Academic Communications for Business and Economics- myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theAcademic Communications for Business and Economics. Answer: Introduction In 2009, on Easter Sunday, two employees of Dominos , working in a North Carolina store, decided to post two funny videos of them while making sandwich. They created five videos using different ingredients. One of video showed that an individual was sticking mozzarella cheese up his nose and then used that dirty cheese by blowing the same on a sandwich. Other videos were about unhygienic uses during preparation and cooking and some stomach turning activities. They posted those videos in YouTube without consulting anyone and they did not think of any consequences after posting them in social networking site. They did not even think of reputation of the brand image of Dominos and did not realize that their funny activities can take a toll on the branding. 1 million people watched those videos. Those videos were viral and people criticized Dominos for adulteration in prime trusted brand. The videos were on YouTube for 2 days. Online bloggers and customers prepared several articles on th at adulteration. The top personality of Dominos then decided to tackle the situation going on social media through different social media platforms. He realized that videos were not false propaganda. Then he collaborated with the consumer watch dog GoodsAsYou.org. They identified the two employees as Kristy Hammond and Michael Setzer(Goldiner, 2009). Vice president McIntyre then instructed the company to respond all queries on Twitter. Dominos explained the situation, their stand, what is going on to rectify the situation and why the company didnt issue any official statement. By next day, President of Dominos, Patrick Doyle recorded an apology statement and it was uploaded on YouTube. A video was posted against two videos on social networks just to manage and to fight the situation on same platforms. This made people more responding and trustworthy as people watched adulteration on YouTube and believed the whole story. In the same way, people trusted the apology video and believed that it was not adulteration, rather a nonsense post. It was indeed a right decision as well as a guide for the corporate also(Gregory, 2009). The Domino's crisis is an eye opener for corporates. It shows that companies should have very strong social media presence which can handle any situation over cyber world. If companies do not have access to the social network in a day when youngsters are totally dependent on this platform, companies would definitely face real problems and become victims in social media platforms very easily. If a corporate does not have social media presence, it cannot manage any created damage in social media either. Domino's did not have very good social media presence. So it could not be active when the videos were posted on YouTube. It would take time for them to combat the crisis as they did not have any corporate strategies to manage risk factors of being victimized in social media platforms. People did not believe them unless an apology with explanation was uploaded by the company president. Dominos used the same platform to clarify the issue for damage control. People understood their views as it was more relevant to public feelings. Food adulteration took a toll on company reputation in initial stage, but later uploading a video had done the damage control about all allegations, which was proved to be effective tool to manage the crisis. In his dissertation titled How Social Media is Changing Crisis Communication: A Historical Analysis, Daniel A. Landau (2011) mentioned that an integrated strategy communicating in such a way that it incorporates both traditional and social media, which is important (p. 62). Previously corporate sectors had risk management associated with different platforms and they had ready documents to handle the situation. But now as social media is used to defame a company, it must have risk management plans to deal with all social media. When company sets up a presence on online, it becomes more public friendly with easy reach of people. People can now watch their favourite brand and can react more than before. Now they are directly related to the company affairs. Earlier it was hidden in some way and stakeholders could know about their company at the end. But now people can react and assess the company while watching online and can build positive or negative feelings. Social media response is very quick and within very less timeframe and it can be viral as well. So for negative news, before being viral, company should be able to manage that damage using the same media(Northrup, 2010). Compiling and synthesizing these damage control practices are not an easy task. This crisis and disaster are different in nature with unique feature, which are inherently dynamic, with unpredictable outcome (Bell, 2010, p. 151). As per Seeger (2006) these practices do not frame a plan, rather they are the principles and sometimes processes which are treated to be effective crisis communication response in terms of good planning (p. 242).There are different practices depending on the nature of situations. Coombs (2004) offers the Situational Crises Communication Theory to make strategies for different situational approach. It explains how a company can select a crisis response strategy. Normally crises cause awareness of stakeholders in a three way system(Young, 2012). If the crisis took place in past or it may happen in near future also If the situation can be controlled by the company If the crises are an output of internal or external process(Seeger, 2006). In Domino's case, this crisis was not happened in the past. So corporate is not ready to control the situation. Company reputation depends on ready strategies to handle that crisis and thus it can change minds of stakeholders. It can affect stakeholders in a very negative way. The crisis must be observed in a serious note Company should interpret all relevant information in details and connect them accurately with relevance Company has to choose a strategy which seems to be most fitted in this situation Company must implement the solution (Hale, Dulek, Hale, 2005). Normally a company should choose the strategy which is best suited in that situation by evaluating with four step process. Best practice can minimize the damage very quickly and efficiently. In this case, until the president came over with apologetic video, people did not listen and turned down every excuse which caused a big problem with the company. Dominos could upload video with those two staffs who posted those problematic videos. As they posted some videos which misled people that Dominos products are adulterated and there is no quality check or assurance process. Actually they did it for fun without realizing the seriousness of the issue. They even did not think that it would go to such serious extent and those crazy videos could turn so harmful for their company. If another video giving explanation from these two people was uploaded, people would start believing their innocence. People would definitely listen to them as they did such for first time. Generally people have positive impact if the miscreants admit their fault. Domino's could talk to them after identifying the duos. Then it could create a video mentioning that they posted the video without any serious thinking. They did not mean for degrading the product, rather it was completely a fun video(Thesmokinggun, 2009). The management of Dominos have realized that problem happened in social media and required to be handled and controlled via social network only. As there is a concern about the reputation of the company, to apprehend the correct views in front of stakeholders, the President came to control damage occurred by this loss. The president is the supreme authority and most weighed person in the organization. So people have a biased response for him. He is liable to the stakeholders. So only he could clear all confusions created by that wrongly posted video. He took apology which made people more comfortable. Public observed that the company is serious about their whereabouts with very particular step to make damage control urgently. People always have a trust system on this type of mentality and cannot close their eyes. People with consciousness about social media watched first video, made a conclusion of adulteration of food. After watching video of the president of that same company, peop le concluded that it is not a case of adulteration. Here people continued to trust on the brand as the highest authority has that trustworthiness. People started believing on their loving brand just like before(Williamson, 2010). Dominos could use traditional media like print media and electronic media. Dominos could give advertisement in all leading newspaper. They could publish an interview of the president of the company with those two staffs. Staffs could clarify their stand with relevance. They could admit in a press conference also to accept that they did this wrong doing unintentionally. They could tell people that the video was for pure fun. It was not for any adulteration. At the same time, the president could give an interview with apology. He might feel sorry with the people. Dominos could call a press meet with those two defaulters. All the traditional media got information about what happened there. Dominos could give advertisement in television also. Newspaper and television are two main mass media everywhere. Public could understand the stand point in this matter and decide accordingly. Dominos could use Twitter as well as Facebook also. Facebook could counter talk on that video as Facebook is used by huge number of people. It might be viral also with the statement that the video was not an adulterated one; rather it was a fun posting without considering any post consequences. In Twitter, Dominos was trolled by several people for this adulteration video. Company could clarify its position in twitter also. They could post video also in both the social networking sites. Dominos could target directly its stakeholders using Facebook and Twitter because a huge number of people have access on these two sites(Youtube, 2009). The first page principle is Tell the truth. This created a series of questions that who needs the truth and to what extent. In a situation like this, there are multiple truths which might be right to grab the attention of general customers, the company, the employees and the media. In this case, there were some online watchdog organizations. They helped the company by informing every details related to this case. The Designated authority of the company actually conveyed the message that an erratic and insensitive behaviour of two individuals who thought that everything was not so serious. Company gave the message that the two individuals do not represent the brand. They are part of the 100,000 people and cannot represent all staffs who work every day at Dominos Pizza all over the world (Flandez, 2009, Para. 6). Patrick Doyle wanted to interpret the truth that the incident done by them was not carrying anything wrong in any sense. They felt sorry for the whole episode and told people that the act was an unwilling mistake and they would do anything to regain the trust of consumers(Scholarcompanions, 2016). However, in the quest to honest, open and candid (Seeger, 2006) about the situation, Dominos must take all responsibility of its workers. But at the same time taking responsibility had the probability of legal hazards (ClaeysCauberghe, 2012), including freedom of speech and to some extent copyright claims also. In order to minimize the damage of the company, Dominos depended on two social sites (the watch dog organizations and local authorities) as they are credible sources and general people have faith on them. Being social media partner, they coordinated the situation as an act too idiotic and alerted more people (York, 2009, Para. 5), and appealed to people not to add further fuel to the matter (Vei et al., 2011). Initially Dominos took 24 long hours to respond as it was hesitating to respond and clarify their stand through social media. They never communicated in Twitter or any other social media as people are very fast and judgemental in social media. So people gathered negative views against Dominos. Veil, Buehner, and Palenchar (2011) pointed to the fact that the power to communicate remains with the way a company is behaving and narrating the entire situation. It never depends only on technology(Petkevi?ien?, 2014). A second challenge in telling the truth in the digital age reveals on other questions (Roberts, 2010) that an organisation needs virtual spaces in cyber world. They are using social media platforms, which are to be used for best practices. York (2009) brought this to our attention in her online article, asking why Dominos lagged behind on social media presence. The brand is on all the social media platforms like MySpace, Twitter, and YouTube and most visibly on Facebook with nearly 300,000 followers (Para. 18). There is a big difference, that presence in social media does not have value if not utilized in any serious situation. Company must integrate their marketing policy in social media otherwise competitors would never miss a chance to malign in any possible situation. On the very next day the video was uploaded in YouTube, and Dominos had posted a video on their website. But it had not got such implication as expected by the employees of the company. Dominos could not reach the audience through its own websites. According to McIntyre, prior to this event, they had a crisis management team with all probable social media plans. But they thought not to jump there without a solid strategy. They planned to play safe and straight. Most important thing is they were about to implement their new social media strategy just a week later. But as this situation came suddenly, which made them to jump in order to resolve the crisis and they did opposite to whatever they planned (Quoted in Jacques, 2009, Para. 10) After reviewing this, they researched a lot and found the truth that apology by the president actually changed the scene drastically in favour of the company. He further assured that this type of incident would never happen again (Levick, 2009, Para. 6). They changed their strategy then and decided to use the same interface targeting same audiences. They uploaded video to control the damage and to give explanations to the people and stakeholders, as well. They used to generate various contents and information from social networking to prove their willingness to act promptly with concern, passion and apology (Veil et al., 2011, p. 114). Bloomberg BusinessWeek appreciated their concern in such situation as they gave importance to rebuild their fame. Online portals said that Dominos has that ability to manage social media in crises situation (Levick, 2009, Para. 7)(Wordpress, 2016). Initially Domino's chose to upload video in their website. But it hardly had viewers. As they handled this type of situation first time; with this experiment, negative publicity was going on with the pranked video. If the video was being watched by more people, that would make it further viral. When Domino's realized the problem, it chalked out a fruitful plan to counter the video in the same platform, to win the battle. People started watching companys clarification of such a serious issue and started believing companys version as it was more accountable than any other. The video had viewership of one million within 24 hour. It was further increased in next day. Speed in social media plays a vital role and thus it is a major criterion to minimize risk factors using social media. Crisis management is a complex issue. But time is an important factor to handle situation like Dominos case. References: Goldiner, D., 2009. Domino's pizza workers face charges for YouTube video showing them making 'special' sandwiches. [Online] Available at: https://www.nydailynews.com/news/money/domino-pizza-workers-face-charges-youtube-video-showing-making-special-sandwiches-article-1.364515 [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Gregory, S., 2009. Domino's YouTube Crisis: 5 Ways to Fight Back. [Online] Available at: https://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1892389,00.html [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Northrup, L., 2010. Domino's Gross-Out Video Star Gets 24 Months Probation. [Online] Available at: https://consumerist.com/2010/03/10/dominos-gross-out-video-star-gets-24-months-probation/ [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Petkevi?ien?, M., 2014. Crisis Management to Avoid Damage for Corporate Reputation: The Case of Retail Chain Crisis in the Baltic Countries. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 156, pp.452-57. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042814060406. Scholarcompanions, 2016. Attached are three questions regarding dominoes crisis 2009. [Online] Available at: https://essay-discounts.scholarcompanions.com/public-relations/attached-are-three-questions-regarding-dominoes-crisis-2009/ [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Seeger, M., 2006. Best Practices in Crisis Communication: An Expert Panel Process. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 34(3), pp.232-44. Available at: https://www.vodppl.upm.edu.my/uploads/docs/Artikel%201%20-%20%20Best%20Practices.pdf. Thesmokinggun, 2009. Domino's Prankster A Sex Offender. [Online] Available at: https://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/dominos-prankster-sex-offender [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Vei, S., Buehner, T., Palenchar, M. l, 2011. A Work-in-Process Literature Review: Incorporating Social Media in Risk and Crisis Communication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 19(2), pp.110-22. Williamson, S.N., 2010. Domino's Pizza gross-out prankster pleads guilty. [Online] Available at: https://www.charlotteobserver.com/latest-news/article9048248.html [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Wordpress, 2016. Issues, Crisis and Reputation. [Online] Available at: https://whatifandwhynot.wordpress.com/issues-crisis-and-reputation/ [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Young, C., 2012. Fight Viral with Viral: A Case Study of Dominos Pizzas Crisis Communication Strategies. [Online] Available at: https://api.ning.com/files/vwzIt05Fr12G2dm3XgplkGFekSvdL5bn0h1xq1S0A6sfsN6g6uP-YPQnu4GLaaJe0ta8OP6ahNZvsFhAAkP0IADz-wJBVO4R/dominospizzacasestudy.pdf [Accessed 26 August 2017]. Youtube, 2009. Domino's Pizza Worker Kicked Out Of College 9-1-2009. [Online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHZXL93ERk0 [Accessed 26 August 2017].