The Domino's Effect

By: Mollie Shannon

Domino’s is a trusted household name, but in 2009 its wholesome reputation was tainted by two of its employees.  One Sunday in April, business was slow in a North Carolina Domino’s store.  Two employees (Kristy Hammonds, 31 and Michael Setzer, 32) thought it would be humorous to video tape themselves doing unsanitary things to food.  The duo then decided to post the video to YouTube, and it went viral in no time.  This became a huge crisis for Domino’s and when executives learned of the issue  they were faced with many decisions.

“We got blindsided by two idiots with a video camera and an awful idea,” said a Domino’s spokesman, Tim McIntyre.

It took just one day after being aware of the video for the franchise owner to fire the two employees.

Kristy Hammonds and Michael Setzer makers of the inappropriate viral video

The hasty firing of the guilty employees is an example of Social Exchange Theory.  This theory states that:

• Costs and benefits are analyzed and used to predict behavior based on rewards/costs
• People factor in the consequences of their behavior before acting in order to keep costs low and rewards high
• Presumably all human relationships are formed by the use of subjective cost/benefit analysis

 In this example, Domino’s made the decision to quickly fire the guilty employees in order to keep costs low and rewards high.  The costs of firing the employees are minimal, and the cost of keeping them would have been very high.  In this case they lose two employees, who were clearly not desirable anyway. If they had kept them employed, it could have seemed as though Domino’s condoned their behavior or that the company was not concerned with their actions.  Domino’s immediate response team jumped into action after seeing the video, taking stills of the video and trying to identify the employees.  By 11pm on Monday, just one day later, they had identified the store and the employees.  Domino’s went further than firing the two employees and were quickly talking with the police about pressing charges.

“We want them charged with a crime because there’s visual evidence, and they claim on the video that they’re going to feed this to somebody,”  said McIntyre.  

Keeping in mind the fact that human relationships are formed through the evaluation of costs/benefits and considering that there is a relationship between Domino’s and their customers, they wanted to reassure people that the benefits of eating their pizza outweigh any costs.  Domino’s wanted to be sure to make their point, and  make it strong, that they do not tolerate these actions.

It is the job of a public relations professional to communicate with their public.  In this case Domino’s needed to communicate with America the company’s views and opinions on the viral video.  America wanted to know how Domino’s was going to handle the crisis, and the employees involved.  Domino’s took a stand, and wanted to make it clear to its public that this video was not an accurate representation of their company.  By firing and pressing charges against the employees it shows that Domino’s does not tolerate behavior like this.

“I kept making the point that Domino’s did not do this. This was done to us.”-Mcintyre

References:

Clifford, S. (2009, April 15). Video prank at domino’s taints brand. The New York Times. Retrieved          from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/business/media/16dominos.html?_r=1&

Jacques, A. (2009, August 17). Domino’s delivers during crisis: The company’s step-by-step response after a vulgar video goes viral. The Strategist. Retrieved from    http://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/TheStrategist/Articles/view/8226/102/Domino_s_delivers_during_cris  is_The_company_s_step

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/16/dominos-disgusting-video-_n_187628.html