A negative social media exposure by way of a video threatened the image of Domino's Pizza International. The video, which became viral online, shows two of Domino's employees tampering and playing with customers' food orders. The management of Domino's Pizza must come up with a plan to negate the viral video and to protect its reputation before everything else comes to worst.
Jana Seijts; Paul Bigus
Harvard Business Review (W11159-PDF-ENG)
September 09, 2011
Case questions answered:
- Do you think customers who saw this video changed their attitude toward Domino’s Pizza?
- 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?
Not the questions you were looking for? Submit your questions & get answers.
Case answers for Domino's Pizza
1. Do you think customers who saw this video changed their attitude toward Domino’s Pizza?
According to the Domino’s Pizza case study, two employees of a North Carolina Domino’s store posted a YouTube video of themselves in the kitchen as they performed disgusting practices with pizza ingredients.
In my opinion, I think customers who saw the video of adulterated food on YouTube, probably would change their attitude and perception towards Domino’s Pizza. The video was viewed nearly 1 million times and posted on various outside blogs and message boards.
The customers were probably very grossed out by the acts depicted in the video. Meanwhile, there were also multiple online conversations online related to the video incident on blogs and social media like Twitter. Once a video like this is posted on YouTube the company’s good name will be tainted. The company reputation also was affected by the video.
In addition, the brand name “Domino’s” was even under attack. This is all because the video became famous and was viewed by everyone. From then on, every time a customer wants to purchase Domino’s Pizza, they remember this incident. This would be the trend for months.
Because of this, the customers will not want to purchase pizza from Domino’s anymore. Domino’s Pizza would lose their biggest target market who are men watching big games in groups and eat pizza while watching.
According to a research study, 65% of respondents, say they would not visit Domino’s Pizza after seeing the video. Once these twenty to forty-year-old middle-income men watch the video clip posted on YouTube, they will rather order their pizza from other pizza stores such as Pizza Hut and Papa John’s.
The psychographics of these men has to do with good-tasting pizza that is affordable and of decent quality. When employees are performing disgusting practices on the ingredients that are supposed to be put on a pizza, Domino’s regular and would-be customers will not purchase food from there. Other than that, the loyal customers also were losing faith and trust in the brand quickly. They may shift to another brand. Once the trust is gone, the consumer’s feedback is mostly negative.
Word-of-mouth advertising would also fail as it would also probably be all negative. It can influence other consumer’s minds, attitudes, and decisions. 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.
2. Which source—the rogue employees or the company’s CEO—would be more credible?
Based on the video released by the staff and the CEO’s apology and explanation, as consumers, they will choose to believe the…
Unlock Case Solution Now!
Get instant access to this case solution with a simple, one-time payment ($24.90).
