Brand Failures
Brand Failures Brand Failures
138 Brand failures But Procter & Gamble dismissed this research as ‘insufficient data in the hands of a bureaucracy.’ However, by this time the company had started to realize it was fighting a losing battle and began to co-operate and look for a compromise solution. Procter & Gamble suggested a warning label be added to the product. But when the results of the CDC study were confirmed by an independent research firm, Procter & Gamble had little choice but to suspend sales of the product. The withdrawal of Rely from the market was estimated to cost US $75 million. However, although Procter & Gamble initially made matters worse by denying responsibility, the company was now embarked on a damage limitation exercise. It worked jointly with the CDC to draft a consent agreement. The CDC allowed Procter & Gamble to deny any product defect or violation of federal law. In return Procter & Gamble promised to buy back any unused product and offered its scientific expertise to research the problem. The company also mounted a large-scale educational campaign. In an article for the Canadian Journal of Communication, Drexel University’s Priscilla Murphy explored Procter & Gamble’s handling of the Rely tampon incident in relation to ‘games theory’. She argued that by the end, Procter & Gamble’s game plan had improved greatly: The latter stages of Procter & Gamble’s strategy exemplify a wholly different approach to conflict. What had begun as a classic escalation game became a bargaining venture in which everyone’s desires were examined and coordinated so that each player could live with the agreement. When we are talking about bargaining games we are really looking at the ways in which both sides in a conflict gradually come to agree on a single version of events, a single perspective. What resulted was a stable equilibrium point that, though not ideal, represented the best outcome for each side given the pressures from the other side. So although the incidents of toxic shock syndrome spelt the end of the Rely brand, Procter & Gamble itself suffered small lasting damage and continues to produce some of the world’s most popular tampon products.
PR failures 139 Lessons from Rely Co-operate don’t aggravate. If Procter & Gamble had co-operated with the health authorities from the start it would have been able to limit the negative media coverage. Kill the brand, save the company. For companies with numerous brands it is often better to admit defeat early on and terminate a brand for the sake of the overall reputation of the company.
- Page 95 and 96: Extension failures 87 24 Heinz All
- Page 97 and 98: Extension failures 89 Lessons from
- Page 99 and 100: Extension failures 91 the no-nonsen
- Page 101 and 102: Extension failures 93 Have a core
- Page 103 and 104: Extension failures 95 In the mid-19
- Page 105 and 106: Extension failures 97 every brand -
- Page 107 and 108: Extension failures 99 sales rose to
- Page 109 and 110: Extension failures 101 However, amo
- Page 111 and 112: Extension failures 103 29 Chiquita
- Page 113 and 114: Extension failures 105 A brand is
- Page 115 and 116: 31 Ben-Gay Aspirin Ben-Gay is anoth
- Page 117 and 118: 33 Smith and Wesson mountain bikes
- Page 119 and 120: 35 Lynx barbershop Lever Fabergé,
- Page 121 and 122: 37 LifeSavers Soda Invented in 1912
- Page 123: 39 Frito-Lay Lemonade Frito-Lay is
- Page 127 and 128: It can be expected that brands will
- Page 129 and 130: PR failures 121 40 Exxon Don’t sa
- Page 131 and 132: PR failures 123 including the clean
- Page 133 and 134: PR failures 125 environmentalists,
- Page 135 and 136: PR failures 127 the public. [. . .]
- Page 137 and 138: PR failures 129 42 Perrier’s benz
- Page 139 and 140: PR failures 131 common purpose thro
- Page 141 and 142: PR failures 133 Lesson from Pan Am
- Page 143 and 144: PR failures 135 In addition, Snow B
- Page 145: PR failures 137 45 Rely tampons Pro
- Page 149 and 150: PR failures 141 As Gerber saw it, a
- Page 151 and 152: PR failures 143 regarding youth mar
- Page 153 and 154: PR failures 145 buying about 40 per
- Page 155 and 156: PR failures 147 Be sensitive. By s
- Page 157: PR failures 149 Remember that comp
- Page 161: Brands operate on a global scale. B
- Page 164 and 165: 156 Brand failures of the Bombay St
- Page 166 and 167: 158 Brand failures Coca-Cola. The
- Page 168 and 169: 160 Brand failures Lessons from Kel
- Page 170 and 171: 162 Brand failures Translation trou
- Page 172 and 173: 53 Schweppes Tonic Water in Italy I
- Page 174 and 175: 55 Electrolux in the United States
- Page 176 and 177: 57 Coors in Spain Coors beer had eq
- Page 178 and 179: 59 Clairol’s Mist Stick in German
- Page 180 and 181: 61 American Airlines in Mexico When
- Page 182 and 183: 63 Kentucky Fried Chicken in Hong K
- Page 184 and 185: 176 Brand failures ment. Pretty soo
- Page 186 and 187: 178 Brand failures 65 Quaker Oats
- Page 188 and 189: 180 Brand failures Lessons from Sna
- Page 191 and 192: The people behind a brand are its m
- Page 193 and 194: People failures 185 66 Enron Failin
- Page 195 and 196: People failures 187 67 Arthur Ander
138 <strong>Brand</strong> failures<br />
But Procter & Gamble dismissed this research as ‘insufficient data in the<br />
hands of a bureaucracy.’<br />
However, by this time the company had started to realize it was fighting a<br />
losing battle and began to co-operate and look for a compromise solution.<br />
Procter & Gamble suggested a warning label be added to the product. But<br />
when the results of the CDC study were confirmed by an independent<br />
research firm, Procter & Gamble had little choice but to suspend sales of the<br />
product.<br />
The withdrawal of Rely from the market was estimated to cost US $75<br />
million. However, although Procter & Gamble initially made matters worse<br />
by denying responsibility, the company was now embarked on a damage<br />
limitation exercise.<br />
It worked jointly with the CDC to draft a consent agreement. The CDC<br />
allowed Procter & Gamble to deny any product defect or violation of federal<br />
law. In return Procter & Gamble promised to buy back any unused product<br />
and offered its scientific expertise to research the problem. The company also<br />
mounted a large-scale educational campaign.<br />
In an article for the Canadian Journal of Communication, Drexel University’s<br />
Priscilla Murphy explored Procter & Gamble’s handling of the Rely<br />
tampon incident in relation to ‘games theory’. She argued that by the end,<br />
Procter & Gamble’s game plan had improved greatly:<br />
The latter stages of Procter & Gamble’s strategy exemplify a wholly<br />
different approach to conflict. What had begun as a classic escalation<br />
game became a bargaining venture in which everyone’s desires were<br />
examined and coordinated so that each player could live with the<br />
agreement. When we are talking about bargaining games we are really<br />
looking at the ways in which both sides in a conflict gradually come to<br />
agree on a single version of events, a single perspective. What resulted<br />
was a stable equilibrium point that, though not ideal, represented the<br />
best outcome for each side given the pressures from the other side.<br />
So although the incidents of toxic shock syndrome spelt the end of the Rely<br />
brand, Procter & Gamble itself suffered small lasting damage and continues<br />
to produce some of the world’s most popular tampon products.