Week 6 BOC: Tylenol Scare 1982

In the fall of 1982, seven people in Chicago, Illinois died after ingesting Tylenol capsules that were contaminated with cyanide. It resulted in their market value plummeting about 1 billion dollars. The tampering occurred once the product reached the shelves. They were removed from the shelves, infected with cyanide and returned to the shelves. In 1982, Tylenol controlled 37 percent of its market with revenue of about $1.2 million. Immediately after the cyanide poisonings, its market share was reduced to seven percent. Then four years later, the same incident occurred which called for immediate damage control. Although Johnson & Johnson knew they were not responsible for the tampering of the product, they assumed responsibility by ensuring public safety first and recalled all of their capsules from the market. In fact, in February of 1986, when a woman was reported dead from cyanide poisoning in Tylenol capsules, Johnson & Johnson permanently removed all of the capsules from the market. Johnson & Johnson removed 31 million bottles that were being sold nationwide and replaced all advertisements with alert warnings to protect their loyal customers. With all their products stripped from the shelves, they were able to begin reconstructing their brand image. Chairman of Johnson & Johnson, James Burke, made it clear to the company and public that they saftey of the consumer came first then the improvement of the product second. What set apart Johnson & Johnson's handling of the crisis from others? It placed consumers first by recalling 31 million bottles of Tylenol capsules from store shelves and offering replacement product in the safer tablet form free of charge. The new "tamper-proof" seal was introduced to the public along with caplets, instead of capsules. Also they invented a new pricing program and coupons for their loyal customers to apologize for their unfortunate events. Because Tylenol is considered a "medical drug," they reached out to the medical community to promote the saftey of the new packaging and caplet. It is because Johnson & Johnson acted quickly that established the trust between the company's shareholders and customers that allowed it to protect their brand till this day. 

http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/fall02/susi/tylenol.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/23/your-money/23iht-mjj_ed3_.html
http://www.mallenbaker.net/csr/crisis02.php

Week 5 EOC: Trend Predictions

For next year's trend forecast, I predict that the hourglass will make its way back on to the runway. We have seen frequent boxed silhouettes that last two seasons and I think the sexy woman should emerge now. If it is economic troubles that are influencing these boyish trends, then so be it. It still is not an excuse to forget why your a woman. Progressive brands are moving away from traditional advertising methodologies and opting for consumer insights to connect authentically to the market. Still, traditional brand-owners are not yet ready to accept that qualitative trends and consumer emotion are driving the market. Another trend prediction of mine are pastel colors. I observe the grunge and punk rock fads will eventually fad and themes will become more softer and bring back the strength of femininity. I believe advertisements should direct their attention to the older generations, they are making a comeback. Since times are rough, the baby-boom generation are fighting for their last will-in-testament before they finally retire. These next trends need to display comfort and agility for those cougar moms and sugar dads.  Today’s youth interacts with brands that connect with it on an emotional level. They want to feel that a brand belongs and connects to their lives. They are interested in co-creating with brands and want to feel that they can influence product design, marketing, events and communications.Today's youth are concerned with only themselves, so its time to give the parents and grandparents some attention because they still exist in society and we as young folk look up to them. Young people are still finding who they are, so even if the advertisements are toward older people, if the fashion is trendy, most likely they will wear it.
So many companies focus on their immediate competition for marketplace trends. I preach the gospel to brands about ‘looking sideways’ at products and brands in markets beyond their own. Radical innovations come about when elements from very different worlds are brought together.

Brands now need to be authentic and real; it’s about honesty and sincerity.

Week 4 EOC: McDonald's Response to "Super Size Me"

I feel that McDonalds handled the release of the documentary "Super Size Me" pretty well. It seemed as if McDonalds felt the man who decided to eat all those calories every day for 30 days was a total idiot. McDonald is the Wal-Mart of fast food restaurants and people fail to realize that the more attention you bring to these companies, the more your advertising their brand for free. It does not matter how many people stand in front of a McDonalds and hold picket signs all day, you cannot fight the brand. The company has called the documentary “a super-sized distortion of the quality, choice and variety available at McDonald’s.” It says the film is not about McDonald’s but about Spurlock’s decision to act irresponsibly by eating 5,000 calories a day — “a gimmick to make a film.” Both parties brought up significant arguments as defenses. McDonalds has made the effort in introducing a healthier menu to their broad consumers. Even though Spurlock, the man who made the documentary, ate some of those items during his fast food, 30 day diet, doesn't mean McDonalds is misleading their customers. In the McDonald's ad, the restaurant chain highlights the fact it has introduced healthier items to its menu. It claims the amount of food Spurlock ate during his experiment was quivalent to what the average McDonald's customer eats at the chain over six years. We all know that fast food isn't good for anyone period. Fast food consumption should be in moderation, and as an American trying to live a healthier lifestyle should realize that. Spurlock says, "I believe it's a two-way street because I believe there's not enough information coming out to the consumer. When you feed 46 million people every day, as McDonald's does, you have a huge responsibility - 46 million worldwide, half of them in America, 23 million every day, almost 10 percent of the population. You have a responsibility to help educate your consumer to make the right choices, letting them know how often they should eat the food." I feel that Spurlock made an agreeable argument, but what do people want from McDonalds? Do they want their advertisements to say "eat within moderation" or "do not overly consume," no, they will not.

 

http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/220087/
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4433307/ns/business-us_business/t/mcdonalds-phasing-out-supersize-fries-drinks/#.UfmXtIKaClU
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500183_162-615975.html