Ham-Fisted Crisis Management: A Disaster at Boar’s Head
By Katherine Scotti, Senior Associate and Holly Lyne, Associate
Senior Associate
Associate
For months, Boar’s Head has been navigating a major product recall and related plant shutdown that have led to a USDA investigation, potential criminal charges, and class action lawsuits. The company’s communications have been lacking at many key inflection points during this tumultuous period, and the company’s leadership and ownership are now under significant scrutiny. Below, we share some key communications learnings from Boar’s Head’s existential crisis.
Communicate with empathy…
At the outset of the recall, Boar’s Head and USDA issued a technical press release, and the company separately issued a boilerplate media statement saying that it was “cooperating fully with government authorities and conducting [its] own investigation into this incident.” The company’s first social media post regarding the recall was a generic message on its corporate Instagram account, stating, “[a]t Boar’s Head, the health and safety of our customers is our top priority.”
It is likely that legal concerns and a lack of conclusive information resulted in the company’s barebones statements in the early days of the recall. Even so, Boar’s Head could have included more empathetic messaging in its statements without jeopardizing its legal strategy – expressing more concern and sympathy for those impacted without assigning blame or taking ownership.
The company also could have more effectively demonstrated that it was taking the situation seriously by disseminating its statements more proactively and frequently across social media and other channels. It’s important to leverage all relevant channels to reach your key stakeholders, even if you are still gathering information and planning next steps.
…and do so quickly
Beyond its minimal press release and anodyne day one media statement, Boar’s Head remained silent for four days after the start of the recall, and in doing so missed a crucial window of opportunity to communicate with key external stakeholders and shape the narrative.
It was not until a month after the recall’s initiation that the company released a more substantive communication via a product recall page on its website. While the letter hit many of the right messages – e.g., apologizing effectively for the tragic loss of life and impact to all customers, as well as outlining concrete actions the company is taking to improve food safety – it was too little, too late.
Organizations must balance legal and reputational considerations as they develop and execute communications strategies – the best of which enable the timely dissemination of empathetic and informed messaging that does not endanger the legal strategy.
Choose your spokesperson wisely… or, at least, have a spokesperson
Recent reporting has revealed that two families have been fighting over ownership of Boar’s Head for years and that the company’s leadership is unclear even to some of its C-level executives. Headlines such as “The Secretive Dynasty That Controls the Boar’s Head Brand” (New York Times) and “The Boar’s Head deli company is so secretive that a top executive didn’t know the name of the CEO” (Fortune) have left the public wondering who actually pulls the strings at Boar’s Head. So, when an otherwise well-crafted letter to customers regarding the crisis was signed by the company and not its CEO, it only added fuel to the speculation about the company’s leadership and left the letter feeling more hollow and corporate than sincere and driven by empathy.
Humans connect better with one another than they do with brands. Thus, electing a credible spokesperson – typically a CEO or other member of corporate leadership who takes ownership and responsibility – can be an effective mitigating factor against the negative reputational impacts of a crisis. In the absence of such a figure, it can be difficult for a company to earn back public trust.
Skeletons in your closet? Find them!
Near constant media coverage of Boar’s Head’s recall has put the company under a microscope. Now, its internal strife and lack of clear leadership are being exposed for all to see.
When one crisis occurs, others may follow, making a bad situation even worse. Companies experiencing a crisis will almost certainly be scrutinized more closely than before, reinforcing the importance of proactive risk management and crisis preparedness.
Where to go from here
Boar’s Head has its work cut out if it wants to earn back trust and repair its reputation. Below are a few steps the company could consider taking to help right the ship:
Boar’s Head should select a relatable spokesperson to take charge of the narrative with empathy, credibility, and transparency. Perhaps the company’s newly appointed Chief Food Safety Advisor could be appointed spokesperson for this crisis.
The company should find opportunities to demonstrate that its leadership is both defined and secure. Promoting leadership could be anything from a LinkedIn post to an interview in a trade publication. However, these efforts must be well-timed and take place after the company has followed through on executing food safety improvements and is no longer facing significant legal risk.
These steps alone are unlikely to completely resolve their current reputational challenges – but following up these initial efforts with a programmatic, multi-channel campaign that clearly and compellingly communicates how Boar’s Head has gone above and beyond to rectify the underlying issues that led to the crisis may give the company a fighting chance.