It passed the industry standard testing.
Let's say the industry standard didn't involve any drop testing at all. Would that make any difference in the safety of a pistol that discharges when it drops?
It doesn't. Testing a pistol to verify that it meets an industry drop safety standard that doesn't insure the pistol is drop safe means that when you're done you still don't know if the pistol is drop safe.
Industry standard testing is great, but the point of the testing isn't the testing itself. The goal is to insure that guns meet a reasonable safety standard. Speaking hypothetically, if a gun company (or anyone else, for that matter) knows that a particular design will pass industry standards but will still exhibit the behavior that the industry standards are designed to exclude, they have an obligation to make that known.
As someone once said, "No matter how beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results."
In other words, this whole situation is likely to not only result in a change to the P320 design, but also in a change to the industry drop testing standards. And both of those will be positive changes.
The one thing that is true is that if SIG made a good faith effort to drop test their pistol to insure that it met industry standards, that (plus the way they handle this situation) will go a long way towards upholding their reputation.
I include the words "good faith" because if they knew, or had good reason to believe, that the industry standard would not turn up safety problems that were likely to exist in the design, then their testing, even if it met industry standards, would be, in my opinion, inadequate and their behavior, reprehensible.
What I mean by that is that if I design a gun and I know (or have good reason to believe) that the gun has a feature/flaw/defect/oddity that could result in serious injury or death and also know that it will pass industry standard testing then I would be remiss to ignore the feature/flaw/defect/oddity and merely test the gun to industry standards.