Essay on Effective Communication Case Study

Effective communication is vital to the smooth running of a business and various methods of communication are used within a business environment to achieve this. Each form has various benefits to communicate effectively to their designated target audience. When communication is carried out properly it means the sender and receiver both correctly obtain the same information. Each

In order to discuss this case, it is also important to know about McNeil Consumer Healthcare, the subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson and the producers of famous medicine "Tylenol". Tylenol was their best selling product; it was very much trusted by their consumers and they also earned huge profits from its sales in United States.

Purpose: The purpose of this speech is to educate and inform my audience of the risks inherent from unintended hypothermia. I’m eager to alert perioperative staff of the potential dangers as well as the preventative measures that can be taken in order to avoid complications associated with unintended hypothermia. My central idea is hypothermia management saves lives.

When J&J realized that their Tylenol capsules caused the deaths of four Chicagoans, they immediately initiated a recall of all Tylenol products, and spread the news by any means possible. Cars with sirens and loudspeakers drove through the city and suburbs of Chicago, urging residents to throw away any Tylenol capsules they might have. Schools were contacted, and they instructed students to bring all Tylenol products to the school nurse. News flashes were initiated to warn people of the Tylenol danger as well, and all stores were instructed to remove Tylenol products from their shelves. Removing the products was a gutsy move, not only because it was dangerous to the company by recalling so much products, but there was also a fear that the killer

The EpiPen device automatically injects a drug called epinephrine, which reverses potentially deadly allergic reactions. It is the only device of its kind available in the United States. Millions depend on carrying the device at all times. For decades the EpiPen was available at a low cost until the Mylan Company purchased it in 2007. Since then, the price has risen over 400% creating a public backlash of media reports, social media petitions, and politician’s calling out Mylan executives to explain the reason for the price raise. Lack of compassion and appearance of greed has tarnished the public image of the company. Mylan has begun looking for ways of rebuilding their image by releasing compensation to the public in the form of generic cheaper EpiPens and payment assistance to eligible patients, but it might be too little too late in this current ongoing communication crisis event.

Blue Bell’s news releases were always professional and to the point with hard facts. Blue Bell informed the public as soon as a recall was put in place. Blue Bell was transparent throughout the crisis which gave them credibility. Blue Bell made sure the whole truthful story was available through their press releases. The symptoms of Listeria were clearly stated in each of the press releases. This allowed

This happened on two occasions, the first in 1982 and the second in 1986. These episodes could have been devastating to the McNeil company by drastic decrease in consumption of the Tylenol products. The McNeil company rallied to the situation to counter this possible decrease in consumption. According to "Laurels: The National Business Hall of Fame", Tylenol's share in the one billion dollar analgesic market commanded thirty-five percent of the market before the 1982 incident. At the time of these episodes, consumer trust was damaged and market share decreased to seven percent. By February 1983, Tylenol had regained a twenty-four percent share of the market(Diary of an Amazing Comeback). In the 1990's, Tylenol again reached its thirty-five percent of the market which at this time accounted for a two billion dollar market(Laurels: The National Business Hall of Fame, Fortune). By regaining their share of the market, this demonstrated that the consumers had faith in the McNeil company's ability to produce safe and trustworthy products, i.e. Tylenol, for their comfort and happiness.

TO: Alison Allen, Human Resources Director; Cary Hasler, Marketing/Advertising Director; Joseph Earl, Customer Service Director; Elizabeth Hope-Earl, Client Account Director

Tylenol, an over the counter prescription product from Johnson & Johnson, was one of the top brands in the analgesic market. Within the company, it was also a large income earner that commanded nearly 15% of the company’s total profits. That being the case, the 1982 crisis was not only a big blow to the brand, but also to the company as a whole. The crisis jeopardized the company’s existence; putting at risk a multi million investment which the investors had a lot of faith in. Irrespective of whether the crisis was due to malicious acts from ill motivated criminals or not, the company had to act swiftly to counter the legal issues which were ensuing and mitigate huge impending losses. It was really a trying moment for the top management of Johnson & Johnson and more so to the CEO, James Burke, who faced the toughest test of his managerial career during this time. Though the crisis was amicably solved, there were some legal issues that were imminent and some valuable lessons learnt from the episode.

Consumers do not always evaluate prices objectively. Often a referenced price is a known and available price, like that of a competitor. Pricing Datril at par with Tylenol and advertising it as a new substitute with same features may have been a fraught tactic in a short-run test environment. Market penetration and share take time and is unknown. Additionally, a price war could have ensued with Tylenol due to cost differences especially in advertising.

In 1982, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) faced a major crisis that had the potential to send the company into financial ruin. Tylenol, the country’s most successful over-the-counter product, with over one hundred million users, was under attack.

In a competitive market to which Johnson and Johnson operates, the smallest of errors can lead to consequences which can cut revenue. When large mistakes occur, millions of dollars are lost, and even worse, there is a loss of customer confidence. Johnson and Johnson has had numerous recalls in their consumer healthcare division recently, which rocked the organization’s once sound image, and diminished its profits. These recalls have hurt Johnson and Johnson’s stocks and cost the company about $900 million in sales last year (Rockoff, 2011).

Communication is an area that all companies must value. If a customer has a need or want they must be able to communicate that to the company. This will allow the company to achieve optimal satisfaction with their customers. This will be beneficial to the company because with optimal customer satisfaction

Fill out the different cells with regard to each theory definition. You are to identify the theory the example represents, who developed the theory (theorist), explain the relevance of the theory, and then provide your own personal or professional application example of the theory.

If you search the web regarding Merck, the FDA, and the Vioxx Recall you’ll find a number of primary and secondary sources with central facts regarding the Vioxx case. While there are a number of variables to consider, I focused on the factual data that provided integral facts about this case. In the early 90s congress passed the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) that requires pharmaceutical companies to pay the FDA to review proposed medicines. This came as a result of pressure to get drugs into the market quickly as consumers were fearful that they were not receiving medicines quickly. This act allows the FDA to provide reviews that approve or disapprove various drugs—companies seek to enter into the market; yet the process was found that “two thirds of the survey lacked confidence that adequately monitors the safety of prescriptions once they are on the market” (Lawrence, 483). Because there was pressure to get drugs into the market the FDA shortened the approval time which caused the approval percentage to increase from 1.56 percent to 5.35 percent in 2001. While at the same