Nutritional Foods Case Study if

Nutritional Foods Case Study If I were Fred James, I would have a strategy already in place in case an incident such as this occurred. Firstly, I would make sure that myself and my company had a good relationship with the media. The media can be an excellent source of information during a crisis because it has the capability to disseminate information quickly to large amount of people.

Therefore it not only increases awareness of the crisis on a broad scale, but it also provides details that people want or need to know, such as where the crisis is occurring and who it is affecting. However, the media can also be a hindrance in the sense that in can create panic (for example in the famous "War of the Worlds" incident) and it can also sensationalize information, making it difficult for audiences to discern the truth from the "hype." The problem is, organizations cannot control the media.

They can, however, learn to handle it in such a way that it is more often used as help than a hindrance Fink (2000) uses the example of the infamous poisoned Tylenol crisis to illustrate his point that when it comes to handling the media vs. The media handling you, the key is to have a communicator who exhibits authority. Companies need to have good communicators in place who are skilled at showing negative things in a positive light.

This does not mean that they are lying or manipulating the public; it simply means that they are able to remind the public of the company's best qualities so that customers are getting a fair picture of the situation. In order to do this properly, however, Fink (2000) recommends cultivating relationships with the media and the consumer in times of non-crisis. He states, "The time to begin crisis communications is when there is no crisis and it is possible to create a reservoir of good will" (p. 96).

If I were Fred James, I would already have authoritative several public relations managers building relationships with the media so that the headlines that were bound to ensue in a food poisoning incident would be given a positive slant rather than a negative one.

That way, I would feel much more comfortable alerting the public after the first or second report because I might get a slant such as "Nutritional Foods puts customer safety before profits" instead of an angle such as "Nutritional Foods poisons its customers." As far as when I would have taken direct action if I were Fred James, I would not have done so after the first incident because at that point, it really could have been a coincidence.

There is no sense taking a chance on panicking the public, ruining the company's reputation and losing massive amounts of money when there were only two incidents reported which might have been related, but might not have been. After the third and fourth incidents were reported, I would have undoubtedly taken immediate action to rectify the problem. Two incidents could be a coincidence, but the chance of four being a coincidence is astronomical. I would do at this point everything that James did later after he received confirmation.

I would not have waited for the batch numbers and other confirmations simply because logic would tell me that four reports of food poisoning could not be a coincidence. Furthermore, I would already have a plan in place as to what steps to take in case of such an occurrence. The key word here is "planning." Organizations need to be prepared for all possible worst case scenarios, and have communication strategies in place if and when such an incident occurs.

A good leader can make all the difference in the world when it comes to crisis action planning. The Harvard Business Review quotes a lesson that Continental airlines learned during its crisis situation: "Strategic direction is never more crucial than during a crisis. Leaders must find the most leveraged plan of action, stick with it and continually monitor the company's performance against it" (pp. 117-118).

So, while it is important to have good leadership and strategic planning in times of non-crisis, nowhere is it more important that a leader knows how to lead than when a crisis has actually occurred. This means being able to remain cool under pressure, being able to convince others not to panic, and being prepared to develop and implement a plan of action that allows the crisis to cause as little damage as possible.

In terms of ethics, I would have no problem admitting liability and taking care of the sick individuals as well as possible. If a company is liable, they should admit it. Otherwise, not only are they acting unethically, but they are also risking alienating customers who are unlikely to accept their denial of responsibility anyway. People tend to be relatively forgiving of mistakes when those who make the mistake own up to what they have done.

Since there was obviously no malicious intent involved in this case, it is unlikely that admitting liability and helping the sufferers and their families would harm the company's reputation. In fact, more than likely, it would enhance it. According to Campbell (2007) businesses that are socially responsible focus on the long-term success of the enterprise. Corporate leaders that only take a short-term view of the business while making decisions have a tendency to distort the true cost of doing business irresponsibly, both for industry and for society.

It is therefore paramount that corporate leaders make decisions regarding social responsibility within the context of the broader perspective of time. This approach would.