CASE STUDY No. 9645 

KEY WORDS RETAIL PACKAGING, LIQUIDS

Warner-Lambert Company
182 Tabor Road
Morris Plains, NJ 07950

Contact: James C. Lime, Vice President Environmental Affairs and Compliance
Tel: 201-540-4355. Fax: 201-540-5316. 

Summary

Switching from a glass bottle with corrugated and paper overwrap to a plastic bottle without additional packaging, Warner-Lambert eliminates 20 million pounds per year of packaging for the Listerine mouthwash product, a 52% weight reduction.

Action

Warner Lambert manufactures health care and consumer products. Listerine, which has been produced since 1906, is regulated by the federal Food and Drug Administration because of its claim to kill bacteria leading to gingivitis and plaque.

Consumer complaints to WL about unnecessary packaging of Listerine led the company to examine the feasibility of making a change. The process required a sizeable capital investment, complex coordination among departments, long lead time, and patience. All the affected parties were involved: manufacturing, marketing, legal, purchasing, engineering, environmental, packaging technology.

Among various factors considered were the following:

  1. Redesign of the bottle in such a way as to deter competitors from copying the distinctive look of Listerine.
  2. Development of a child-resistant cap closure that's easy for others to remove.
  3. Shelf-life testing.
  4. Drop-test proof.
  5. Consumer acceptance--no drop in marketshare.
  6. Safety. The old container presented the messy risk of a glass bottle filled with an alcohol containing liquid. What were the risks associated with a new container?
  7. New machinery. A single plant produces Listerine for the entire market.
  8. Distribution, transportation--savings expected to accrue from reduced product weight.
  9. Overall cost saving/payback.

The new Listerine bottle is manufactured of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and has been well accepted by consumers, the company reports. Interestingly, WL tried to change ots packaging this way in the early 1970s but was rebuffed. Focus group research at the time found that consumers felt such a packaging change signaled a cheapening of the product. Today, such waste prevention initiatives are applauded as evidence of a company's environmental sensitivity.

Payback

WL will not reveal the overall cost of this packaging change. But the company is pleased with the change and expects to recover its investment in full. As one company official observes, a 52% reduction in packaging weight has to be significant.

WL has considered packaging changes for other products, with mixed results. For example, it was found that Caladryl, an anti-itch lotion for poison ivy, could not be packaged in PET (the most recycled plastic) because the lotion interacted with the plastic. Hence the bottle remained in a polypropylene container.

 

            IIR Homepage