“WOULD YOU LIKE YOUR TACO WITH OR WITHOUT PESTICIDE TODAY?”

CASE #11

Kristen Lucas Shannon Mossman Julie Hildenbrand

Founded in 1903 (Fred Walker)

World’s second largest food company ($42.9 billion)

170 Countries

Corporate office located in Northfield, Illinois

BACKGROUND

BRANDS

Insecticide

8 other varieties approved for human consumption

StarLink’s biotech corn was NOT approved

PROBLEM = Cry9C

Environmental Protection Agency stated StarLink’s biotech corn was only to be used for livestock feed and ethanol fuel

Causes allergic reactions (mild allergy to fatal shock)

BIOTECH CORN

Taco meal kit

Nacho kits

Salsa

Taco sauce

Seasoning mix

Refried beans

Taco Bell Products

*Annually taco shells generate nearly $50 million

Friends of the Earth sends a news release to media outlets announcing that test results found traces of biotech corn (unsuitable for human consumption) in taco shells produced by Kraft Foods. The FOE ordered the taco shells be removed from store shelves immediately.

September 18, 2000

CRISIS

ROPE

ResearchObjectives and Goals

Programming and Planning

Evaluation

RESEARCH

Kraft Foods decides to conduct an EXPERIMENT

Type: PROBLEM RESEARCH

Quantitative Research (Hard Data)

Formal Research Process

Secondary Research

FDA

To protect the reputation of Kraft Foods

GOALS

ONE ULTIMATE GOALType: Reputation Management

To verify FOE’s test results immediately by working with the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.

To address consumer anxieties and provide consumers with answers regarding health concerns.

To make the product unavailable immediately if unapproved Cry9C is found to be present in the taco shells.

OBJECTIVES

To communicate on a national level and emphasize that biotech corn found in Kraft Foods’ taco shells is not entirely dangerous to the health of all consumers.

PROGRAMMING & PLANNING

STRATEGY

Keep the taco shells on the shelves as long as possible.

One day after FOE test results were released, Kraft Foods issued a statement explaining the taco shells would be tested.

The same day Kraft issued the statement, the company also released more information to consumers. (Q & A)

Sept. 22, 2000 Kraft Foods chief executive announced the recall of the products.

Offered a second Q & A following the recall of the taco shells.

Presented recommendations for biotechnology.

PROGRAMMING & PLANNING

TACTICS

To verify FOE’s test results immediately by working with the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency.

S: FDA and EPA involvement

M: FDA’s test results

A: Kraft has the ability to work with FDA and EPA

R: No mention of budget

T: Issued statement 1 day after FOE’s new release and released results 4 days later.

EVALUATION

Objective # 1

To address consumer anxieties and provide consumers with answers regarding health concerns.

Issued two Q&A’s to the public

S: Targeting Kraft Food’s consumers

M: Media coverage

A: Impossible to cease all consumer worries

R: No mention of budget

T: Issued statements and Q&A (Sept. 19)

After recall, issued second Q&A (Sept. 22)

*No specific mention of these dates

EVALUATION

Objective # 2

To make the product unavailable immediately if unapproved Cry9C is found to be present in the taco shells.

Kept taco shells on store shelves until test results confirmed the presence of StarLink

Sept. 22, 2000 official recall of taco shells

Suspended taco shell production

S: All taco shells recalled

M: Track grocery stores who carry the taco shells (over 2.5 million packages)

A: Must make all carriers aware taco shells have been recalled

R: No mention of budget

T: Recalled four days after test results were confirmed

EVALUATION

Objective # 3

Case # 11: Kraft Foods Case # 13: Bausch & Lomb

CASE COMPARISON

•Highly respected health care brand•ReNu lens cleaners •Microbe causing blindness (fungi) •Health authorities were not notified•Still sold in U.S. •May CDC announces results •Bausch & Lomb decides to recall product after findings were announced•The public was unhappy with the response•Bausch & Lomb takes a big hit•After recall, reputation rebuilding began immediately

•Major global food supplier •Biotech corn: Taco Bell taco shells•Ingredient causing allergic reactions•FOE released lab test results•Kraft did not recall taco shells immediately•Waited for FDA test results to recall the product•Public was extremely anxious, they wanted answers immediately•Recall occurred AFTER results were found•Little reputation management following recall

*Both companies put THEMSELVES before CONSUMERS!

Twitter account for Kraft Foods

Create a blog for Kraft Foods’ consumers to discuss their thoughts on biotech corn and other questionable ingredients

Include links on Kraft Foods’ website directing concerned consumers to articles regarding information on bio tech corn

UPDATE

1. How could Kraft’s response have been more proactive to the initial crisis?

2. Did Kraft do the right thing by leaving the taco shells on store shelves until the lab results were presented? Was the recall too late? 

3. Taco Bell’s home line of products were in question, how could Taco Bell as a restaurant utilize PR strategy and tactics to differentiate their products from those in question, ensure consumer safety and continue with a steady flow of business?

4. Were the Q&A’s too brief? If you were a concerned customer, did they cover all of the information you wanted to know?

5. Should food companies use labels or warning signs when they use biotech foods? What other ways could companies inform the public about the dangers or benefits of using biotech foods?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS