Toyota's corporate image under scrutiny?

Corporate image is always protected, and often at the legal level. Add to that mix a few passes from the press and the public is shielded from knowing any facts, except through whistle blowers, bloopers and rogue articles on the web. That's why I was drawn to an official article forwarded to me by some former auto-industry colleagues, who wonder why negative information on foreign-owned car companies is not made more public like it is for American car companies.

The article in question was written by a credible source, CBS News Investigative Unit Contributor, Myron Levin, entitled “Toyota Accused of Hiding Evidence.”  It reported that a former attorney for Toyota has accused the automaker of illegally withholding evidence in hundreds of rollover death and injury cases.

The article is objective and makes no judgments, and neither should we. As my father used to say, there are always two sides to every story. Nonetheless, here’s what really caught my attention, more than news of some pending lawsuit:  Why were issues affecting past safety lawsuits never presented in the media before, especially if hundreds of cases against Toyota were involved? Even if there were only ten, it's worthy of some public attention.

In that respect, it's hard not to at least question the media for bias. Does Toyota own a free-pass card in the press, when American companies like GM, Ford and Chrysler get slammed all the time?

Moreover, structural safety issues are serious, affecting lives and especially deserving of public pause. So, one would think some hot-shot reporter far higher on the info-food-chain might have paid attention to it. Then again, maybe someone did, but it got buried; at least until a few days ago. So, let's applaud CBS News for showing some chutzpah.

Frankly, I was not aware that there had been so many cases against Toyota; or that the integrity of roof structures in SUVs and pickups had ever been challenged. News to me, and this is not my first day in the industry! Then again, I wasn't privy to all of my past employers' legal issues either; but I did know of a few. Still, allegations involving safety can make the public very suspicious, and rightfully so; hence, the reason for protective legal measures, silence and image management.

According to all the positive press for Toyota, we've almost been groomed to think the company is flawless in every way. For the record, design and cost tradeoffs occur in every auto company. It's not criminal, just business judgment as usual; but, keep in mind that some in the public do drink and drive too fast, subjecting themselves and their vehicles to extreme forces. No company controls public use of products.

Question: As Toyota has been regarded as the benchmark for automotive quality, has anyone questioned whether that's due to good image management as much as reality? (GM, pay attention here)

Take the term “quality” for example. It has certainly become more generic over the years; and companies have been known to hide their true human character behind such terms, images and rhetoric, just like politicians. Sure, in-house quality programs may contribute to safer products, but they do not represent the only defining factor. Fact is safe products require synergies between engineering, design, testing, manufacturing, minimum government standards, honest reporting and corporate character as collective elements.

Out of these, I believe corporate character ultimately sets the tone and controls the safety level of any product off the line; but, again, the public's use and misuse of a product determines if that safety level is adequate.

Yet, if the numbers are accurate in the CBS report of the suit, why was the public not openly aware of so many potentially-negative cases against Toyota? Again, why did they (and still do) seem to get a free pass in the media? If this was GM, Ford or Chrysler, the very act of attempting to seal a single safety complaint would be front-page news with neon ink, not just a web article. Where's the interviews with video on prime-time? Is Toyota supposed to be immune from all bad press? Until this CBS article, where was the reporting?

It seems Toyota may now be learning the hard way what GM has known all along: 1) Top dog has its price, and it's litigious; 2) American companies get shot at more in the press; and, 3) Toyota's free pass needs to expire if it wants to play like a USA carmaker in Detroit.

In regards to the pending case, Toyota is still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That's why I quickly clicked the link in the CBS article to read the PDF document, Biller v. Toyota, to better understand whether the issues are legitimate or bogus. Furthermore, I was more interested in the vehicle structural performance.  Unfortunately, the link appeared to be unavailable. Tried again later; still nothing.

Hopefully, it’s just the server and not any intentional cave-in by anyone. Then again, the article did report that Toyota wants to “seal the complaint due to privileged and confidential information.” That may be the legal strategy of the moment in the eyes of a corporate attorney, but not in the best interest of corporate image in the public's eye. Now I want to know!

A Test of Trust  

As automotive consumers, the former and present intent on more silence by Toyota should make us now want to invoke the old Russian proverb quoted by Reagan, “Trust but verify." Does Toyota have a problem with verifying the effects of rollovers? Yes or no? Then prove it! Walk the talk as they say. It's a simple question that now demands an answer.

Besides, inquiring minds now need to know for the sake of public safety; and any attempt at sealing a complaint without proving safety is a path Toyota best not go down if it wants to retain its good public reputation. It's a matter of public trust. It's too late to evade or avoid the issue now, as the question is already out there; the CBS article made it so, and the claim is public record. That means Toyota's corporate integrity is now at risk whether it believes that or not.

On the other hand, the fact that the lawsuit is by an attorney who once worked for Toyota appears bothersome. Does he have an axe to grind? Perhaps. Does he have a case? Perhaps. If so, could he become subject to a gag order due to attorney-client privilege, making this a difficult case to read let alone report on? Again, perhaps, but the emphasis of this article is supposed to be tilted more toward media bias and public trust.

So, where's the media's use of the Freedom of Information Act when you need it? Furthermore, how far does this type of attorney-client privilege extend should culpability ever be discovered? And how would we (the public) ever know unless Toyota at least releases its roof safety standards and test results once and for all? If they have the best, then they should stand on that; but at least prove it. One would think that alone would rest the issue for sure and secure Toyota's reputation.

Examiner Final Comments

Fact is design engineers in the auto industry are trained to avoid the term “defect” in emails or any other written communication or speech. It implies fault and lack of concern for product integrity.

On the other hand, engineers are encouraged to use terms like “the product operated beyond the parameters of its design.” That implies the company has no control over conditions or how its products are operated. That is the game and the basis for a conundrum in a courtroom.

I wrote a few months back about similar and potential legal issues surrounding small and large cars in crashes. See Are small cars with small crumple zones dangerous? and Minicars may be unsafe for human transportation. Point is: It’s not IF an auto company will ever get sued, but WHEN. Legal complaints are a simple fact of automotive life and every other product life. Nonetheless, honesty is still the best policy when it comes to protecting a corporate image.

In all fairness, companies like Toyota have a fiduciary duty to defend themselves, and are entitled to due process. In return, they, like all other companies, must act as honest and forthright citizens; meaning, they cannot ever hide or destroy evidence, regardless of the issue. That is illegal and immoral. So, as author of “Perfecting Corporate Character” dating back to 1997 (before the Enron fiasco), I dare say let morality be everyone's guiding light.

[UPDATE-1: See comments for new links from a few readers. To save you copying and pasting, I tested the link from Consumerist.com but had to search under "Toyota" to reach the listing. You may click here for Consumerist.com Article or for your convenience, here's the direct pdf link to the lawsuit to the CBS News pdf.: http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/BILLERvTOYOTACOMPLAINT.pdf ]

[UPDATE-2: For the Scribd link that does not require a pdf reader, cleck here http://www.scribd.com/doc/19362403/BILLERvTOYOTACOMPLAINT ]

Picture Source: (AP Photo/Itsuo Inouye)