Why Governance Must Evolve with Consumer Expectations
Recalls are often treated as operational issues. In reality, they are enterprise risks.
Recall as a Multi-Dimensional Risk
A recall impacts:
- Consumer safety
- Brand trust
- Regulatory exposure
- Investor confidence
These are not operational metrics. They are board-level concerns.
Yet recall readiness is often fragmented across departments:
- QA owns detection
- Operations own execution
- Communications own messaging
What is missing is ownership.
Lessons from Cybersecurity
A decade ago, cybersecurity was seen as an IT issue. Today, it is a board mandate.
Recall readiness is following the same trajectory.
Both involve:
- Low-frequency, high-impact events
- Irreversible reputational damage
- Public scrutiny
Preparedness must exist before the incident.
Governance, Not Reaction
Boards should not ask: “Did we follow recall procedures?”
They should ask: “Are we capable of identifying and protecting affected consumers within hours?”
This requires:
- Clear accountability
- System-level investment
- Regular readiness assessment
Recall as a Trust Commitment
In the eyes of consumers, recall response reflects brand values.
Slow, vague responses erode confidence. Clear, personal action reinforces trust.
This is why recall readiness belongs in:
- Risk committees
- Governance discussions
- Long-term brand strategy
A New Expectation of Leadership
The brands that lead in the future will be those that treat recall readiness as part of corporate responsibility — not operational housekeeping.
Preparedness is leadership. And leadership starts at the top.
Mr. Cong Ung Thanh - Founder & CEO
