For This Assignment, Address An Issue Or Problem Faced By A ✓ Solved

For this assignment, address an issue or problem faced by a

For this assignment, address an issue or problem faced by a company of your choice and analyze it using techniques taught in this course. The write-up is limited to 12-15 double-spaced pages, not including a title page and exhibits. Select an organization by exploring news and current events to find a business with a complex problem; a recent problem of a public company is suggested. Choose an organization relevant to your career or interests. Use the 9-step case analysis process as a guide: 1) Skim the case to get an overview. 2) Read the case thoroughly to digest the facts. 3) Carefully review information in exhibits. 4) Decide what the strategic issues are. 5) Begin your analysis with quantitative work. 6) Apply concepts of strategic analysis. 7) Consider conflicting opinions. 8) Support your opinions with reasons and evidence. 9) Develop recommendations and an action plan. Support your analysis and recommendations with high-quality evidence, including textbooks and peer-reviewed academic journal articles covering applicable topics from: Accounting; Business Communications; Business Ethics; Business Finance; Business Integration and Strategic Management; Business Leadership; Economics; Global Dimensions of Business; Information Management Systems; Legal Environment of Business; Management; Marketing; Quantitative Research Techniques/Statistics.

Paper For Above Instructions

Executive Summary

This paper analyzes a complex problem facing Tesla, Inc.: safety, regulatory, and reputational risks arising from Autopilot/Full Self-Driving (FSD) technology incidents and related quality concerns. Using the 9-step case analysis process, the paper synthesizes facts from regulatory reports, company filings, and industry literature, conducts quantitative and strategic analysis, examines stakeholder perspectives, and develops actionable recommendations to restore safety performance, legal compliance, customer trust, and long-term shareholder value (Tesla, 2023; NHTSA, 2023).

Background and Problem Statement

Tesla has grown rapidly as a leader in electric vehicles (EVs) and vehicle automation. However, recurring crashes involving Autopilot or FSD modes, multiple NHTSA investigations, media reports about build quality, and mounting legal/regulatory scrutiny pose a multi-dimensional problem: technological risk, legal exposure, reputational damage, and potential adverse financial impacts (NHTSA, 2023; Reuters, 2023). The core problem: how should Tesla manage safety and regulatory compliance while sustaining innovation and competitive advantage?

1–3: Case Overview, Thorough Reading, and Exhibit Review

Key facts: NHTSA has opened investigations into crashes involving Autopilot; Tesla’s public filings note regulatory and legal contingencies; media and consumer reports cite quality anomalies (Tesla, 2023; NHTSA, 2023; Bloomberg, 2022). Exhibits for analysis would include NHTSA investigative summaries, Tesla’s 10-K risk disclosures, industry accident statistics, recall and warranty cost history, and brand sentiment metrics.

4: Strategic Issues

Primary strategic issues include: (a) regulatory compliance and potential litigation costs; (b) product safety and engineering tradeoffs between rapid feature deployment and rigorous testing; (c) reputation management and customer trust; (d) impacts on market share and finance if sales or valuation decline (Porter, 1985; Coombs, 2007).

5: Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative inputs: number of NHTSA investigations over time; estimated recall/warranty costs as percent of revenue; incident frequency per million vehicle miles relative to industry baselines; stock market responses to news events. For example, spikes in investigations correlate with short-term share volatility and elevated implied litigation risk (Tesla, 2023; Reuters, 2023). Financial modeling should stress-test scenarios: baseline (no large recall), adverse (major recall/legal settlement), and proactive-investment (significant safety program spend). Preliminary estimates suggest that a major recall or settlement could reduce free cash flow by multiple percentage points in the year of the event, affecting valuation (Tesla, 2023).

6: Strategic Analysis Application

Using Porter’s competitive forces and resource-based view, Tesla’s software and brand are core resources, but rising safety liabilities weaken the firm-specific advantage (Porter, 1985; Hart, 1995). A dynamic capabilities lens suggests Tesla must better integrate engineering validation, regulatory engagement, and communication practices to maintain competitive advantage while managing risk (Teece, 2007).

7: Conflicting Opinions

Conflicting views emerge: proponents of rapid deployment argue that iterative, data-driven real-world testing accelerates innovation and improves systems faster; critics emphasize ethical responsibility, rigorous off-line testing, and regulatory alignment (Hevelke & Nida-Rümelin, 2015). Investors weigh short-term growth vs. long-term legal and reputational risk (Bloomberg, 2022).

8: Support for Opinions and Evidence

Evidence supports a hybrid strategy: continued innovation but with stronger safety governance. NHTSA investigations and academic ethics analyses indicate real moral and legal obligations for safety-first deployment (NHTSA, 2023; Hevelke & Nida-Rümelin, 2015). Crisis communication literature shows transparent, timely responses reduce reputational damage and accelerate recovery (Coombs, 2007).

9: Recommendations and Action Plan

Recommendation 1 — Establish an independent Safety and Compliance Board (SCB): mandate third-party engineers and ethicists to review Autopilot/FSD releases, audits, and testing protocols. Timeline: pilot within 3 months; full operation within 9 months. Rationale: reduces regulatory risk and demonstrates governance commitment (Coombs, 2007).

Recommendation 2 — Create a rigorous pre-deployment validation pipeline combining simulation, closed-course testing, and staged public trials with explicit safety thresholds. Allocate capital for testing infrastructure and hire additional safety engineers. Timeline: 6–12 months. Rationale: reduces incident rates and potential recall costs (Christopher & Peck, 2004).

Recommendation 3 — Enhance transparency and communications: publish safety metrics, incident investigations summaries, and corrective action plans quarterly. Implement proactive stakeholder engagement with regulators and consumer groups. Timeline: start immediate quarterly disclosures. Rationale: rebuilds trust and mitigates reputational damage (Coombs, 2007).

Recommendation 4 — Financial and legal contingency planning: set aside a dedicated safety reserve fund and strengthen insurance strategies while negotiating cooperative approaches with regulators. Timeline: immediate policy changes and 12-month funding horizon. Rationale: manages financial exposure and demonstrates prudence to investors (Tesla, 2023).

Action Plan Summary

Month 0–3: Charter SCB, begin quarterly safety disclosures, begin contingency fund allocation. Months 3–9: Implement validation pipeline, hire specialists, run pilot audits. Months 9–18: Full deployment of governance and testing protocols; publish results and performance improvements.

Conclusion

Tesla’s Autopilot/FSD-related issues represent a complex, multi-disciplinary problem involving engineering, legal, ethical, financial, and reputational dimensions. Applying the 9-step case analysis indicates that balanced, evidence-driven governance reforms, rigorous validation pipelines, and transparent communications provide the best path to mitigate risk while preserving innovation capability. These measures align technical safety practices with strategic objectives and stakeholder expectations, improving long-term firm resilience and value (Porter, 1985; Coombs, 2007; Christopher & Peck, 2004).

References

  • Tesla, Inc. (2023). Annual Report (Form 10-K). U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. (Tesla, 2023)
  • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2023). Special Crash Investigation & Autopilot-related inquiries. NHTSA.gov. (NHTSA, 2023)
  • Baker, N., & Siddiqui, S. (2023). U.S. opens investigations into Tesla Autopilot crashes. Reuters. (Reuters, 2023)
  • Hawkins, A. (2022). Tesla quality issues put production and reputation at risk. Bloomberg. (Bloomberg, 2022)
  • Coombs, W. T. (2007). Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing, and Responding. Sage Publications. (Coombs, 2007)
  • Hevelke, A., & Nida-Rümelin, J. (2015). Responsibility for crashes of autonomous vehicles. Journal of Business Ethics, 148(3), 859–870. (Hevelke & Nida-Rümelin, 2015)
  • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive Advantage. Free Press. (Porter, 1985)
  • Christopher, M., & Peck, H. (2004). Building the resilient supply chain. International Journal of Logistics Management, 15(2), 1–14. (Christopher & Peck, 2004)
  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014. (Hart, 1995)
  • Harvard Business Review. (2010). How to Respond to a Product Recall. Harvard Business Review Analyses. (Harvard Business Review, 2010)

Related Assignments