Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Copy of Domino's Dilemma
Transcript of Copy of Domino's Dilemma
In 2009, Domino’s employees released a video to YouTube doing repulsive things to the ingredients they were using to assemble a pizza.
And their wings are from chicken which is fed by the chicken feed, which contains harmful chemical additive. When this news was reported, KFC and McDonald's were in crisis, and the turnover plummeted. Despite their CEO explained and apologized immediately, but the crisis was not lifted. The disgusting practices process had left a deep impression on consumers. When think of those disgusting pictures, consumers will give up buying the fast food. So, for consumers, they are more willing to believe what they see, not what they hear
in my opinion the CEO didn't respond immediately to that action and the message was not that harm to their employees. For the video to have been posted for 48 hours and the video was viewed 1 million times before it was taken down appears to be a very slow response.
in the short term, of course it will affect the company and many costumers will not be loyal to Domino's and in the long term it won't affect because people will forget what these video included.
Do you think customers who saw this video changed their attitude toward Domino's?
Between the video released by staff and CEO's apology and explanation, as consumers, they will choose to believe the content of the video. Between visual and auditory, we will be more likely to believe what we have seen. In the consumer's opinions, CEO's apology and explanation just aimed to defuse the crisis. However, what people concern about is the safety of food. It has occurred the similar case in China. KFC and McDonald's have been exposed to their tomato sauce added a harmful chemical additives.
Which source the rogue employees or the company's CEO would be more credible?
The video included vivid, disgusting images of the Domino's product. Was a " talking head" response by the CEO the most effective counter message? What type of message structure and/or content might the company have used instead to push back against this depiction?
“In about five minutes it’ll be sent out on delivery where somebody will be eating these, yes eating them, and little did they know that cheese was in his nose and that there was some lethal gas that ended up on their salami…that how we roll at Domino’s”
Domino’s took about 48 hours to respond to the video, which, by then, had over 1 million hits.
Their statement was an apology, also posted on YouTube, stating that although the employees claim the incident was hoax, the company is taking the situation seriously.
The company also used social media (Twitter) to address the issue, which most people believe was handled effectively. In a survey by Advertising Age, 64% of readers believed the company did the best they could, given the situation.
Customers were probably very grossed out by the video. However, any rational individual would recognize that this was a one-time incident, carried out by some immature employees and not by the company itself.
It seems the video did not hurt Domino’s too much. The incident occurred in 2009, and since then, Domino’s sales and revenues have only grown, from $1.4B to $1.8B in 2013.
All the same, the video could have slowed Domino’s growth. Just because their sales/revenues increased, does not mean the company wasn’t affected by the video.
After all, it was only two employees, Of course it caused bad affects to costumers but at the end the company acted to that action and they made sure it will not happen again.