Image via Wikipedia

The recent Salmonella Typhimurium Outbreak has proven to be an opportunity for businesses to show how a crisis can illustrate their ability to communicate. First news of the outbreak came from the FDA on January 12, 2009. This release announced the investigation and suspicion that peanut butter was the cause.

One week later, the FDA released an update detailing their investigation progress and a list of potentially tainted manufacturers/products. If you get a chance, check out the list of all peanut products recalled. Holy Trail Mix, Batman! That's a lot.

I was compelled to write this post after being impressed by how Costco and Kellogg's handled the situation. We purchased a box of Austin snack packs at Costco within the last couple of months. It is my understanding that Kellogg's makes Austin brand products.

On Monday, January 26^th, we received a phone call at my home number from a Costco representative. They were phoning because they identified that we had purchased a product that was potentially contaminated and asked us to discard any remaining product. I have to say, I was impressed with that.

To top it off, we received a letter in the mail that same day from Costco with Kellogg's letterhead. The letter explained the potential for contamination, gave us URL's to visit for more information, and voiced their regret and apology:

“We sincerely apologize to our consumers and cannot express enough our disappointment and deep regret about this situation....Recent events suggest there was a breach in our supplier's process that is unacceptable to Kellogg. We are taking the aggressive steps necessary to reassure you and regain your confidence before these products are reintroduced to the market”

Phone calls AND letters via snail-mail. Impressive. You can feel the process that letter had to pass through before mailing. Writing it, PR approval, legal approval and then the snail mail process. Let's set aside the human vs. corporate-voice argument for this post. Could the message have spread faster and farther with a social media approach? It is cool to note the laser focus of their message delivered by utilizing Costco's customer data.

Clearly, Costco has an advantage. They attach every purchase to a specific customer profile since the member's card is swiped at transaction time. Their data is obviously structured in a way that allows it to be searched and utilized. (It feels like a “duh” to write that out loud but I think we can all agree that many companies have a hard time accessing customer data into a usable format.)

It makes me wonder how many from this long list of potentially tainted manufactures failed to react. How many of these companies (by choice or lack of resources) did not make any effort to notify their customers and/or consumers? Could they have chosen an efficient and affordable approach via social media? Clif Bar, for example, posted their recall on their website. Good start. The post came to me via Facebook. A friend had posted the link on her feed.

I was impressed with how Costco and Kellogg's reacted together. We got the message. We got it late – but we got it. Obviously there are millions of consumers of these products that never touch social media in their day. It seems to me, however, that making an attempt to communicate through online social channels (when resources and data are not available to call and mail every customer who might be affected) has potential to deliver the message efficiently. Let's call it a case for why it makes sense for the companies on that list to have a proactive, engaged relationship with consumers 100% of the time. Had a strong social media relationship existed before the incident, passionate consumers would get the message immediately and they would likely be quick to help spread the word in a way that would put glee in the hearts of public relations professionals.