2010-01-18 00:01:04frank
[US] 危機管理典範的墮落
談到危機管理通常會提到美國嬌生公司(Johnson & Johnson)於1982年其著名的止痛藥 Tylenol 遭下毒，而 Johnson & Johnson 面對此一問題所做出的種種反應。 Tylenol 是占有美國三成以上市場的止痛藥。9月時有七名芝加哥地區民眾服用被添加致命毒物氰化物的Tylenol capsules而死亡，造成消費者恐慌，公司面臨重大危機考驗。當時的CEO James Burke決定回收所有市場上的Tylenol，最後並以安全密封罐(當時的新發明)的包裝重新上市。 Johnson & Johnson 與 James Burke 面對危機的許多作為後來被奉為危機管理的金科玉律：
但是這次嬌生面對消費者的投訴竟然過了二十個月後才展開回收行動。這是聯合報網站上的報導：
前人立下的典範為世人所稱頌，看看嬌生今日如此難堪的處境，難道就只能以世風日下來解釋嗎？
News Analysis
In Recall, a Role Model Stumbles
By NATASHA SINGER
Published: January 17, 2010
The Harvard Business School teaches future executives the gold standard in brand crisis management. The model dictates that a company should communicate clearly with the public about a crisis, cooperate with government officials, swiftly begin its own investigation of a problem and, if necessary, quickly institute a product recall.
The template is based on Johnson & Johnson’s conduct in 1982, when several people died after taking tainted Tylenol pills. The company’s reaction to the crisis is widely regarded as exemplary.
But last week, Johnson & Johnson appeared to abandon its own template, stunning a few business school professors. Its conduct also drew harsh criticism from federal officials.
On Friday, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, a division of Johnson & Johnson, announced the recall of several hundred batches of popular over-the-counter medicines, including Benadryl, Motrin, Rolaids, Simply Sleep, St. Joseph Aspirin and Tylenol.
According to a federal inspection report, the response was anything but swift. The recall came 20 months after McNeil first began receiving consumer complaints about moldy-smelling bottles of Tylenol Arthritis Relief caplets, according to a warning letter sent by the Food and Drug Administration to the company on Friday. Since then, a few people have also reported temporary digestive problems like nausea, vomiting and stomach pain, the agency said.
Certain lots of products that included Motrin, Rolaids, St. Joseph Aspirin and Tylenol were recalled on Friday by McNeil.
The McNeil unit of Johnson & Johnson had recalled some batches of the arthritis drug at the end of 2009. But the company did not conduct a timely, comprehensive investigation, did not quickly identify the source of the problem, and did not notify authorities in a timely fashion, prolonging consumer exposure to the products, the warning letter said.
Analysts said the company’s seemingly slow response appeared out of character for one of the most trusted corporate brands in America, the maker of beloved household products like Johnson’s Baby Shampoo and Band-Aids.
And the recall, they said, had the potential to encourage consumers, who may have perceived name-brand medicines as being a higher quality worth their premium prices, to switch to less expensive drugstore brands.
“The F.D.A. comments on Friday were devastating because they make the company seem to be complacent and sloppy,” said Timothy Calkins, a clinical professor of marketing at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill.
Deborah M. Autor, the director of the Office of Compliance at the F.D.A.’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said on a conference call with journalists on Friday that the company should have acted faster.
“When something smells bad literally or figuratively,” Ms. Autor said, “companies must aggressively investigate and take all necessary actions to solve the problem.”
In response to a query from a reporter on Sunday, a spokeswoman for McNeil said that the company was working with the F.D.A. to resolve the agency’s concerns.
“We’re conscious of the fact that people expect more of us,” the spokeswoman, Bonnie Jacobs, wrote in an e-mail message. “McNeil Consumer Healthcare has applied broad criteria to identify and remove all product lots that it believes may have the potential to be affected, even if they have not been the subject of consumer complaints.”
In a statement on Friday, McNeil said the breakdown of a chemical used to treat wood pallets that transport and store product packaging was the source of the moldy smell in some products.
The company has set up a Web site, McNeilProductRecall.com, which provides the list of recalled batches, also known as lots. Consumers can also call 888-222-6036 to ask about a refund or replacement of recalled products.
Separately on Friday, the Justice Department also filed charges against Johnson & Johnson in federal court in Massachusetts, accusing the company of paying kickbacks to a nursing home pharmacy to promote several of its prescription drugs, including the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, to elderly patients. The company said on Friday that its conduct had been legal and appropriate. The company was reviewing the government’s complaint and intends to respond in court, a spokeswoman said.
Mr. Calkins said the company faces even more public scrutiny with both problems coming out on the same day.
“Now you have two stories that people are connecting,” Mr. Calkins said. “It is a bit of a compound fracture.”
He and other analysts speculated that company managers might have underestimated the extent of the chemical contamination problem or might have underestimated the public relations issue that could ensue.
This is not the first time a multinational corporation appears to have underreacted to a limited product problem that turned into a big public relations headache, said Stephen A. Greyser, a professor emeritus of marketing at the Harvard Business School. Coca-Cola, he said, was slow to respond to reports in 1999 that several hundred people in Western Europe had become sick after drinking Coke.
Mr. Greyser said he was puzzled by Johnson & Johnson’s corporate conduct in this instance.
The F.D.A.’s charges of bad behavior have not yet been proved, he said, but they were serious enough that the company should be more forthright about what its own investigations showed.
“This is an instance where behavior is more important than communications,” said Mr. Greyser, who wrote Harvard’s original case study on Tylenol in 1982. “Communications and good public relations can be very helpful, but it can’t overcome bad behavior.”
In a climate in which Americans have come to expect perfection in consumer goods, companies are better off overreacting than underreacting when product problems arise, said Michael Braun, an assistant professor of marketing at the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management.
Such an extreme measure as Johnson & Johnson’s nationwide recall of Tylenol in 1982 may not have been warranted for safety reasons, he said, but it reflected well on the company.
“These kinds of actions have tremendous public relations value and that can protect a brand because it engenders trust,” he said. “They probably haven’t done that in this case.”
Johnson & Johnson’s conduct is all the more out of step, analysts said, because the drug maker had been one of the first in the pharmaceutical industry to set up its own blog, jnjbtw.com.
In 2008, for example, in an act of transparent crisis management, the blog apologized to readers for a Motrin ad that had insulted some mothers and explained that the company had pulled the ad campaign in response.
But, as of Sunday at 6 p.m., on the issue of the current recall, the blog so far has had no comment from the company.
A version of this article appeared in print on January 18, 2010, on page B1 of the New York edition
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/business/18drug.html?ref=business
The story was taken from The New York Times. The copyright belongs to The New York Times Company. The author of the story and The New York Times are not involved with, nor endorse the production of this blog.
儘早和大眾說明與溝通。
迅速展開調查。
與政府單位合作。
迅速回收有問題產品。
迅速展開調查。
與政府單位合作。
迅速回收有問題產品。
但是這次嬌生面對消費者的投訴竟然過了二十個月後才展開回收行動。這是聯合報網站上的報導：
5300萬瓶藥有怪味 嬌生大召回 世界日報╱編譯中心綜合紐約15日電
嬌生公司的召回行動緩慢曾被聯邦食品暨藥物管理局(FDA)譴責。該公司說，消費者報告這些藥有「一種陳舊、腐臭和發霉的氣味，在少數個案中，這些藥與短暫、不嚴重的腸胃情況，包括惡心、胃痛、嘔吐和腹瀉有關，該公司因而主動召回這些藥」。
http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR2/5369794.shtml
嬌生公司的召回行動緩慢曾被聯邦食品暨藥物管理局(FDA)譴責。該公司說，消費者報告這些藥有「一種陳舊、腐臭和發霉的氣味，在少數個案中，這些藥與短暫、不嚴重的腸胃情況，包括惡心、胃痛、嘔吐和腹瀉有關，該公司因而主動召回這些藥」。
http://udn.com/NEWS/WORLD/WOR2/5369794.shtml
前人立下的典範為世人所稱頌，看看嬌生今日如此難堪的處境，難道就只能以世風日下來解釋嗎？
News Analysis
In Recall, a Role Model Stumbles
By NATASHA SINGER
Published: January 17, 2010
The Harvard Business School teaches future executives the gold standard in brand crisis management. The model dictates that a company should communicate clearly with the public about a crisis, cooperate with government officials, swiftly begin its own investigation of a problem and, if necessary, quickly institute a product recall.
The template is based on Johnson & Johnson’s conduct in 1982, when several people died after taking tainted Tylenol pills. The company’s reaction to the crisis is widely regarded as exemplary.
exemplary adj. 1. providing a good example for people to copy 典範的；可作榜樣的；可作楷模的
2. of punishment 懲罰 severe; used especially as a warning to others 嚴厲的；儆戒性的；懲戒性的
2. of punishment 懲罰 severe; used especially as a warning to others 嚴厲的；儆戒性的；懲戒性的
But last week, Johnson & Johnson appeared to abandon its own template, stunning a few business school professors. Its conduct also drew harsh criticism from federal officials.
On Friday, McNeil Consumer Healthcare, a division of Johnson & Johnson, announced the recall of several hundred batches of popular over-the-counter medicines, including Benadryl, Motrin, Rolaids, Simply Sleep, St. Joseph Aspirin and Tylenol.
According to a federal inspection report, the response was anything but swift. The recall came 20 months after McNeil first began receiving consumer complaints about moldy-smelling bottles of Tylenol Arthritis Relief caplets, according to a warning letter sent by the Food and Drug Administration to the company on Friday. Since then, a few people have also reported temporary digestive problems like nausea, vomiting and stomach pain, the agency said.
Certain lots of products that included Motrin, Rolaids, St. Joseph Aspirin and Tylenol were recalled on Friday by McNeil.
The McNeil unit of Johnson & Johnson had recalled some batches of the arthritis drug at the end of 2009. But the company did not conduct a timely, comprehensive investigation, did not quickly identify the source of the problem, and did not notify authorities in a timely fashion, prolonging consumer exposure to the products, the warning letter said.
Analysts said the company’s seemingly slow response appeared out of character for one of the most trusted corporate brands in America, the maker of beloved household products like Johnson’s Baby Shampoo and Band-Aids.
And the recall, they said, had the potential to encourage consumers, who may have perceived name-brand medicines as being a higher quality worth their premium prices, to switch to less expensive drugstore brands.
“The F.D.A. comments on Friday were devastating because they make the company seem to be complacent and sloppy,” said Timothy Calkins, a clinical professor of marketing at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill.
complacent n. too satisfied with yourself or with a situation, so that you do not feel that any change is necessary; showing or feeling complacency 自滿的；自鳴得意的；表現出自滿的
Deborah M. Autor, the director of the Office of Compliance at the F.D.A.’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said on a conference call with journalists on Friday that the company should have acted faster.
“When something smells bad literally or figuratively,” Ms. Autor said, “companies must aggressively investigate and take all necessary actions to solve the problem.”
figurative adj. of language, words, phrases, etc. 語言、詞語等 used in a way that is different from the usual meaning, in order to create a particular mental image. For example, ‘He exploded with rage’ shows a figurative use of the verb ‘explode’. 比喻的
In response to a query from a reporter on Sunday, a spokeswoman for McNeil said that the company was working with the F.D.A. to resolve the agency’s concerns.
query n. 1. a question, especially one asking for information or expressing a doubt about something 疑問；詢問
2. a question mark to show that something has not been finished or decided 問號
2. a question mark to show that something has not been finished or decided 問號
“We’re conscious of the fact that people expect more of us,” the spokeswoman, Bonnie Jacobs, wrote in an e-mail message. “McNeil Consumer Healthcare has applied broad criteria to identify and remove all product lots that it believes may have the potential to be affected, even if they have not been the subject of consumer complaints.”
In a statement on Friday, McNeil said the breakdown of a chemical used to treat wood pallets that transport and store product packaging was the source of the moldy smell in some products.
The company has set up a Web site, McNeilProductRecall.com, which provides the list of recalled batches, also known as lots. Consumers can also call 888-222-6036 to ask about a refund or replacement of recalled products.
Separately on Friday, the Justice Department also filed charges against Johnson & Johnson in federal court in Massachusetts, accusing the company of paying kickbacks to a nursing home pharmacy to promote several of its prescription drugs, including the antipsychotic drug Risperdal, to elderly patients. The company said on Friday that its conduct had been legal and appropriate. The company was reviewing the government’s complaint and intends to respond in court, a spokeswoman said.
Mr. Calkins said the company faces even more public scrutiny with both problems coming out on the same day.
“Now you have two stories that people are connecting,” Mr. Calkins said. “It is a bit of a compound fracture.”
He and other analysts speculated that company managers might have underestimated the extent of the chemical contamination problem or might have underestimated the public relations issue that could ensue.
This is not the first time a multinational corporation appears to have underreacted to a limited product problem that turned into a big public relations headache, said Stephen A. Greyser, a professor emeritus of marketing at the Harvard Business School. Coca-Cola, he said, was slow to respond to reports in 1999 that several hundred people in Western Europe had become sick after drinking Coke.
emeritus n. used with a title to show that a person, usually a university teacher, keeps the title as an honour, although he or she has stopped working （常指大學教師）退休後保留頭銜的，榮譽退休的
Mr. Greyser said he was puzzled by Johnson & Johnson’s corporate conduct in this instance.
The F.D.A.’s charges of bad behavior have not yet been proved, he said, but they were serious enough that the company should be more forthright about what its own investigations showed.
forthright adj. direct and honest in manner and speech 直率的；直截了當的；坦誠的
“This is an instance where behavior is more important than communications,” said Mr. Greyser, who wrote Harvard’s original case study on Tylenol in 1982. “Communications and good public relations can be very helpful, but it can’t overcome bad behavior.”
In a climate in which Americans have come to expect perfection in consumer goods, companies are better off overreacting than underreacting when product problems arise, said Michael Braun, an assistant professor of marketing at the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management.
Such an extreme measure as Johnson & Johnson’s nationwide recall of Tylenol in 1982 may not have been warranted for safety reasons, he said, but it reflected well on the company.
“These kinds of actions have tremendous public relations value and that can protect a brand because it engenders trust,” he said. “They probably haven’t done that in this case.”
engender v. to make a feeling or situation exist 產生，引起（某種感覺或情況）
Johnson & Johnson’s conduct is all the more out of step, analysts said, because the drug maker had been one of the first in the pharmaceutical industry to set up its own blog, jnjbtw.com.
In 2008, for example, in an act of transparent crisis management, the blog apologized to readers for a Motrin ad that had insulted some mothers and explained that the company had pulled the ad campaign in response.
But, as of Sunday at 6 p.m., on the issue of the current recall, the blog so far has had no comment from the company.
A version of this article appeared in print on January 18, 2010, on page B1 of the New York edition
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/18/business/18drug.html?ref=business
The story was taken from The New York Times. The copyright belongs to The New York Times Company. The author of the story and The New York Times are not involved with, nor endorse the production of this blog.