Organizational Structure of the Situation

Kiersten Umberger

OGL 481

May 31, 2020

STRUCTURE 2Umberger

The situation I selected comes from personal experience as an employee at

Starbucks. A few years ago at a Starbucks in Philadelphia, the connection to the community the

company had always had was severed. A few men were asked to leave and reported to police

even though they had done nothing wrong. This reflected in a lot of negativity on the company

and treatment of specific people and groups. My situation that I am analysing was a result of this

unkind and inappropriate act.

The company wanted to quickly mend their relationship with communities so they

changed a policy that had semi unwritten standards about when to ask people to leave the store.

In my store we had always asked people that were homeless or misusing the space to leave. After

this incident I felt my manager was left with many unanswered questions about policy changes.

In order to avoid any trouble she asked that we no longer kick anyone out. This resulted in

employees feeling unsafe and also many homeless people stationing themselves in the store thus

turning away paying customers.

. I have always felt very cared for by the company and even enjoyed coming to work

everyday because the structure created a positive work environment. The structural frame of

Starbucks has always been very rooted in the mission and values which are heavily focused on

human connection and kindness;

“To inspire and nurture the human spirit – one person, one cup and one neighborhood at a time.

● Creating a culture of warmth and belonging, where everyone is welcome.

● Acting with courage, challenging the status quo and finding new ways to grow our

company and each other.

● Being present, connecting with transparency, dignity and respect.

● Delivering our very best in all we do, holding ourselves accountable for results.
STRUCTURE 3Umberger

● We are performance driven, through the lens of humanity” (Starbucks Mission, 2020).

This mission is displayed in the way employees are trained to interact with customers.

The customers are at the root of everything the employees do. I do not want to call this a rule

because it is embedded in the culture of the company, but it truly makes up the structure. The

beverage quality, the friendly attitudes, the sincere and genuine conversations and even the

cleanliness is all for the customer. Having an internal relationship to the company I understand

the structure first hand. I believe the roles are well defined and there is a system and standard

operating procedures in place for everything. Overall there is good communication from the top

down. One form of this communication comes in a weekly update that is visible at work and at

home for every employee.

Other than the mission and values the structure is displayed in the sharing of information,

the extensive training, the communication between levels, and in how tasks are assigned. The

company values the employer, the shareholder and the customer. Partners look to supervisors for

information, supervisors look to managers and so forth. Each level has their own training, job

description, and expectations of the role. Starbucks has a clear strategy and plan to get their work

taught and communicated thoroughly to employees. The organization of the company's

expectations gives them a positive structure to insiders and outsiders.

STRUCTURE 4Umberger

When referring to the situation described, It is heavily influenced by the structure of the

organization. The entire time they were trying to mend their relationship with the customers and

get back to their mission of nurturing the human spirit. The very first value listed refers to

welcoming everyone and creating a sense of belonging which is exactly what was tampered with

the incident. With that relationship being damaged the company wanted to react quickly. Prior

to the incident in Philadelphia the company seemed to typically function with a human resources

frame. In order to quickly resolve the damage done by one store in Philadelphia they acted more

from a political perspective. I believe getting back to the connection to the community was very

crucial and action was taken rapidly. This caused many questions about what is right and wrong

and when it is okay to ask a person to leave the store and when it is inappropriate. I think my

manager acted out of fear of having any escalations in her store that she set a rule in her own

store where we never asked anyone to leave while tensions were high with the company. When

big decisions are made at the top quickly I think it leaves room for error and questions. This may

have led to the decision my manager made. I think viewing this with a human resources frame

caused me to react negatively to the situation.

If I were to relive this situation I think I would have tried to understand that the structure

of the company was suffering due to this incident in Philadelphia and rash decisions were being

made to mend this. It is important to change your personal frame to better understand situations

you disagree with. In hindsight I understand what the purpose of my managers decisions were,

but as a leader in an organization I think she could have still managed to keep partners from

feeling vulnerable. Acting in extremes is not a valid solution and in turn results in more minor

issues. Many Starbucks stores deal with harassment and even assault from non customers. This
STRUCTURE 5Umberger

could be from a homeless person or many times they see drug users utilizing the restroom for a

private space. This puts the employees at risk because often there are needles in trash cans or

fecal matter left in a seat. Not allowing these people to be removed puts employees at risk.

To better resolve the situation there should have been stricter guidelines in place that

stated when it was appropriate to ask someone to leave and when it is not. Eventually these

guidelines were made and listed in the stores for customer knowledge as well. This solution

made the expectations clear, and allowed the company structure to remain intact. I think the

company does a great job of getting everyone on board with the same goals, contributing to the

success of the company. There are many people working together to make these goals and define

pathways to success as well as dealing with roadblocks. This specific incident helped evolve the

structure of the organization as a whole, and forced employees to reassess their actions and

attitudes toward all people.

STRUCTURE 6Umberger

Mission Statement. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.starbucks.com/about-us/company-

information/mission-statement