Johnson & Johnson – Tylenol Issue

Team 5
Sreevyshnav S Nair – CB.BU.P2MBA17139
Pranab C V – CB.BU.P2MBA17106
Rajeev M Nair – CB.BU.P2MBA17112
Ajay Krishnan M – CB.BU.P2MBA17010
Abhin A – CB.BU.P2MBA17004
Kiran Mohan – CB.BU.P2MBA17073
About Johnson & Johnson
Tylenol Crisis
 How the company handled it?
• First step was to pull all Tylenol in the Chicago area , followed by a
nation wide recall

• This included 31 million bottles with a retail value of over $100 million.

• Company sent mailgram messages explaining the situations to over

500,000 doctors , hospitals, and distributors of Tylenol

• Also established a crisis phone line where consumers could call to

ask questions about the product.

• CEO James Burke , and other executives were accessible to the

press and were interviewed by a variety of media.
 Result

 Reaction to Tylenol poisoning

 Proved that its famous credo wasn’t hallow

 Its commitment to the consumers, its primary stake holder.

 By being accessible to the press.

 Result
 Johnson and Johnson pioneered the Tamper Resistant Packaging That has become so
commonplace now food and pharma products.

 Due to its careful handling of the issue Johnson and Johnson still maintains its
reputation as a quality producer of Pharmaceuticals and a company that cares
about its customers.

 The ethical and customer centric view by which Johnson and Johnson handled the
issue insured that by mid 1980’s the regained almost all of its market share.
 Learnings
 By Maintaining Transparency at top management levels Johnson and Johnson
was able to reinforce its Image as an Honest Company which has its customers
welfare at heart.
 Pulling back products worth $100 million dollars it showed that more than the
money it cared about people and was prepared to face such a big loss to
ensure public safety.
 Due to their Honesty and their insistence on following the Morally and Ethically
correct path they were able to survive this crisis with their reputation intact and
their position in the market secure.
 The Social Costs View of the Manufacturer’s duties
This theory states that a manufacturer should bear the social costs of injuries caused by
defects in a product even when no negligence was involved on the part of the
manufacturer, and no contractual relations existed between the manufacturer and the
user.