The Boston Globe has an article this morning on the efforts being taken by pet food brands to restore trust in their products following the pet food recall that’s involved hundreds of varieties and dozens of brands:
WASHINGTON — Pet food makers whose products have been pulled from store shelves face one of their toughest challenges ever: regaining customers’ trust.
The nation’s largest pet food recall began simply, in mid-March , with a single manufacturer’s products. Since then, it has ricocheted across the nation, with at least 154 brands being pulled.
As a result, pet food sales have slumped. For example, semi moist cat food sales plummeted by 31.2 percent in the four weeks ended March 25 , compared with the month prior, according to Information Resources Inc. , whose sales figures do not include Wal-Mart Stores.
The article goes on to focus on the experience of SmartPak. Here’s a quote from SmarkPak’s CEO:
“I think we’re going to come out of this fine because we took the approach we did,” said Paal Gisholt , SmartPak president . “Handling the initial crisis in a very open way was a good first step. But people are counting on us to make good on our promises to continue to do everything in our power to make sure their dogs get safe, healthy dog food in the right amount.”
While Mr. Gisholt, looking at the entire mess solely from the vantage point of his own company, may see his own company’s actions as “very open”, I’m not sure that consumers see it that way.
Fair or not I think that most consumers see a pet food recall that can be seen to have begun as long as five months ago (with the first customer complaints made to Menu Foods’s hotline) and, as a consequence of the incremental approach taken to date, has resulted in more deaths of pets than might have been otherwise. Some pet owners have been compelled to change foods multiple times as additional brands and varieties have been recalled in fear for the lives and health of their pets.
See for comparison Johnson & Johnson’s handling of the Tylenol product tampering case from 25 years ago. Have pet food brands and manufacturers met that standard?
I’d like to hear more from the “pet food makers”. I’ve tried communicating with some of them without a great deal of success. What’s their side of the story? What do they think should happen?
As the cited article goes on to point out pet food brands and manufacturers are now taking steps to identify the sources of the ingredients the use or specify. Is this too little, too late? Should they have acted in anticipation rather than in reaction? Why or why not?
In a very real sense the brands and manufacturers are as much victims as the pet owners in this affair but pet owners, rightly or wrongly, see the brands and manufacturers as having more control and, consequently, having more responsibility. What do you think?
How can pet food sales slump? The inference is that pets are being fed less or are being feed non-pet foods?
What gives?
I interpreted that as meaning two things, shaun. First, that sales of the companies that have been affected by the recall are down and, second, that more people are turning to cooking for their pets (not entirely a positive development).
The way Johnson & Johnson handled the Tylenol case is a great example of how this could have – and should have – been handled. Had these products been meant for human consumption the manufacturer’s response would probably have been markedly different; what appeared to be a rather lethargic reaction to a health crisis would likely have been swift, organized, and open. To be fair the manufacturers were acting as they were legally required, but whether their response was ethical could be questioned. A very important point the manufacturer apparently overlooked: the deaths were not human, but the consumers were.
Johnson & Johnson restored faith in their company and in their product. At this point questions still remain about Menu Foods’ ability to control the quality of any of their products, and the firm has not adequately publicly demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement and safety. We have to ask ourselves if we would eat food manufactured under such conditions, and if the answer is no, how could we in good conscience feed that food to our pets?
Rob, since you drew the conclusion I was pointing towards without my telling you what conclusion to draw, it looks like I’ve been doing my job.