Starbucks: A Diversity Audit - Essay Example

?STARBUCKS Starbucks: A Diversity Audit I. Introduction: Why Starbucks Was Chosen and How the Audit Was Conducted Starbucks encourages progress. It was chosen because it’s a Fortune 500 company that has a numerous amount of perks for its workers, including health insurance for workers that contribute twenty to forty hours of work per week. Not only that, but Starbucks has a “partners” system that encourages camaraderie and employee benefits. These benefits highlight the bonuses of being a worker at Starbucks, including having access to “partner numbers,” which are numbers that allow the worker to gain a certain percentage off on merchandise and coffee from Starbucks when they buy such things. There is a hierarchical system of management, with managers being at the top, and partners being the baristas who basically work at shifts during the day in order to run the stores. Usually baristas only make an average of $8 per hour if that, not including tips—before taxes. Another reason why Starbucks was chosen as an object of investigation was because of its streamlined marketing plan which has worked effectively in the U.S. and several foreign countries. According to Simon (2009), “The same perfectly calibrated predictability…adds value to Starbucks products and lures millions of people to its stores everyday” (pp. 58). Starbucks is a multi-national corporation that has become a multi-million dollar company within such a short time, that it is definitely a leitmotif for potential future companies that want to follow in its footsteps of success. Starbucks is definitely one company that should be watched, and that is why it was chosen to be analyzed. Starbucks Coffee Company was destined for greatness. According to Collins (2007), when Howard Schultz decided to open two Starbucks cafes right across the street from each other, he never imagined that one would draw a business crowd while the other would attract hipsters (pp. 2). Obviously, Starbucks attracts a certain segment of the population that relies on specialty coffees and teas as a part of its everyday existence. Five participants were audited in the survey—including one hiring (HR) manager and one former employee were interviewed in-depth; their actual first names will be given later in the piece. II. Investigation 1. Upon observing the physical setting, it was noticed that the arrangement of this particular Starbucks in Chicago was very neatly arranged. The initial impression was that the environment was a bit staid. People didn’t really make much eye contact unless asked to do something. The physical layout seems to place a distance between the baristas, the managers, and the customers. Everyone has their “area,” creating a very territorial attitude as one walks in. Of course, this is not true of all divisions or even facilities. It really does depend upon where one is—how convenient the layout is, et cetera. Starbucks in New York are totally much more accessible. 2. Upon collecting and analyzing written materials, such as annual reports, newsletters, news releases, and manuals, this information realized the strictness within the company. The baristas are required to begin at the beginning of their work careers to taste at least all of the coffees they can, starting with time at training. On their “Career Diversity” (2012) section of their website, the seven people pictured are all African-American (pgh. 1). The company seems to basically be saying that by incorporating ‘diversity,’ that means that they hire African-Americans an overwhelming majority of the time, or perhaps even are a pro-Black company. The company says about itself on its “Starbucks Supplier Diversity Program” (2012), it claims that it is “…actively seeking out women- and minority-owned businesses to purchase from, we help build prosperous communities in diverse neighborhoods” (pgh. 1). The type of culture that the written materials reflect is that it is committed to minorities—a.k.a. people of color—and women. There isn’t diversity encouraged at all levels of the materials—some seem quite biased towards one special interest group than another. 3. Reception area procedures seem to be formal. The atmosphere is relaxed, however—lots of individuality is present in the barista/employee area. It’s a rather plain area. The receptionist seems a bit moody, and doesn’t immediately acknowledge visitors. When they do come into the store, it’s standard procedure to greet the visitors and ask what they would like. Visitors wait, but become impatient. Diversity is present, but that doesn’t mean it is a harmonious mix. Some people obviously don’t get along too well, and are just there for a paycheck. 4. The employees were asked questions about the company. Of the two employees that were interviewed in-depth, the hiring manager seemed to know much more about the company than the employee. Truly, both seemed blinded to the fact that their products were not fair-trade coffee in any sense of the word, but they were both convinced about this myth. Both employees agreed that lots of hard work by the baristas has made the company successful. The main former employee interviewee and the hiring manager don’t really agree about what company values are most important. Tanya, the hiring manager, would talk about the coffee (T. File, personal communication, August 11, 2012). Helena, the former employee, talked about how crucial the baristas were to the company, valuing people more than a product (H. Berry, personal communication, August 11, 2012). The kind of people that work there seem to be all kinds of shady people with tattoos, multiple piercings, and unusually-colored hair. Those are also the same people who seem to get ahead. Role models in the company, people seen as leaders, usually have traits that make them stand out or are somewhat unusual. Women and minorities can succeed, but they really have to have personality to successfully move up the corporate ladder. When asked what it’s like to work there, the former employee speaks about the company negatively. If one wants to get things done, usually it’s always going to be the baristas’ job to make everything run smoothly. It’s a bureaucracy to some extent, where managers are on salary and they get paid the same whether they swipe in for 36 hours or 50 to 60 hours. Baristas have a weird sort of unity because they’re all stuck in the same dead-end job, the former employee mentioned. It’s a sort of an employee subculture with a camaraderie. 5. People really spend their time either goofing off a lot, or doing their respective jobs as baristas or managers. 6. Regarding career paths, the people who get ahead are the ones in management. Baristas have a high rate of turnover. Regional managers are top people until they get too old, and then they are replaced, usually with people from diverse groups, which is probably code for someone younger and hipper. To get promoted, people have to prove their mettle for being a barista for a significant period of time (at least one year or more). The company, according to the former employee, rewards backbiting and sniping amongst partner members. They also value loyalty and being a good team player versus seniority and competency. 7. People usually stay in jobs at the company for a year or less or more; hiring management usually stays for anywhere from two to three or more years. 8. People generally talk about the service, and right now Starbucks is partnering up with Square.com in order to revolutionize the way people order for coffee at the national change. Team meetings, memos, and reports generally emphasize what is going on within the ranks of the baristas. It focuses on peoples’ shortcomings for the most part, and downplays the team partners’ strengths and good things that they did. III. Review and Analysis: Strengths, Weaknesses, Conformism, and Flexibility 1. Key points, patterns, and themes that evolved don’t revolve around customers, but rather what was always going on within the store as far as the arguments between managers and baristas or between employees themselves. There is definitely political infighting, and individual initiative is punished. 2. Starbucks puts the focus on placating the boss, looking good, and getting one up on the people around them. They don’t care too much about budgets, financial analysis, or sales quotas. 3. The company’s short-term focus is to prey on the fact that people need jobs, partnered with high turnover among employees. 4. Declining morale is obvious, especially among the women and minorities who are trying to make inroads for themselves at the company. 5. Starbucks is a weak culture; it promotes emotional outbursts in the workplace and getting angry with others (bosses and employees). There is no respect in the work environment, and the former baristas interviewed all felt similarly. 6. There is a lot of fragmentation going on within the company and alliances among subcultures, including jokes, personality clashes, exclusive behaviors, resentments, lack of goals within the company and supporting the company subculture versus doing what’s right. IV. Written Report: How Well Starbucks is Managing Diversity 1. An Inclusive, Multicultural Culture?: A Description of Participants Interviewed Starbucks seems to be multiculturally well-represented, but it’s not totally inclusive of everyone. Employees’ behaviors seem exclusive, like a clique. There were five participants interviewed. Three people were former hiring (HR) managers at Starbucks, while two of the people interviewed were former Starbucks “partners,” also known as Starbucks baristas. Of those surveyed, 60% were completely satisfied with Starbucks corporate culture. Forty percent were unsatisfied with the corporate culture and values. Former baristas complained that there was too much drama and salacious gossiping that went on in Starbucks locations—and that fomenting personal problems at work was not only invited but encouraged, creating a generally unpleasant work environment. Baristas also complain that Starbucks culture is highly focused on multi-tasking—an unhealthy practice. One barrier that stands in the way of the Starbucks legacy is the ethics of how their coffee is produced. Unfortunately, according to the baristas surveyed, rudeness and “uniqueness” gets noticed and rewarded. People not only pay attention to the drama and the rudeness, but they feed upon it like sharks. 2. Corporate Culture and Diversity According to some of the extra questions that were asked participants, there were a few areas that needed to be developed, including tolerance. Baristas wished that benefits were a bit more extensive—where only partial coverage was provided. This did not include dental insurance. Former human resources managers also lamented this as well, at least under the plan that was in place when they were hired. Although all parties believed that corporate culture strove for excellence, baristas were still concerned about the negative corporate culture proffered within the partners in stores and the acceptance of such behavior by management. Former hiring managers did not comment on these remarks. Of course, trust levels are not high among partners as a result. The overall feeling of the baristas was that Starbucks should try to have a friendlier corporate culture. 3. Other Opinions of the Organization’s Management of Diversity Starbucks should reward competency versus the value it places on employees creating drama within the workplace—bosses included, who only seem to fuel the fire. REFERENCES Clark, T. (2007). Starbucked: a double tall tale of caffeine, commerce, and culture. USA: Hachette Digital. Simon, Bryant. (2009). Everything but the coffee: learning about America from Starbucks. USA: University of California Press. Starbucks supplier diversity program. (2012). Available: . Career diversity. (2012). Available: . Read More