PR wisdom from a CEO named Steve

No, it's not Steve Jobs. 


I'm referring to Steve Ells, Chipotle's CEO, whose company has been having the worst weeks ever. Maybe the worst quarter. Unexplained illnesses linked to Chipotle's fresh-food menu have resulted in more than 120 customers taking sick, and the temporary closing of 44 restaurants in Boston and the Pacific Northwest.

By Aude (Own work), via Wikimedia Commons
To his credit -- and at some professional risk -- Ells took to the morning TV news circuit last week, and took full responsibility for these problems. On the TODAY show, the first words out of his mouth? "I'm sorry."

No royal "we're sorry." No PR aphorisms along the lines of,  "We regret..." He took responsibility. And explained in very plain English what the company's doing to sanitize the restaurants and make them safe.

And, even when asked about the impact of the bad news and closings on Chipotle's stock price, Ells stayed on message. He told Matt Lauer: "That's not what we're thinking about now. We're thinking about the safety and quality of our ingredients. (And) to put in place practices that will not enable this to happen again."

No outlandish promises. No placating messages to Chipotle's stockholders. Just plain speaking. A prompt, direct apology. No criticism of Chipotle's suppliers or employees. Just what they're doing to make sure this never happens again.

Hell, I'd work for this guy.

Ells' on-target, take-responsibility candor -- both at the start and finish of the TODAY Show interview -- should be a required viewing for anyone looking for crisis communications strategies. Chipotle's recovery from this issue won't be quick -- and may be costly -- but fast-food contamination history suggests the company will do better than Jack In The Box did in the wake of its foodborne illness crisis.



Popular posts from this blog

Questioning the New York (Times) Athletic Club

Image
The New York Times dropped the axe on its legendary sports department in early July. Sports reporting we read in the Times henceforth will originate with The Athletic, a younger (and perhaps more agile) sportswriting website purchased by the NYT Corp.  You'll find a good assessment of the move here .  As a Times subscriber, I have automatic access to any sports reporting it produces. I won't call it "free access," however, because my ever-increasing monthly rate for a three-day Times subscription surely will include a tithe to cover the Athletic.  But ditching the Times ' sports desk and dispersing its fine sports journalists and photographers to other NYT jobs? That's a loss. Here's why: Conflict of interest: The Athletic allows its staff to report on sports gambling, while some are paid contractors of the sportsbook companies. Is there a Pete Rose-style conflict here? I'd expect so. The Times allowed no double-dipping within its sports staff. The s
Read more

Readers get the (drive) shaft in motorsports coverage

Image
In mid-August, the U.S.'s premier auto racing sport will compete at a road racing course in Watkins Glen, NY. NASCAR's brutish Cup series cars will race in this rural community Aug. 20.  May 2023, Charlotte Motor Speedway. (c) DKassnoff, 2023. But, don't expect  The New York Times  to cover NASCAR before then. The newspaper's sports section -- now outsourced to The Athletic, its sportsbook subsidiary -- hasn't covered NASCAR since July 2. That's when NASCAR's drivers competed on the rain-soaked streets of Chicago. The Times provided no coverage of their July 30 race in Richmond, VA, or any NASCAR race since early July. The Times  has focused its motorsports coverage on Formula 1 racing. These are the expensive, open-wheeled, high performance racing teams once called Grand Prix. This class of racing is controlled by another media company: John Malone's Liberty Media, which purchased Formula 1 in 2017 and returned it to profitability. Visit the Times '
Read more

Your hand's already in my pocket

Image
I use an ad blocker, and probably you do, too. Every day, even on websites where I pay a monthly subscription fee, I see a pop-up that say: "We Notice You Are Using an Ad Blocker." And they ask me to turn it off. I don't. I'm already paying for that news website's reporting. Their hands are already in my pocket. And, truth is, I don't mind digital ads that are somewhat relevant to my tastes. Show me an ad for a guitar deal or Ford car parts, and I'll probably read it. Screen shot, unnamed Gannett publication, Sept. 2018 But I don't care about Patrick Swayze's secret son. Or what forgotten 1970s actress Loni Anderson looks like today. (I was more of a Howard Hesseman /Dr. Johnny Fever fan, anyway.) When newspapers relied on print ad revenue, I'd glance at those ads -- and sometimes, I'd bite -- because those ads were for local or regional merchants. They wanted to build a relationship with me.  They didn't try
Read more