Chicago Tylenol

1. What Happened?
The Chicago Tylenol murders were a series of poisoning deaths resulting from drug
tampering in the Chicago metropolitan area in 1982. The victims had all taken Tylenol-
branded acetaminophen capsules that had been laced with potassium cyanide.[1] A total of
seven people died in the original poisonings (six adults and one 12-year-old girl died), with
several more deaths in subsequent copycat crimes. The incidents led to reforms in the
packaging of over-the-counter substances and to federal anti-tampering laws.
On the morning of September 29, 1982, twelve-year-old Mary Kellerman of Elk Grove Village,
Illinois, died after taking a capsule of Extra-Strength Tylenol. Adam Janus of Arlington
Heights, Illinois, died in the hospital later that day. Shortly thereafter Adam's brother Stanley
and sister-in-law Theresa, of Lisle, Illinois, died after gathering to mourn his death, having
taken pills from the same bottle.[3] In the coming days Mary McFarland of Elmhurst, Illinois,
Paula Prince of Chicago, and Mary Reiner of Winfield also died in similar incidents.[4][5]
Investigators soon discovered the Tylenol link. Urgent warnings were broadcast, and police
drove through Chicago neighborhoods issuing warnings over loudspeakers.
As the tampered-with bottles came from different factories, and the seven deaths had all
occurred in the Chicago area, the possibility of sabotage during production was ruled out.
Instead, the culprit was believed to have acquired bottles of Tylenol from various
supermarkets and drug stores over a period of several weeks, added the cyanide to the
capsules, then returned to the stores to place the bottles back on the shelves. In addition to
the five bottles that led to the victims' deaths, three other tampered-with bottles were
discovered.
The tampering inspired hundreds of copycat incidents across the U.S. The Food and Drug
Administration tallied more than 270 different incidents of product tampering in the month
following the Tylenol deaths. Pills tainted with everything from rat poison to hydrochloric
acid sickened people around the country. Some copycats expanded to food tampering: that
Halloween, parents reported finding sharp pins concealed in candy corn and candy bars.
Some communities banned trick-or-treating all together.

2. What did Johnson & Johnson do? And

Johnson & Johnson distributed warnings to hospitals and distributors and halted Tylenol
production and advertising. On October 5, 1982, it issued a nationwide recall of Tylenol
products; an estimated 31 million bottles were in circulation, with a retail value of over US
$100 million.[6] The company also advertised in the national media for individuals not to
consume any of its products that contained acetaminophen after it was determined that only
these capsules had been tampered with. Johnson & Johnson offered to exchange all Tylenol
capsules already purchased by the public for solid tablets.
The actions of Johnson & Johnson to reduce deaths and warn the public of poisoning risks
has been widely praised as an exemplary response to such a crisis.[2] No suspect was ever
charged or convicted of the poisonings. New York City resident James William Lewis was
considered the prime suspect, and was convicted of extortion for sending a letter to Johnson
& Johnson that took credit for the deaths and demanded $1 million to stop them.
There are three stages in a
crisis life cycle: pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis. Since no other poisonings had
happened before, Johnson & Johnson was not fully prepared with a crisis management
 plan. The company did not believe at the current time that product tampering was a
potential risk for them. However, even though the company did not have a pre-crisis
signal and detection program they were still able to manage the crisis adequately.
Johnson & Johnson worked diligently and honestly to help alleviate any problems that
this intentional criminal activity could cause to their company.
Johnson & Johnson needed to handle this crisis in a way that would not destroy
their reputation or their most profitable product, Tylenol.Johnson & Johnson executives
respond swiftly and authoritatively.
How did Johnson & Johnson make decision?
Chairman of the Board, James E. Burke said, the decisions to pull advertising, recall all
bottles from the lots laced with cyanide, and send warnings to health professionals were
made with no hesitation. The biggest decision was whether to make a nationwide recall of
Tylenol. There were arguments on both sides, but after viewing the burials of poisoned
victims, all objections subsided and a nationwide recall was announced. Executives a
Johnson & Johnson understood the responsibility they had toward their publics and decided
a recall was inevitable. Sheffi refers to this as assessing the damage realistically. He believes
that companies must make sure to not underestimate the severity of damage caused by a
crisis. Recalling the 31 million bottles of Extra-Strength Tylenol capsules lead to
Johnson & Johnson receiving a great deal of positive attention from the media for its
ethical actions. Johnson & Johnson also received positive response from the media
because of relationships formed with the Chicago Police department, the FBI, and the
Food and Drug Administration.
After that decisions made by executives and the public relations department at Johnson
& Johnson did not stem from a lengthy crisis management plan, but from the company
credo established by Robert Wood Johnson, of the founding family, in the 1940s.
Corporate Vice President of Johnson & Johnson Lawrence G. Foster told journalist post8
crisis that there were crisis management plans but nothing that could have prepared the
company for this type of disaster. Conducting interviews with key external opinion
leaders is another crucial part of the post-crisis stage. The company used the credo to be
their moral compass during the crisis, and it helped display the importance of the
company culture to the public. The credo stated that Johnson & Johnson had social
responsibilities that were far more important than sales and profit.
For example, Johnson & Johnson developed new product protection methods and ironclad
pledges to do better in protecting their consumers in the future. Working with FDA officials,
they introduced a new tamper-proof packaging, which included foil seals and other features
that made it obvious to a consumer if foul play had transpired. These packaging protections
soon became the industry standard for all over-the-counter medications. The company also
introduced price reductions and a new version of their pills called the caplet a tablet
coated with slick, easy-to-swallow gelatin but far harder to tamper with than the older
capsules which could be easily opened, laced with a contaminant, and then placed back in
the older non-tamper-proof bottle.
3. Tylenols comeback
Within a year, and after an investment of more than $100 million, Tylenols sales rebounded
to its healthy past and it became, once again, the nations favorite over-the-counter pain
reliever. Critics who had prematurely announced the death of the brand Tylenol were now
praising the companys handling of the matter. Indeed, the Johnson & Johnson recall became
a classic case study in business schools across the nation.
In 1983, the U.S. Congress passed what was called the Tylenol bill, making it a federal
offense to tamper with consumer products. In 1989, the FDA established federal guidelines
for manufacturers to make all such products tamper-proof.
Sadly, the tragedies that resulted from the Tylenol poisonings can never be undone. But their
deaths did inspire a series of important moves to make over-the-counter medications safer
(albeit never 100 percent safe) for the hundreds of millions of people who buy them every
year.

Unfortunately, product tampering did not stop with the 1982 Tylenol poisonings. In 1986, the
company faced another crisis after a woman died after taking Extra-Strength Tylenol
capsules. Once more, cyanide was to blame. This time Tylenol was not alone. The incidence
of product tampering appeared to rise after the 1982 Tylenol murders, including incidents of
poisoned chocolate milk, orange juice, Excedrin, and Sudafed. J&J responded with another
recall and a promise to only release Tylenol in caplet or tablet form.
In 1989, Johnson & Johnson faced another problem when deaths were reported due to
overdoses on Tylenol. It was later revealed that hundreds of deaths and severe liver damages
could be attributed to acetaminophen, the main ingredient in Tylenol. Many analysts feel
that Johnson & Johnsons labeling should have been clearer, with explicit warnings about the
dangers of overdose. At least 100 suits were filed against Johnson & Johnson over
acetaminophen poisonings between 1990 and 1997. In 2006, J&J was ordered to pay
damages in the wrongful death suit of a young boy. Although the FDA did not require strong
warnings regarding the dangers of acetaminophen overdose until later that year, the judge
determined that J&J knew about the risks and did not actively work to mitigate them with
clear labeling. Although J&J has been praised countless times for its quick actions during the
Tylenol poisoning crisis of 1982, the company has encountered criticism for not reacting
quickly enough to another crisis. In 2009, Johnson & Johnson recalled many of its childrens
Tylenol common cold and allergy medications. Nearly
Suspects[edit]
During the initial investigations, a man named James William Lewis sent a letter to Johnson &
Johnson demanding $1 million to stop the cyanide-induced murders. Police were unable to link
him with the crimes, as he and his wife were living in New York City at the time. He was
convicted of extortion, served 13 years of a 20-year sentence, and was released in 1995 on
parole. WCVB Channel 5 of Boston reported that court documents, released in early 2009,
"show Department of Justice investigators concluded Lewis was responsible for the poisonings,
despite the fact that they did not have enough evidence to charge him". Lewis has denied
responsibility for the poisonings for several years.[7][8]

A second man, Roger Arnold, was investigated and cleared of the killings. He had a nervous
breakdown due to the media attention, which he blamed on Marty Sinclair, a bar owner. In the
summer of 1983, Arnold shot and killed John Stanisha, whom he mistook for Sinclair. Stanisha
was an unrelated man who did not know Arnold.[9] Arnold was convicted in January 1984 and
served 15 years of a 30-year sentence for second-degree murder. He died in June 2008.

Laurie Dann, who poisoned and shot people in a May 1988 rampage in and around Winnetka,
Illinois, was briefly considered as a suspect, but no direct connection was found. [10]

Police never arrested anyone for the original Tylenol murders, but tax consultant James Lewis
wrote a letter to Tylenol's manufacturer in October 1982 demanding $1 million to "stop the
killings." Lewis had a strange past. He had been charged with a 1978 Kansas City murder after
police found the remains of one of his former clients in bags in his attic; charges were dropped
after a judge ruled that the police search of Lewis' home was illegal. But police could never tie
him to the Tylenol killings and he denied committing them. Lewis was convicted of extortion for
the letter and spent more than 12 years in federal prison. Richard Brzeczek, the Chicago police
superintendent at the time, said it was unlikely Lewis would ever be prosecuted for the killings
themselves.

But when the FBI reopened their investigation in early February, the focus shifted back to Lewis.
His Cambridge, Mass. office was searched as well as a storage unit he had rented nearby. The
FBI has been tightlipped about the reason for the search and haven't named Lewis in conjunction
with the reopened investigation. Police still have some of the tainted Tylenol capsules from the
original killings and are hopeful some DNA can be recovered from the pills for testing.

The killings did have a measurable, positive impact, however: a revolution in product safety
standards. In the wake of the Tylenol poisonings, pharmaceutical and food industries
dramatically improved their packaging, instituting tamperproof seals and indicators and
increasing security controls during the manufacturing process. The result has been a dramatic
reduction in the number of copycat incidents although it may be of little solace to the families
of the seven killed in Chicago. But now, as the FBI brings modern technology to bear on a case
long gone cold, perhaps they can hope again for something else tangible: at long last, some
criminal charges.

Aftermath[edit]
The media gave Johnson & Johnson much positive coverage for its handling of the crisis; for
example, an article in The Washington Post said, "Johnson & Johnson has effectively
demonstrated how a major business ought to handle a disaster". The article further stated that
"this is no Three Mile Island accident in which the company's response did more damage than
the original incident", and applauded the company for being honest with the public. [11] In addition
to issuing the recall, the company established relations with theChicago Police Department, the
FBI, and the Food and Drug Administration. This way it could have a part in searching for the
person who laced the capsules and they could help prevent further tamperings. [12] While at the
time of the scare the company's market share collapsed from thirty-five percent to eight percent,
it rebounded in less than a year, a move credited to the company's prompt and aggressive
reaction. In November, it reintroduced capsules but in a new, triple-sealed package, coupled with
heavy price promotions and within several years, Tylenol had the highest market share for the
over-the-counter analgesic in the U.S.[13]

A number of copycat attacks involving Tylenol and other products also took place. In
1986, Excedrin capsules in Washington state were tampered with, resulting in the deaths of
Susan Snow and Bruce Nickell from cyanide poisoning and the eventual arrest and conviction of
Nickell's wife, Stella, of crimes connected to both deaths[14] That same year,Procter &
Gamble's Encaprin was recalled after a spiking hoax in Chicago and Detroit that resulted in a
precipitous sales drop and a withdrawal of the pain reliever from the market. [15]

The 1982 incident inspired the pharmaceutical, food, and consumer product industries to
develop tamper-resistant packaging, such as induction seals and improved quality
control methods. Moreover, product tampering was made a federal crime. [16] The new laws
resulted in Stella Nickell's conviction in the Excedrin tampering case, for which she was
sentenced to ninety years in prison.[14]

Additionally, the tragedy prompted the pharmaceutical industry to move away from capsules,
which were easy to contaminate as a foreign substance could be placed inside without obvious
signs of tampering. Within the year, the FDA introduced more stringent regulations to avoid
product tampering. This led to the eventual replacement of the capsule with the solid "caplet", a
tablet made in the shape of a capsule, as a drug delivery form and with the addition of tamper-
evident safety-seals to bottles of many sorts.[citation needed]

Ongoing investigations[edit]
In early January 2009, Illinois authorities renewed the investigation. Federal agents searched the
home of James Lewis in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and seized a number of items.[17] In
Chicago, an FBI spokesman declined to comment but said "we'll have something to release later
possibly".[18] Law enforcement officials have received a number of tips related to the case
coinciding with its anniversary. In a written statement,[19] the FBI explained,

This review was prompted, in part, by the recent 25th anniversary of this crime and the resulting
publicity. Further, given the many recent advances in forensic technology, it was only natural that
a second look be taken at the case and recovered evidence.

In January 2010, both Lewis and his wife submitted DNA samples and fingerprints to authorities.
[8]
Lewis stated "if the FBI plays it fair, I have nothing to worry about". [8]

On May 19, 2011, the FBI requested DNA samples from "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski in
connection to the Tylenol murders. Kaczynski denied having ever possessed potassium cyanide.
[20]
The first four Unabomber crimes happened in Chicago and its suburbs from 1978 to 1980, and
Kaczynski's parents had a suburban Chicago home in Lombard, Illinois, in 1982, where he
stayed occasionally.[21]

In 2011, Scott Bartz, a Johnson & Johnson whistle-blower and former employee, claimed the
poisoned Tylenol had actually been tampered with somewhere along the repackaging and
distribution links in Tylenols supply chain, rather than at retail locations. [22]

References[edit]
1. Jump up^ Douglas, John E.; Olshaker, Mark (1999). The Anatomy of Motive The FBI's
Legendary Mindhunter Explores the Key to Understanding and Catching Violent Criminals. New
York City: Scribner. pp. 103104. ISBN 0-684-84598-9.

2. Jump up^ "5 Crisis Management Truths from the Tylenol Murders -". 4 October 2012.

3. Jump up^ "How the Tylenol murders of 1982 changed the way we consume medication".

4. Jump up^ Douglas, 106.

5. Jump up^ Bell, Rachael. "The Tylenol Terrorist". Crime Library. truTV.

6. Jump up^ Emsley, John. Molecules of Murder: Criminal Molecular and Classic
Cases.Cambridge:Royal Society of Chemistry, 2008, p. 174.

7. Jump up^ "Feds Convinced Lewis Was Tylenol Killer". WCVB-TV. February 12, 2009.
RetrievedMay 12, 2009.

8. ^ Jump up to:a b c Lavoie, Denise (January 11, 2010). "Friend: Tylenol Suspect Submits
DNA, Fingerprints". Associated Press (via ABC News). Retrieved November 29, 2014.

9. Jump up^ "Tylenol Figure Is Convicted". Associated Press (via The New York Times).
January 15, 1984.

10. Jump up^ "Tragedy in Winnetka: The Answers Are Few". Milwaukee Sentinel. May 25,
1988. Retrieved December 30, 2009.
11. Jump up^ Jerry Knight (October 11, 1982). "Tylenol's Maker Shows How to Respond to
Crisis".The Washington Post. p. WB1.

12. Jump up^ Kaplan, Tamara. "The Tylenol Crisis: How Effective Public Relations Saved
Johnson & Johnson". The Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved February 12, 2010.

13. Jump up^ N. R. KLEINFIELD. "TYLENOL'S RAPID COMEBACK". The New York Times.

14. ^ Jump up to:a b Tibbits, George. "Woman Guilty of Killing 2 in Poisoned Excedrin
Case". The Boston Globe via HighBeam Research (subscription required). Seattle, Washington.
Retrieved May 10, 2012.

15. Jump up^ "Retired Drugs: Failed Blockbusters, Homicidal Tampering, Fatal
Oversights".Wired.com. October 1, 2008.

16. Jump up^ United States Government Printing Office. "USCODE-2010-title18-partI-

chap65-sec1365.pdf" (PDF). United States Government Printing Office. Retrieved December
4,2011.

17. Jump up^ Saltzman, Jonathan (February 5, 2009), "Fatal Tampering Case Is
Renewed", The Boston Globe

18. Jump up^ "FBI Searches Home of Man Linked to Tylenol Deaths". Associated Press
(via Fox News). February 4, 2009. Retrieved March 7, 2010.

19. Jump up^ Fifis, Fran (February 5, 2009). "Law Enforcement To Review Tylenol Murders".
CNN. Retrieved March 7, 2010.

20. Jump up^ Woolner, Ann (May 19, 2011). "FBI Wants Unabomber's DNA for 1982 Tylenol
Poisoning Probe". Bloomberg News. Retrieved May 19, 2011.

21. Jump up^ "FBI wants to test Unabomber DNA in Tylenol killings".

22. Jump up^ Bergmann, Joy. "The Tylenol Mafia".

http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1878063,00.html
Analysis

Case Study: The Johnson & Johnson Tylenol Crisis

Before the crisis, Tylenol was the most successful over-the-counter product in the United States
with over one hundred million users. Tylenol was responsible for 19 percent of Johnson &
Johnson's corporate profits during the first 3 quarters of 1982. Tylenol accounted for 13 percent
of Johnson & Johnson's year-to-year sales growth and 33 percent of the company's year-to-year
profit growth. Tylenol was the absolute leader in the painkiller field accounting for a 37 percent
market share, outselling the next four leading painkillers combined, including Anacin, Bayer,
Bufferin, and Excedrin. Had Tylenol been a corporate entity unto itself, profits would have placed
it in the top half of the Fortune 500 (Berge, 1998).

During the fall of 1982, for reasons not known, a malevolent person or persons, presumably
unknown, replaced Tylenol Extra-Strength capsules with cyanide-laced capsules, resealed the
packages, and deposited them on the shelves of at least a half-dozen or so pharmacies, and food
stores in the Chicago area. The poison capsules were purchased, and seven unsuspecting people
died a horrible death. Johnson & Johnson, parent company of McNeil Consumer Products
Company which makes Tylenol, suddenly, and with no warning, had to explain to the world why
its trusted product was suddenly killing people (Berge, 1998).

Primary Evidence. Robert Andrews, assistant director for public relations at Johnson & Johnson
recalls how the company reacted in the first days of the crisis: "We got a call from a Chicago news
reporter. He told us that the medical examiner there had just given a press conference-people
were dying from poisoned Tylenol. He wanted our comment. As it was the first knowledge we
had here in this department, we told him we knew nothing about it. In that first call we learned
more from the reporter than he did from us." Andrew's dilemma points out something that has
become more prevalent with the expansion of 24 hour electronic media. The media will often be
the first on the scene, thus have information about the crisis before the organization does
(Berge, 1990).

Johnson & Johnson chairman, James Burke, reacted to the negative media coverage by forming a
seven-member strategy team. The team's strategy guidance from Burke was first, "How do we
protect the people?" and second "How do we save this product?" The company's first actions
were to immediately alerted consumers across the nation, via the media, not to consume any
type of Tylenol product. They told consumers not to resume using the product until the extent of
the tampering could be determined. Johnson & Johnson, along with stopping the production and
advertising of Tylenol, withdraw all Tylenol capsules from the store shelves in Chicago and the
surrounding area. After finding 2 more contaminated bottles Tylenol realized the vulnerability of
the product and ordered a national withdraw of every capsule (Broom, 1994).
By withdrawing all Tylenol, even though there was little chance of discovering more cyanide
laced tablets; Johnson & Johnson showed that they were not willing to take a risk with the
public's safety, even if it cost the company millions of dollars. The end result was the public
viewing Tylenol as the unfortunate victim of a malicious crime (Broom, 1994).

Johnson & Johnson also used the media, both PR and paid advertising to communicate their
strategy during the crisis. Johnson & Johnson used the media to issue a national alert to tell the
public not to use the Tylenol product. In the first week of the crisis Johnson & Johnson
established a 1-800 hot line for consumers to call. The company used the 1-800 number to
respond to inquires from customers concerning safety of Tylenol. They also establish a toll-free
line for news organizations to call and receive pre-taped daily messages with updated statements
about the crisis (Berge, 1990).

Before the crisis Johnson & Johnson had not actively sought press coverage, but as a company in
crisis they recognized the benefits of open communications in clearly disseminating warnings to
the public as well as the company's stand (Broom, 1994).

Several major press conferences were held at corporate headquarters. Within hours an internal
video staff set up a live television feed via satellite to the New York metro area. This allowed all
press conferences to go national. Jim Burke got more positive media exposure by going on 60
Minutes and the Donahue show and giving the public his command messages (Fink, 1986).

Johnson & Johnson communicated their new triple safety seal packaging- a glued box, a plastic
sear over the neck of the bottle, and a foil seal over the mouth of the bottle, with a press
conference at the manufacturer's headquarters. Tylenol became the first product in the industry
to use the new tamper resistant packaging just 6 months after the crisis occurred (Berge, 1990).

Secondary Evidence. The initial media reports focused on the deaths of American citizens from a
trusted consumer product. In the beginning the product tampering was not known, thus the
media made a very negative association with the brand name.

All 3 networks lead with the Tylenol story on the first day of the crisis. CBS put a human face on
the story which contained the following: "When 12 year-old Mary Kellerman of Elk Grove Village,
Ill., awoke at dawn with cold symptoms; her parents gave her one Extra-Strength Tylenol and
sent her back to bed. Little did they know, they would wake up at 7:00 a.m. to find their daughter
dying on the bathroom floor." (Kaplin, pg. 1, 1998)

The print media weighed in with equally damaging headlines: Time Magazine, "Poison Madness
in the Midwest," Newsweek, "The Tylenol Scare," The Washington Post, "Tylenol, Killer or Cure."

The media was not only focused on the deaths but it was also pervasive. Throughout the crisis
over 100,000 separate news stories ran in U.S. newspapers, and hundreds of hours of national
and local television coverage. A post crisis study by Johnson & Johnson said that over 90 percent
of the American population had heard of the Chicago deaths due to cyanide-laced Tylenol within
the first week of the crisis. Two news clipping services found over 125,000 news clippings on the
Tylenol story. One of the services claimed that this story had been given the widest US news
coverage since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Kaplin, 1998).

Media reporting would continue to focus on Tylenol killing people until more information about
what caused the deaths was made available. In most crises media will focus on the sensational
aspects of the crisis, and then follow with the cause as they learn more about what happened.

Scholarly Journals. Scholars have come to recognize Johnson & Johnson's handling of the Tylenol
crisis as the example for success when confronted with a threat to an organization's existence.
Berge lauds the case in the following manner, "The Tylenol crisis is without a doubt the most
exemplary case ever known in the history of crisis communications. Any business executive, who
has ever stumbled into a public relations ambush, ought to appreciate the way Johnson &
Johnson responded to the Tylenol poisonings. They have effectively demonstrated how major
business has to handle a disaster." (pg. 19, 1990)

The Tylenol case was the bases for many of the crisis communications strategies developed by
researchers over the last 20 years. Berg's suffering strategy and Benoit's Rectification strategies
both were developed from doing case studies of how Johnson & Johnson handled the Tylenol
poisonings (Coombs, 1995).

Discussion. The crises category in the Johnson & Johnson Tylenol case is Terrorism. Combs
defines terrorism as intentional actions taken by external actors designed to harm the
organization directly (hurt employees or customers) or indirectly (reduce sales or disrupt
production). Product tampering, hostage taking, sabotage, and workplace violence are examples
of terrorism. The violent, outside agent promotes attributions of external locus and
uncontrollability.
The Tylenol product tampering clearly fits the Terrorism category. An external agent, presumably,
acted to hurt the customers and possibly the employees of Johnson & Johnson. The other
categories, Faux Pas, Accidents, or Transgression do not fit in the Tylenol case, so there was no
cross-categorization in this case.

Crisis Response Strategies used by Johnson & Johnson: Johnson & Johnson employed
Forgiveness and Sympathy strategy for this crisis. Forgiveness strategy seeks to win forgiveness
from the various publics and create acceptance for the crisis.

Johnson & Johnson used Remediation and Rectification, both Forgiveness strategies, in the
Tylenol crisis. Remediation offers some form of compensation to help victims of the crisis.
Johnson & Johnson provided the victim's families counseling and financial assistance even
though they were not responsible for the product tampering. Negative feelings by the public
against Johnson & Johnson were lessoned as the media showed them take positive actions to
help the victim's families (Berg, 1990).

Rectification involves taking action to prevent a recurrence of the crisis in the future. Johnson &
Johnson's development of Triple sealed packaging is an example of rectification. They also
developed new random inspection procedures before the shipment of Tylenol to retailers (Berg,
1990).

Sympathy strategy was a big component of Johnson & Johnson's crisis communication strategy.
Sympathy strategy wins support from the public by portraying the organization as the unfair
victim of an attack from an outside entity. Johnson & Johnson's willingness to accept losses by
pulling the Tylenol product developed sympathy with the public (Berg & Robb, 1992).

The Johnson & Johnson Tylenol crisis is an example of how an organization should communicate
with the various publics during a crisis. The organization's leadership set the example from the
beginning by making public safety the organizations number one concern. This is particularity
important given the fact that Johnson & Johnson's main mission with Tylenol is to enhance the
public's well-being or heath.

Although Johnson & Johnson's leadership performed superbly during the crisis there were some
important areas Tylenol improved upon after the crisis. Johnson & Johnson did not have a
proactive public affairs program before the crisis. The only media relations engaged in by
Johnson & Johnson was in the advertising and marketing area. In the early stages of the crisis
Tylenol was informed about what was going on from a Chicago reporter. If this particular
reporter had been more contentious or adversarial the whole crisis may have taken on a
different form in the public's perception.

Johnson & Johnson's failure to employ/establish a positive relationship with the media, a key
stakeholder, forced the company to respond to the crisis in an advertising-like manner. Johnson
& Johnson received criticism from the media for not being genuine due to the slick sales-like
response ads run during the crisis. The personal messages with the media from the CEO of the
organization enabled Johnson & Johnson to overcome this problem.

Today Johnson & Johnson has completely recovered its market share lost during the crisis. The
organization was able to reestablish the Tylenol brand name as one to the must trusted over-the-
counter consumer products in American. Johnson & Johnson's handing of the Tylenol crisis is
clearly the example other companies should follow if the find themselves on the brink of losing
everything.
 THE TYLENOL CRISIS, 1982

What happened?
In October of 1982, Tylenol, the leading pain-killer medicine in
the United States at the time, faced a tremendous crisis when
seven people in Chicago were reported dead after taking extra-
strength Tylenol capsules. It was reported that an unknown
suspect/s put 65 milligrams of deadly cyanide into Tylenol
capsules, 10,000 more than what is necessary to kill a human.

The tampering occurred once the product reached the shelves.

They were removed from the shelves, infected with cyanide and
returned to the shelves (Mitchell, 1989). In 1982, Tylenol
controlled 37 percent of its market with revenue of about $1.2
million. Immediately after the cyanide poisonings, its market
share was reduced to seven percent (Mitchell 1989).

What did Johnson & Johnson do?

Once the connection was made between the Tylenol capsules and the reported deaths,
public announcements were made warning people about the consumption of the product.
Johnson & Johnson was faced with the dilemma of the best way to deal with the problem
without destroying the reputation of the company and its most profitable product.

Following one of our guidelines of protecting people first and property second, McNeil
Consumer Products, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, conducted an immediate product
recall from the entire country which amounted to about 31 million bottles and a loss of
more than $100 million dollars. (Lazare, Chicago Sun-Times 2002) Additionally, they
halted all advertisement for the product.

Although Johnson & Johnson knew they were not responsible for the tampering of the
product, they assumed responsibility by ensuring public safety first and recalled all of
their capsules from the market. In fact, in February of 1986, when a woman was
reported dead from cyanide poisoning in Tylenol capsules, Johnson & Johnson
permanently removed all of the capsules from the market.

How did Johnson & Johnson re-introduce the product to the

market?

Once the product was removed from the market, Johnson & Johnson had to come up
with a campaign to re-introduce its product and restore confidence back to the
consumer.

1. Tylenol products were re-introduced containing a triple-seal tamper resistant

packaging. It became the first company to comply with the Food and Drug
Administration mandate of tamper-resistant packaging.(Mitchell 1989) Furthermore,
they promoted caplets, which are more resistant to tampering.
2. In order to motivate consumers to buy the product, they offered a $2.50 off coupon
on the purchase of their product. They were available in the newspapers as well as by
calling a toll-free number. (Mitchell 1989)

3. To recover loss stock from the crisis, Johnson & Johnson made a new pricing program
that gave consumers up to 25% off the purchase of the product. (Mitchell 1989)

4. Over 2250 sales people made presentations for the medical community to restore
confidence on the product. (Mitchell 1989)

What was Tylenol's basis for its crisis management program?

The reason Tylenol reacted so quickly and in such a positive manner to the crisis stems
from the companys mission statement. (Lazare Chicago Sun-Times 2002). On the
companys credowritten in the mid-1940s by Robert Wood Johnson, he stated that the
companys responsibilities were to the consumers and medical professionals using its
products, employees, the communities where its people work and live, and its
stockholders. Therefore, it was essential to maintain the safety of its publics to maintain
the company alive. Johnson & Johnsons responsibility to its publics first proved to be its
most efficient public relations tool. It was the key to the brands survival.

Tylenol is one of thousands of companies who have faced a crisis that can be destructive
to its company if not handled properly. In 1999, 17 years later, when Coca-Cola was
faced with a crisis of its own, Nick Purdom of PR Week wrote that "the PR industry has
an important role to play in helping companies identify and manage risks that could
damage their reputation."
While Tylenol succeeded in managing its crisis, the Exxon case was not as successful.