Need to Know

• The first 24 hours of a potential recall are a communications challenge as well as an operational and regulatory one
• Organizations should clearly distinguish confirmed information from preliminary or uncertain information as a recall situation evolves
• Communications should connect new information to what has changed, who needs to know, and which decisions or actions it affects
• Recall preparedness should establish in advance who maintains current information, who has decision-making authority, and how urgent updates will move through the organization

And the clock is running.

The first 24 hours of a potential recall are often viewed primarily as an operational and regulatory challenge. They are also a communications challenge, although not necessarily for the reasons we typically assume.

Before an organization can communicate effectively with employees, customers, business partners, regulators, or the public, it first has to create clarity internally. Important questions that must be answered include: What do we know? What don't we know? What has changed? Who needs to know what, and when? And what decisions are people trying to make with that information?

Strategic communications can help an organization answer those questions. For large manufacturers with established crisis teams, that role may be distributed across multiple people. For small and mid-sized manufacturers, it may fall to one or two people who already handle multiple responsibilities. Either way, the objective is the same: establishing enough shared understanding to make informed decisions as the situation evolves.

What Do We Know, and What Don't We Know?

During the first hours of a potential recall, information does not arrive neatly packaged and labeled as confirmed, preliminary, or uncertain. A test result may require additional evaluation. The scope of affected product may still be under review. Distribution information may be incomplete. A regulator may be requesting information the organization is still gathering. Different teams may hold different pieces of the picture.

One of the most useful things communications can do at this stage is help maintain a clear distinction between what is known and what is still being determined. That distinction matters internally as much as it does externally. Preliminary information can quickly become accepted as fact as it moves through an organization. An assumption made in one meeting may be repeated in another without its original context. A detail that was accurate at 9 A.M. may no longer reflect the organization's understanding at 3 P.M.

A simple discipline can help: maintain a common understanding of what is known, what remains uncertain, and what is being done to fill the gaps. At each meaningful update, ask: What do we know? How do we know it? What remains uncertain? What are we doing to resolve that uncertainty? Has anything changed that affects a decision already made or still under consideration?

The objective is not to eliminate uncertainty before decisions are made. In a rapidly evolving situation, that may not be possible. The objective is to make sure people understand where uncertainty exists so they can account for it in the decisions they make.

What Has Changed?

In a potential recall, the information available at the beginning of the day may look very different several hours later. New test results may become available. Additional distribution records may change the potential scope. Conversations with regulators may raise new questions. Information from suppliers or customers may alter the organization's understanding of the issue.

Sharing new information is important. Making clear what has changed and what that change means is equally important. For example, an initial assessment may indicate that a labeling problem is limited to one production lot. If additional records later expand the potential scope, simply circulating the new information may not be enough. People who made decisions based on the original scope need to understand that the premise has changed and determine whether those decisions need to be revisited.

This is where communications can help connect updates rather than simply distribute them. What did we understand before? What do we understand now? Why did that understanding change? Does the change affect decisions already made or create new ones?

Maintaining communications continuity helps an organization adapt as the facts evolve without allowing an earlier understanding of the situation to continue driving current decisions (Figure 1).

Who Needs to Know What, and When?

Not everyone needs every piece of information at the same time.

Senior leadership may need information to make an immediate business decision. Operations may need enough detail to identify affected product. Employees may need to know whether their work is changing. Retailers or distributors may need specific product information. Customers may need clear instructions about what to do with a product they purchased.

The question is not simply, Who is our audience? It is, What does this person need to know now, and why?

Not every update creates the same information need. A change in the potential scope of affected product may require immediate attention from operations and leadership, while a distributor may need specific product identifiers once the scope is confirmed. The objective is not to communicate everything to everyone. It is to match information to the people who need it, when they need it, and to the decision or action it supports.

For small and mid-sized manufacturers, this distinction can be especially important. Effective communications in those first hours does not require producing more content or communicating through more channels. It requires identifying where information is needed most and making sure it gets there.

What Decisions are People Trying to Make?

Information has value because people use it to make decisions. During a potential recall, those decisions are happening throughout the organization. Leadership may be considering business implications. Food safety and regulatory teams may be determining what additional actions are necessary. Operations may need to make production or distribution decisions. Employees may need to change what they are doing. Eventually, people outside the organization will have decisions to make, as well.

Thinking about communications through the lens of those decisions changes the question from What do we need to tell people? to What do people need to understand to determine what to do next?

That shift can help communicators identify missing information, anticipate questions, and recognize where additional context may be needed. It also gives strategic communications a distinct role alongside food safety, regulatory, legal, operations, and leadership. Communications does not make those functions' decisions for them. It can help identify when a decision-maker is missing information, when two functions are working from different understandings of the same facts, or when a decision made in one part of the organization creates an information need somewhere else.

That is decision support, not simply message development.

The First 24 Hours Start Before the Recall

The first 24 hours of a potential recall are not the ideal time to figure out how information moves through an organization. Preparation can begin long before an issue emerges.

Questions that should be answered in advance include: Who needs to be involved when a potential food safety issue arises? Who has decision-making authority? Where and how will information be collected? How will updates be shared? Who is responsible for communicating with employees, customers, regulators, business partners, or others who may need information?

For a small or mid-sized manufacturer, preparedness does not have to mean a large crisis team or an extensive communications plan. At a minimum, it means knowing who will convene the response, who will maintain the current understanding of the facts, who has authority to make key decisions, and how urgent information will move among the people involved. 

Those roles may be filled by only a handful of people. What matters is that they are understood before an issue arises. It also means making sure someone is prepared to keep asking five questions as the situation evolves:

• What do we know?
• What don't we know?
• What has changed?
• Who needs to know what, and when?
• What decisions are people trying to make?

Those questions will not determine whether a product should be recalled, nor will they replace the expertise of food safety, regulatory, legal, or operational teams. However, they can help an organization make better use of the information those teams are generating.

That is the role strategic communications can play during the first 24 hours: creating clarity around rapidly evolving information so people can understand what is happening, what it means, and what they need to do next.

A recall response depends on many kinds of expertise. Strategic communications is one of them. Its value begins well before an organization is ready to communicate publicly, by helping the people inside the organization understand the information in front of them and use it to make informed decisions.