本站原创Fonterra， a well-known dairy company in New Zealand， is the largest diary exporter in the world. However， such a giant was trapped in a great trouble from August 3， when it confessed that some of its concentrated whey protein powder might be contaminated by the botulinus according to its investigation in March 2013. A factory located in the central part of the northern island of New Zealand is to be blamed for the contamination. Three batches of concentrated whey protein powder produced by this factory in May 2012 he got positive results in the test of bacteria.
Fonterra’s self-confession got some understanding and forgiveness from outsiders， but the five-month delay between finding the problem and reporting it has caused a lot of critici and anger as well. Fonterra’s CEO Theo Spierings explained that it needed to take a while for the New Zealand government to find what bacteria has contaminated these whey powders. But consumers， especially Chinese consumers， who had not yet recovered from the melamine-contaminated milk powder in 2008， were shocked and heartbroken by the news that even “foreign brands of milk powder are not trustworthy”.
On August 5， one day after Fonterra’s self-confession of contaminated milk powder， the Chinese government issued a temporary ban of diary products from New Zealand， culminating this botulinus-caused crisis.
The Chain Reaction
The crisis did not stop at Fonterra or New Zealand. As time went by， the list of enterprises involved in this crisis kept growing longer， because many of them used the milk powder from Fonterra to make their own products.
On the first day of the confession of contaminated milk powder， the possible partners involved in this scandal were also revealed. Dumex， Coco Cola and Wahaha were the first three enterprises that were said to he used contaminated milk powder from Fonterra.
Dumex immediately admitted that it had used the contaminated milk powder and has decided to recall some possibly contaminated products from the market. Coca Cola also ensured the customers by announcing that only a all part of Fonterra’s milk powder was used to produce its Minute Maid Milk， and the process involved the hightemperature sterilization which could kill all bacteria. Wahaha also released the report containing the product names and batch number that might be contaminated by Fonterra’s milk powder.
源于：毕业设计论文模板www.shuoshilunwen.com
Days he passed after the first confession and more and more enterprises found that their names are connected with Fonterra. Karicare， the bestselling milk powder in New Zealand and a very popular brand in China， cannot escape the suspect. The Ministry for PrimaryIndustries of New Zealand has already ordered recalling two batches of Karicare’s products and informed China， Australia， Thailand， India and other countries of the possible contamination.The other company is Abbott. Its involvement raised more concerns from the consumers， especially the Chinese， because it is Abbott’s branch in Shanghai getting involved in this crisis and Abbott infant milk powder is very popular among Chinese young mothers. What’s worse is that Fonterra’s CEO Theo Spierings once mentioned that a company requested Fonterra to veil its name when talking about the botulinus incident.
“There is a company wanting us not to speak out its name. But we are keeping the contact with them. Presently all products he been found and relevant measures he been taken， through which efficient control has been achieved，” said Spierings.
The Embassy of New Zealand in China referred this company to Abbott， but Abbott said that it neither used the contaminated milk powder from Fonterra and nor asked Fonterra to keep its name undercover. Abbott also promised to recall the products that might be contaminated.
Fonterra’s trouble for itself is more than that. Soon after the botulinus scandal， Sri Lanka said that it had detected melamine in the milk powder from Fonterra. The New Zealand soon came out and denied the accusation. However， the sacred consumers in the world did not seem to buy it. Sri Lanka， Russia， Kazakhstan， Brunei and so on had joined in the rank of China to ban or limit the importation of milk powder from Fonterra or even New Zealand.
The Insincere Apologies？
Such a chain reaction has doubtlessly greatly damaged the profile of Fonterra and the entire dairy industry of New Zealand. In order to se the already broken image， both Fonterra and the government of New Zealand all came out to show their apologies.
Fonterra， the main defendant in this incident， reacted very quickly. Three days after the revelation of the contaminated milk powder， itsCEO Theo Spierings flew to Beijing and held a press conference， in which he “sincerely apologized to Chinese consumers for letting the contaminated milk powder into China”. He said that the consumers of food for infants and young children he the right to worry about consumer safe and healthy food. He also said that Fonterra was working t
源于：论文格式字体www.shuoshilunwen.com
he Chinese government and communicating with Chinese clients to inform people of the progress of solving the problem. After Spierings， New Zealand’s Prime Minister John Key also said that he would take the opportunity of visiting China late this year to apologize to Chinese consumers personally for Fonterra’s contaminated milk powder. Then， Bruce Wills， President of New Zealand Farmers Cooperative Association， came out to apologize to Chinese consumers on behalf of the dairy farms that supply raw milk to Fonterra.Someone even paid for this mistake with a higher price. Gary Romano， Director of Fonterra’s Dairy Department， resigned from his post. Though Fonterra did not explain why he left， it is widely believed that his resignation is caused by none other than the incident. Even though he might be a goat for the entire incident， but someone had to stand up and pay for the mistake painfully. Romano， the direct manager of milk powder， was unfortunately the best choice. His resignation also showed Fonterra’s attitude towards this incident.
However， even though some many famed figures he come out and apologized， Chinese consumers were not so easy to be appeased. Many people think that Fonterra’s apologies were not sincere.
Prof. Gu Mingxiao from Fudan University said that the apologies of Fonterra were mostly based on diplomatic phrases. It seems to be sincere， but far from being meaningful.
“The diplomacy in the crisis is just a method instead of an objective. Fonterra was far from showing any sincerity and accomplishment that match its size. It made the mistakes that many multinationals he made in China. Such a way of dealing with crisis is inapplicable，”Prof. Gu said.
What’s making Chinese disappointed and think that Fonterra was not sincere in its apologies is that it neither spoke of repayment nor ge the relevant schedule in about half a month after the incident. Previously， Kelvin Wickham， President of Fonterra Greater China and India， said that the “source of contamination” had been found and the repayment would be initiated soon. But Fonterra China denied this saying.
In experts’ opinions， it is hard to define payment standards and relevant work. “First， there are no standards in the world about the botulinus，” says Song Liang， senior dairy analyst from Distribution Productivity Promotion Center of China Commerce. Wang Dingmian， anexpert in the dairy industry， says that Fonterra’s repayment standards for its clients can be determined by the contracts signed between the two parties. But it is hard for ordinary consumers to ask for repayment from Fonterra， because “some consumers might lose the vouches or receipts of milk powder they bought， the only refer
源于：论文要求www.shuoshilunwen.com
ence to their loss”.The Self-exposure
Apart from being thought to be insincere in the apology and unable to give out repayment plans timely， Fonterra’s method of dealing with this crisis is generally thought to be OK.
First of all， it was Fonterra its
源于：论文大纲www.shuoshilunwen.com
elf to reveal the problems to the public. When it reported this incident to the New Zealand government， it also informed the eight clients that might be involved in this incident and provided its support for their emergent investigation.“Fonterra considered this incident to be its own responsibility from the very beginning and did not try to hide the problem，” said Chen Lianfang， a dairy analyst from China Agriculture Consultant. “The senior executives tackled this problem with the attitude of being responsible for clients and consumers. The New Zealand government also took actions actively. Their methods are worth learning for Chinese enterprises and administrative departments.”
It is also worthwhile to mention that the traceability system of New Zealand’s dairy industry enabled the company to find where the contaminated milk powder came from and where it went. So they could report the problems to everyone as quickly as possible. Even though the incident has involved many people and companies， no panic was seen in the consumers of New Zealand.
Meanwhile， inone year and a half after the contaminated milk powder was sold， no clients of Fonterra he ever found the botulinus – or at least he reported it – until Fonterra revealed its own scars.
Actually， it was not the first time that Fonterra revealed its scars by itself. Early in 2008， when the melamine incident happened， Fonterra’s name was seen. The chief criminal of this worldshaking incident， Sanlu， was a close partner with Fonterra in China. Fonterra even spent RMB 864 million becoming the second largest shareholder of this Chinese company in 2005.
In September 2008， Fonterra reported the information about Sanlu’s mixture of melamine with the milk powder to the government of New Zealand regardless of the objections of Sanlu and local government. Then the New Zealand government warned the Chinese government about this， which finally brought this scary incident out of the water. Fonterra suffered from great losses after the bankruptcy of Sanlu and several of its milk powder brandswere forced out of China because they were run by Sanlu.
At the beginning of this year， Fonterra reported about the dicyandiamide found in its products. The tiny proportion of dicyandiamide is caused by the dicyandiamide which is placed in the soil to reduce the impact of cows’excrement. No countries he put the dicyandiamide into the range of their tests， but Fonterra still reported that and the New Zealand forbad the dairy companies in New Zealand to do this again. [3]In Chen Lianfang’s opinion， “The most important reason for Fonterra to become the largest exporter of milk powder is that it has constant requirements for the quality of its products.”She believes that the shockwe of the botulinus incident will be appeased soon and will not he big influence over the foreign brands of milk powder in China.
The Spring for Domestic Brands？
Even though Chen Lianfang believes that Fonterra will soon get out of the crisis， at least in August， Chinese consumers were scared and the trust in Fonterra seemed to be down.
Chinese media kept saying that it is a good opportunity for domestic dairy enterprises to regain the market， which has been lost after the melamine scandal in 2008. Is that true？
“The problems of China’s domestic dairy companies he been a long and incremental thing. Many enterprises did what are unforgivable and unforgettable. It is not easy to erase consumers’distrust for these domestic brands，” said Wang Dingmian.
Then， what do Chinese consumers think about the contaminated milk powder of Fonterra？
“They are really scared and refused to buy Fonterra’s products，” said a dealer in a supermarket. “Now they turnedto the milk powder made in Europe. Those brands from Germany， UK， Holland and Ireland become extremely popular then.”
The online shops that help Chinese mothers buy branded milk powder from European Union became extremely busy as of August. “The shelves with milk powder in some supermarkets in Germany and Holland are almost emptied. Our sales increased more than 100% in the first week after Fonterra’s incident， even though the price was 8% higher than before，” says a dealer.
From this， we can see that domestic dairy companies are far from the beneficiary of Fonterra’s fall. They still he a long way to reclaim the confidence of consumers. As two you
摘自：毕业论文格式模板www.shuoshilunwen.com
ng mothers said： “Fonterra might bring the botulinus t into milk powder out of carelessness， but Chinese dairy companies added the melamine into milk powder intentionally despite knowing the danger.”For Fonterra， which had survived the melamine incident in China， would never give up the Chinese market， which has been its largest overseas market. Both Chen Lianfang and Wang Dingmian， as well as many consumers， believe that it could resume its image in China as long as it could show more sincerity and tackle the repayment well. [3][4]