “social auditors” now measure how well
corporations have achieved it, and hundreds of companies produce glossy company
reports touring the company’s dedication to it. The United Nations’ Global Compact,
launched at Davos in 1999, enumerates goals for it, and by 200 more than 3,000 firms
had signed on.

4

http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Motor_Company (Search in 2008.11.20)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

5

One popular argument is that “socially responsible” companies do better by theirconsumers and investors. Dow Chemical reduces its carbon emissions so it can lower its
energy costs. McDonald’s employs more humane slaughtering techniques, which prevent
costly worker injuries and yields more meat. Wal-Mart has adopted “green” packaging
for its fresh produce – transparent plastics from corn sugars – because it’s cheaper thanpetroleum-based packaging. Starbucks gives its part time employees health insurance
because that reduces employee turnover and helps its bottom line. Alcoa estimates annual
savings of about $100 million from reduced energy use and related environmental
improvements.

As a customer’s view, when the extra benefits of some product accrue to consumers
individually, they may be willing to pay more for it. This doesn’t make the product“socially responsible,” either. Energy-efficient appliances that save consumers money,
organic foods that make them feel healthier, gourmet ice cream that’s tastier because it’smade with cream from cows with access to lots of pasture, salmon that’s more delectablebecause it was caught in the wild rather than brought up in pens, and free-range eggs thatmake consumers feel more secure against salmonella, may all be worth the higher priceconsumers pay for them. But consumers don’t pay extra because of any presumed social
good; they pay because it’s worth it to them personally. Wendy’s restaurants havestopped frying their food in trans-fats, which have also been banished from Oreo cookies
and Frito-Lay snacks. General Mills now makes its Cheerios and Wheaties out of wholeCopyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

6

grain. These changes were not occurred because these firms became more sociallyvirtuous but because consumers became more conscious about their own health.5

Similarly, companies that pay good wages and offer good benefits in order to attract
and retain high-caliber employees are not being “socially responsible”; they are merely
practicing good management. “High ideals don’t have to conflict with the bottom line,”says Starbucks in one of its many advertisements touting its special commitment tosociety. “When we started providing health coverage to our part-time employees, we
noticed a lot less turnover.”6 That’s precisely the confusion. If Starbucks’s bottom line is
improved because it provides health coverage to part timers, Starbucks is not acting outof high ideals – regardless of the worthy motives of its founder. Starbucks is acting forthe benefit of Starbucks’s consumers and investors. The extra costs are more thanjustified by the savings. It’s called smart business.

View of Consumers
Consumers say they care about social responsibility, but in practice few care enoughto pay more for it. In a European survey of 2004, three-quarters of consumers polled said
they would change their buying decisions because of the social or environmental records
of companies, but only 3 percent said they had actually done so.20 Even when they’re
asked to define “social responsibility,” consumers describe it in terms of personal
consumer satisfaction rather than public good. In a survey co-sponsored by The Wall

5
6

www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/06wendys_transfat.html (2008.11.27)
The New York Times, July 24, 2005, p 13

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

7

Street Journal in 1996, people were asked to rank forty-three activities that influence theiropinions of corporations as “good citizens.” The two most often cited as very important
were “standing behind products/services and honoring warranties” and “producing highquality products and services.”7
Consumers say they want companies they deal with to respect human rights abroad. In
1993, after the events at Tiananmen Square, Levi Strauss decided to phase out its
production in China because of that nation’s poor human rights record – a decision
widely praised. 22 But Levi’s customers were unwilling to pay higher prices for jeans
produced at higher cost in nations that respected human rights. So in 1998, the company
reversed its policy. Either rely on Chinese manufacturers “or risk losing out in thecompetitive game of the global apparel business,” explained Peter Jacobi, Levi Strauss’spresident. “You’re nowhere in Asia without being in China.”

Motor Industry and CSR
Among the global automotive corporations, BMW, Honda, Toyota, and Ford ranked
highest for corporate social responsibility.8 The study shows that consumers across theworld are very likely to accept or reject a corporation based on its reputation for socialand environmental responsibility. Nearly nine out of ten consumers indicated that they
were more likely to purchase a product or service from a corporation with responsible
business practices while eight of ten indicated that they would refrain from purchasing a

7David Vogel, The market for virtue: The potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility(Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2005), p.73
8
http://www.ameinfo.com/85621.html (2008.11.28)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

8

product or service if the corporation failed to follow environmentally friendly or ethicalbusiness practices. And this paper also said, Large corporation are increasingly aware that
their social responsibility directly affects their image and brand equity – andconsequently, their business success. As a result, many are investing heavily in CSR
initiatives – particularly in those markets where they are focusing on expansion. The
results of study highlight the public’s growing interest in the field of CSR, and makes adirect link between this and their purchasing behavior – so supporting the case forinvestment in CSR. Automotive companies can glean vital insight into how their target
consumers are viewing their CSR practices, and therefore how these practices are
influencing their business success.
Moreover, the general public is a very important stakeholder for the automotive
industry as a corporation’s reputation is often judged in the court of public opinion.
Corporations that fail to engage society often suffer serious consequences when there is acrisis.9 In the auto industry, the company that can take the lead in addressing
environmental concerns will have a real competitive edge. That is why Ford is investingso heavily in this area. We want to transform ourselves into a leading-edge provider ofsustainable personal transportation.

9

The Global CSR study conducted by TNS

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

9

Ford Motor Company’s CSR
Ford’s approach to corporate social responsibility (CSR) was first communicated in its
inaugural corporate citizenship report, which uses Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)10
guidelines to disclose social and environmental performance in 1999. In the report, Fordstarted to explore the issue of transparency, accountability and sustainable development.
That is the first time Ford has managed to structure and consolidate its sustainability data
and reporting for all of its facilities worldwide. This report was praised by many CSR
analysts. For example, Andrew Brengle, as analyst with KLD Research & Analytics, asocial responsible investment research firm, said “It is a beautiful report in its
presentation and Ford makes effective use of the GRI format.”
However, the report was actually weak in terms of environmental and social costaccounting. And Ford should offer lots of information, although they could open
themselves up to criticism for the unfavorable data.
Since then Ford has recognized that corporate citizenship was becoming moreassociated with the narrower focus of philanthropy and not the broader business issue ofsustainability. Ford now has adopted a more integrated approach to CSR. Moreover for ismore convinced than ever its long-term success depends on how the Company addresses
issues such as climate change, energy security, working conditions in its supply chain,safety, congestion, noise and innovative use of renewable resources and materials. Ford’sbusiness connects fundamentally with society and its growing need for sustainablemobility and it is, therefore, in Ford’s material interest to anticipate and respond to that
need.
10

GRI is an effort of the private sector, investors, analysts, nonprofit organizations and other corporate
stakeholders to improve the relevance and reliability of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting.

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

10

Since 1999, Ford has been working to integrate environmental and social
considerations into the company’s operations. The company considers innovative
sustainable thinking as the key to delivering great products, a strong business and a betterworld. CSR’s main areas are human right, climate change and mobility that will be
described in the following paragraphs.

Climate Change
As a major multinational enterprise, Ford Motor Company understands the impacts of
its activities on the environment. For that purpose the company has a wide range ofprogrammes and policies designed to greatly improve the environmental impacts of its
products, plants and processes. These programmes and policies include: developing
advanced vehicle technologies, adopting new clean air standards, reducing theenvironmental impact of the company's plants, recycling and reusing materials andconserving natural resources.
Shareholders and the public are increasingly interested in Ford's reaction to climatechange. Therefore the Company has published the first climate change report for the
automotive industry. Climate change is closely related to issues of energy security, fuelprices and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Therefore, Ford is committed to reducing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and energy usage in their operations, develop lowerGHG-emissions products and work with industry partners, oil companies and policy
makers to establish effective frameworks for reducing road transport GHG emissions.11

11

http://www.csrglobe.com/login/companies/ford_motor_company.html (2008.11.20)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

11

Ford is involved in numerous partnerships and alliances with universities, coalitions,
NGOs and other companies to improve our understanding of climate change. For
1 A member of the United States Climate Action Partnershipexample, Ford is: ○2 An alliance of major businesses and leading climate and environmental(USCAP), ○groups that have come together to develop an economy-wide, market-driven approach to
3 Working closely with BP to explore vehicle andreduce greenhouse gas emissions, ○4 Working with the World Resources Institute on the
low-carbon fuel technologies, ○EMBARQ Istanbul project to reduce vehicle emissions and traffic congestion in that city,
5 A founding member of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative at Princeton University to○

study the fundamental scientific, environmental and technical issues related to carbon
12
6 A charter member of the Sustainable Transportation Energy.
management, ○Ford must demonstrate environmental stewardship in several areas by voluntarily
committing to measure, independently verify and publicly report GHG emissions on anannual basis utilizing TCR’s General Reporting Protocol. Ford will leverage its emissions
monitoring and reporting experience with the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) tosupport its commitment to TCR. Ford was the first automaker to voluntarily reportfacility emissions. And also the first to publish an auto industry report dedicated toaddressing the business implications of climate change, carbon dioxide emissions andenergy security concerns.

12

Ford sustainability report 2007-2008 p.17

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

12

Mobility
As an automotive company mobility is a key interest for the Company. Ford responds
to the challenges of sustainable mobility with several initiatives. These include
developing and deploying advanced technologies, promoting road safety in developing
countries and exploring new models of mobility through innovative partnerships.
The development of advanced technologies affects company operations and includes
environmentally friendly mobility in the form of hybrid vehicles, advanced diesel,hydrogen-fuelled internal-combustion and hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles.
Other mobility topics arise because of a change in mobility patterns and behaviour suchas the promotion of road safety in emerging economies or the creation of new mobility
models presenting Ford no longer as a manufacturer of vehicles but a provider ofmobility solutions.

Road Safety Project
The purpose of the initiative is to transfer best practices, with the objective of reducing
accidents and building capacity in developing countries to manage road safety. Projects
include educational outreach to increase rates of seat belt and helmet usage, and training
aimed at improving roadway design. Then first focus of the initiative is China.

Human Rights
Human Rights
The concept of human rights and its economic, social, cultural, political and civil
dimensions are part of Ford's license to operate. As an asset to the company and society

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

13

employees should be treated consistently with fairness and respect. This attitude isreflected in Ford's Code of Basic Working Conditions and efforts to make Human Rights
a topic of importance at Ford plants and in the supply chain.13
In early 2008, Ford joined the United Nations Global Compact, a framework forbusinesses that are committed to aligning their operations and strategies with 10
universally accepted principles in the areas of human rights, labor, the environment andanticorruption.

Human rights violations: environmental degradation, climate change, fueling wars foroil
The US automobile industry is fueling America's addiction to oil. Automobiles are thesingle largest consumer of oil in the US, a country that constitutes less than five percentof the world's population but consumes 25 percent of its oil. The US addiction to oil islinked with a host of human rights and environmental problems, including human rights
abuses in countries such as Nigeria, Ecuador, Sudan, South Africa and Indonesia. The US
oil addiction has prompted the US government to cozy up to human rights violating
governments such as that of Saudi Arabia. It has pushed indigenous people off their landand destroyed hundreds of thousands of acres of rainforests, which are home to half theplanet and animal species on the planet. It has fueled wars for oil, such as the war in Iraq,
which has so far caused the deaths of more than 2,100 US troops and an estimated 27,000
to 100,000 Iraqis. It has polluted cities, endangering the health of millions of people who

13

http://www.csrglobe.com/login/companies/ford_motor_company.html

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

14

live in high-ozone communities and leading to hundreds of thousands of cases ofchildhood asthma. And, by being a major contributor to global warming, has increased
the likelihood of extreme weather events like Hurricane Katrina, which killed at least
1,289 people.
Among automakers, Ford Motor Company is the worst. Every year since 1999, the US
Environmental Protection Agency has ranked Ford cars, trucks and SUVs as having theworst overall fuel economy of any American automaker. Ford's current car and truck fleet
has a lower average fuel efficiency than the original Ford Model-T.
Ford is also in last place when it comes to vehicle greenhouse gas emissions.
According to a recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Ford has "the absolute
worst heat-trapping gas emissions performance of all the Big Six automakers." In fact, if
Ford were a country, it would be the 10th largest global warming polluter worldwide,
behind Italy.
Amazingly, despite the company's recent green washing PR campaign, its record has
actually worsened. According to Ford's own sustainability report, between 2003 and2004, the company's US fleet-wide fuel economy decreased and its CO2 emissions went
up. Ford is also lobbying to prevent the U.S. and state governments from improving thesituation: the company has lobbied against lawmakers' efforts to increase fuel economy
standards at the national level and is also involved in a lawsuit against California's fueleconomy standards.14

14

http://www.globalexchange.org/getInvolved/corporateHRviolators.html (2008.11.29)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

15

The American Family Association also organized a boycott of Ford Motor Company
for advertising in publications that catered to gays. In response, Ford stopped doing so.
Not surprisingly, Ford’s decision inflamed gay rights advocates. “Where does this leave
us if our friends say, ‘Okay, gay people, we’re going to cut you loose because we havethe religious right at our heels?’” asked Kevin Cathcart, executive director of the Lambda
Legal Defense fund. “You don’t make deals with bullies, and you don’t cut your friends
loose.”15 After meeting with leaders of several gay rights groups, Ford reversed itself, 16
provoking the American Family Association and forty-three other religious groups toreinstate the boycott. “We cannot, and will not, sit by as Ford supports a social agenda
aimed at the destruction of the family,” the groups proclaimed in a letter to Ford CEO
William Clay Ford, Jr.17

Evaluation of Ford’s CSR
While I searched the Ford Motor Company’s CSR, it was the most difficult to find out
the third party who monitors or watches the Ford Motor Company. NGOs or auditors
mentioned below, they evaluated Ford’s CSR based on the Ford’s annual sustainability
report. So I cannot claim these evaluations have a certainty or objectivity.

15

Jeremy Peters, “Gay Pressure Ford to Reject Boycott Group,” The New York Times, December 13,
2005, C4.
16
Jeremy Peters, “Ford, Reversing Decision, Will Run Ads in Gay Press,” The New York Times,
December 15, 2005, C3.
17
Donald E. Wildmon, Chairman, American Family Association, Letter to Chairman Bill Ford, January 10,
2006, available at http://afa.net/fordletter.aspCopyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

16

S&P 100 Sustainability Report Comparison by SIRANIn June 2005, SIRAN (Sustainable Investment Research Analyst Network)18 issued its
first-ever analysis on the sustainability reporting practices of companies in the S&P 100
Index. SIRAN updates this review each year, most recently in July 2008. The last three
updates have been conducted by independent investment research firm KLD Research &Analytics, Inc. through an analysis of the public websites of all S&P 100 companies.
Questions covered:
1. Company has separate CSR/Sustainability section of website?
2. Company has annual CSR/Sustainability Report?
3. Company references GRI in report?
4. Company has GRI content index?
5. Company report has goals and benchmarks?
6. Company report is GRI "In Accordance" or “A” level?

18

SIRAN maintains the website to provide a forum for general information, education and communication
about corporate social responsibility issues.

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

17

The following chart highlights the reporting status of the companies in our most recent
review. The scores may reflect reporting updates made subsequent to the original releaseof the review. Orange circles indicate positive responses while grey circles indicate
negative responses. SIRAN believes that higher numbers of orange circles for a company
indicates a greater commitment to transparency and reporting.19
However, this analysis has a critical problem, because they looked or judged only eachcompany’s paper or web reports. So they could see a view of the companies. Each report
could include only positive side of companies’ CSR activities or projects. They tried togild their CSR efforts to show customers. So SIRAN’s evaluation has lack of objectivity
and empty of real information that monitored or watched CSR activities. For getting morecredible evaluation, SIRAN has to include more objective and equitable information as athird party.

19

http://www.siran.org/projects_s_and_p_reporting_comparison.php (2008.11.26)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

18

CERES RANKSThe Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (Ceres) and the
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) awarded the “Best
Sustainability Reporting”.20 Ford Motor Company has won the award this year andearned the honor in 2004.
Their judging criteria is divided by 3 fields; Completeness, Credibility, andCommunication.
Completeness (40%): An excellent sustainability report enables the reader to form acomplete view of a company’s operations and impacts. Completeness covers four broad
areas: materiality (significance of information disclosed), stakeholder inclusion(identification of audience and stakeholders as well as processes followed), strategy (thelevel of integration of sustainability in the business) and organizational context (general
information and placing activities in context of sustainability).
Credibility (35%): Credibility is defined as assurance from the presentation of evidence
that there are organizational structures, processes and controls in place to enable thecompany to accurately present information on its impacts. This includes having policies,
appropriate personnel in place, information gathering systems, management systems andperformance targets. Credibility covers five broad areas: management process (the way
the company is managed), stakeholder inclusion (how feedback is used and how it
influences decision-making), governance (senior management and board involvement),
performance data, and assurance (both internal and external).

20

http://world-wire.com/news/0804300002.html (2008.11.15)

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

19

Communication (25%): Communication is the extent to which the sustainability reportcommunicates to the declared target audiences. Communication covers three broad areas:
presentation (how the report looks), stakeholder inclusion (how the report is madeavailable to users) and structure (the style of reporting).21

In a summary report, Ceres and ACCA lauded Ford’s Sustainability report for
presenting “a very compete picture of the key sustainability issues faced by both thecompany and its industry and includes a comprehensive materiality analysis.” The judges
highlighted Ford’s disclosure of quantified data for product emissions, including average
tailpipe emissions per vehicle complete with industry benchmarking. The panel also
expressed appreciation for the report’s recognition of sustainable mobility as a key
strategic issue as the company expands into emerging markets. The judges also praised
Ford’s transparency about key challenges, specifically with regards to climate change andthe changing regulatory landscape, as well as the company’s use of both online and print
reports.

Suggestions and Improvement
In order to maintain credibility and to build reputation, I try to suggest some methods.
For improving CSR activities,•

Ford must have internal and external auditors and verifying institutions as thethird party stakeholder to measure and monitor the Ford CSR.

21

CERES-ACCA NORTH AMERICAN AWADRS FOR SUSTAIBALITY REPORTING 2007 p.9

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.
•

20

Ford should make communication methods with investor and customers to giveinformation about Ford CSR.

For improving the reports,•

Ford reporting needs to describe its road map to success, including long-range
goals and milestones to achieve them.

•Ford should provide more evidence of the business implications of progress on
the issues.

•

To become more credible, the Ford report needs to include sustainable mobility
and climate change goals, a plan to reach these goals, and effective performanceindicators.

•

The Ford report needs more extensive explanation of impact across communities,
BUs, geographies, employees, and governments, not just a few examples.

•

The Ford should report the financial announcement related the CSR projects.

Conclusion
Now Ford Motor Company is in a financial difficulty. So social corporate
responsibility would not their hot issue faced in current situation. However, forsustainable development to the corporate and earth, CSR is necessary to every company
working. Especially Ford Motor Company has stronger duties about environment andother social problems. Because their products are making harmful results in the world: air
pollution, tools for war, accelerating the global warming, and wasting oil. So they have toseek a coexistence and co-prosperity with people. As their reports, their CSR activities
are very various and lively, and we can know that they are deeply considering the CSR

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

21

for their reputation and future development. However, there is a critical problem. Even
their CSR is very excellent job and their report is got good evaluations from many NGOs
who assessed the sustainability or sustainable investment of private companies, it is very
hard to find an objective and critical evaluation based on the real CSR activities not only
the Ford’s reports. Under this current situation Ford Motor Company could make CSR
activities were manipulated. Therefore Ford Motor Company is necessary any externalmonitoring company or auditor. It makes that Ford Motor Company could do the CSR
more strictly and actively. And there is necessary objective information which can help
evaluate the Ford’s CSR.
Ford Motor Company is the one of the largest company in the world. So a possibilityof bankruptcy can cause about many difficulties in many areas of world. I hope that Ford
Motor Company overcome their current difficulties and make a better world through their
Corporate Social Responsibility Campaign.

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.
Discussion Questions
1. Do you believe that Ford is sufficiently transparent in its reporting practices?
2. Does Ford have any incentives to move beyond green washing?
3. What is the best way for environmental activists to engage with Ford and otherautomotive companies?
4. Why do you think there is a lack of credible information about Ford’s CSR
activities? How can this information gap be filled?
5. What benchmark data would make Ford’s CSR activities more credible?

22

Copyright 2008. No quotation or citation without attribution.

23

References
David Vogel, The market for virtue: The potential and Limits of Corporate Social
Responsibility (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 2005), p.73
Ford sustainability report 2007-2008 p.17
Jeremy Peters, “Gay Pressure Ford to Reject Boycott Group,” The New York Times,
December 13, 2005, C4.
Jeremy Peters, “Ford, Reversing Decision, Will Run Ads in Gay Press,” The New YorkTimes, December 15, 2005, C3.
The New York Times, July 24, 2005, p 13
CERES-ACCA North American Awards Sustainability Reporting 2007 p.9
Edmunds AutoObserver.com – J.D. Power: Ford is Winner - 7 June 2007

Internet
www.Ford.com (search 2008.09.30)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Motor_Company (Search in 2008.11.20)
www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/06wendys_transfat.html (2008.11.27)
http://www.ameinfo.com/85621.html (2008.11.28)
http://www.csrglobe.com/login/companies/ford_motor_company.html (2008.11.20)
http://www.csrglobe.com/login/companies/ford_motor_company.html
http://www.globalexchange.org/getInvolved/corporateHRviolators.html (2008.11.29)
http://afa.net/fordletter.asp Donald E. Wildmon, Chairman, American Family
Association, Letter to Chairman Bill Ford, January 10, 2006 (2008.11.12)
http://www.siran.org/projects_s_and_p_reporting_comparison.php (2008.11.26)
http://world-wire.com/news/0804300002.html (2008.11.15)