Essay on Tylenol Murders of 1982

2010 Words Nov 24th, 2012 9 Pages
Running Head: TYLENOL MURDERS

Johnson & Johnson:
The Tylenol Crisis of 1982

Since 1887 Johnson and Johnson had been a respected member of the health care industry providing millions of customers with a diverse line of products from surgical dressings and band aids to baby powder. It had built its reputation on providing surgeons with sterile dressing to use after surgery because infection was a major cause of death after surgical procedures. The company was also a pioneer in the corporate idea of decentralizing the structure of their business so each set of products were directed by their own subsidiary and each had autonomy from the main corporate center. A family run, publicly
…show more content…
95). The company also established a toll-free line for news outlets, which included taped daily updates (“Crisis communication strategies,” n.d). In the first week of the crisis Johnson & Johnson set up a 1-800 phone line so people could call in with questions and concerns (“Crisis communication strategies,” n.d). Johnson and Johnson also offered to let stores and consumers return Tylenol capsules, both regular and extra strength, to be exchanged for tablets of the medication at the company's expense. Johnson and Johnson also stopped the production and advertising of Tylenol (Kaplan, n.d.). Johnson and Johnson initially limited the recall of Extra Strength Tylenol capsules from stores in the Chicago area. The FDA and FBI had advised the company not to issue a nationwide recall of all Tylenol capsules because it would mean giving in to the terrorists (Johnson and Johnson Tylenol Murders (Fearn-Banks, 2002, p. 95). After a copycat crime occurred in northern California, the company issued a nationwide recall of all capsules. The crime cost Johnson and Johnson approximately 100 million dollars for the recall of 31 million capsules (Broom, Center, Cutlip, 1994, as cited in Kaplan, n.d.). Johnson and Johnson also offered a $100,000 reward for information leading to a conviction in the case (Knight, 1982, para. 8). Although the company was not responsible for the product tampering, Johnson & Johnson provided the victim's families

Related Documents