Starbucks
Christine M. Reinheimer
Arizona State University
Organizational Psychology 84391
November 27, 2013
When a company grows very rapidly, change is expected to occur. Some factors that are most likely to change in this massive growth are: the design of an organization’s culture, stress levels among employees, the goals and motivations of the company, quality control, speed of service, efficiency, and customer service. Some of these changes can threaten the culture of an organization because change itself is seen as threatening (Robbins & Judge, 2013). People will not want to change unless a need for change is understood and seen. People also tend to want to maintain equilibrium and not challenge the status quo. These changes can bring about stress and anxiety to people, which affects the organization’s harmony and outcomes if not done in the right way (Robbins & Judge, 2013).
Starbucks coffee shops experienced a massive growth between opening from just eleven stores in 1987 to 2,600 stores by the year 2000 (Robbins & Judge, 2013). It had a spirit of creating personal, unique experiences for customers in the way they delivered service and created an ambience in their shops (Robbins & Judge, 2013). During this massive growth, some factors within the company had changed. Their quality control decreased and the spirit of the company was forgotten as it emphasized on speed and efficiency (Robbins & Judge, 2013). This was apparent in 2006 when Howard Schultz, chairman and former CEO of the company, noticed stores closing and cancellation of planned openings of new stores (Robbins & Judge, 2013). Schultz then came back to the organization as CEO of the company and he implemented changes radically in order to save the company (Robbins & Judge, 2013). He wanted to get back to what Starbucks was in the beginning: making good coffee while providing outstanding, personalized service to customers (Robbins & Judge, 2013). He closed every store in the country
for one afternoon in order to train all 135,000 baristas and instill in them the importance of quality control (Robbins & Judge, 2013).
It was easier for Starbucks to implement this radical change process than it would be for other companies because it was their vision to begin with and Schultz paved the way for their success. He did it with a sense of urgency, training and open communication about change, and made the employees see the benefits of this change instead of letting the company die (Robbins & Judge, 2013).
Schultz was the change agent in this process. He saw the past of the organization and what made it great. He also saw the grim future if they continued with the system they had in doing things. He envisioned a different, better future for the company and was able to “motivate, invent, and implement this vision” (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 580). At that point, he was seen as an outsider but came in as new leadership, who was able to offer a fresh perspective. Schultz also acted as an idea champion, who “actively and enthusiastically promote [the new idea], build support, overcome resistance, and ensure [the idea] is implemented (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 593).
What he did was planned changed, which is a “change in activities that are intentional and goal oriented (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 581). The two goals of planned change are improving the ability of the company to accept the new changes and changes in the behaviors of employees (Robbins & Judge, 2013), which Schultz conveyed through the radical process he implemented for the benefit of the company. He also accentuated the positive in the organization by appreciative inquiry (Robbins & Judge, 2013). Instead of focusing on the negatives, he
refocused the company into what made them great in the first place: their uniqueness and commitment to customer satisfaction.
Schultz also tried to change the culture into a learning organization which “has developed the continuous capacity to adapt and change” (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 594). Change is important for a company or organization to stay current and competitive in the marketplace. Some companies fail to change and adapt with present conditions and Schultz saw this as something that the organization needed to have. He used double-loop learning by “modifying objectives, policies, and standard routines” (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 594). An example of this would be instilling in the employees the value of making one drink at a time and maintaining the personal nature in which they conduct their business with every single customer. The changes Schultz implemented could succeed at other companies who share the same values of customization and high levels of customer service. In order for it to become effective at a company with different values, one only needs to look at how Schultz arrived at his decision for change. They need to understand the process, the strengths of their company, how to implement change in the most efficient way, and to shape the culture of the company to reach its goals as a whole. “Successful champions do things differently in different cultures” (Robbins & Judge, 2013, p. 593), even though the outcomes, goals, and values may be different, the process of coming to what needs to be changed and what needs to be done are essentially the same. Companies and organizations must cater the specific changes they have in mind in what they want their outcomes to be.
References
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. (2013). Organizational behavior. Boston: Pearson.