Toyota vehicle recalls At the end of 2009, Toyota Motor Corporation faced three separate related recalls of automobiles. The first recall, on November 2, 2009, was to correct a possible incursion of an incorrect or out-of-place front driver's side floor mat into the foot pedal well. which can cause pedal entrapment. The second recall, on January 21, 2010, begun after some crashes were shown not to have been caused by floor mat incursion. This latter defect was identified as a possible mechanical sticking of the accelerator pedal causing unintended acceleration, referred to as Sticking Accelerator Pedal by Toyota. As of January 28, 2010, Toyota had announced recalls of approximately 5.2 million vehicles for the pedal entrapment/ floor mat problem, and an additional 23 million vehicles for the accelerator pedal problem. Approximately 1.7 million vehicles were subject to both. Thus, investigations on such issues started immediately. On February 8, 2011, findings into the investigation were released After a 10-month search, scientists found no electronic defect in Toyota vehicles. Driver error or pedal misapplication was found responsible for most of the incidents. The report ended by stating. "Our conclusion is Toyota's problems were mechanical, not electrical." This included sticking accelerator pedals. and pedals caught under floor mats. In fact, in 2005. Toyota launched the "Customer First" program, to bring the voice of customers in an attempt to improve the quality of its vehicles. But it was quietly discontinued in early 20X19. A Toyota manager justified its elimination by announcing "We had come to believe that quality was maintained mainly in processes and not in products, and no quality at source was applied," Moreover, when implemented correctly, any improvement in quality processes can reduce waste and thus lead to reduced cost and improved profitability. Therefore, Toyota wanted to know that if paying more in increasing the quality of their vehicles, would pay them the benefits they are aiming for, or it would be just another lost investment. but On October 24, 2013, a jury ruled against Toyota and found that unintended acceleration could have been caused due to deficiencies in the drive-by-wire throttle system or Electronic Throttle Control System (ETCS). 

1) What two functional perspectives on quality did Toyota supply? Justify. 

2) According to Juran's trilogy quality theory, in which step of the three was the problem? Justify. 

3) Which sphere of the three spheres of quality was Toyota facing a problem in? Justify? 

4) Which point of 14 points of Deming's quality theory was presented in the above case? Justify.