OGL 481 Pro-Seminar I:

PCA-Choosing an Organization
1) Describe your organization.

The organization I would like to study is Starbucks. Of course, everyone knows

Starbucks as the coffee chain giant that has cafes, drive-thrus and kiosk locations all over
the world. Founded in Seattle, Washington, Starbucks has been in business for almost
fifty years and holds itself and its employees (referred to as “partners”) to its mission and
values: “To inspire and nurture the human spirit- one person, one cup, and one
neighborhood at time.”

2) Describe your role in the organization (it can be internal or external).

My role within Starbucks is internal on the retail side of the organization, I am a

store manager of a corporate drive-thru location. I have a district manager who is my
direct manager, followed by a regional director, then a regional vice president. I am
pretty much in the middle of the organization because I am not in operations, nor am I at
the top on the retail side of things.

3) Describe the situation. (see the Canvas instructions for details, especially about how
your situation will be analyzed from five different perspectives over the next five
modules)

This conflict happened between another store manager, Barbara (Barb), one of my
partners Crystal (who is Barb’s daughter), and myself over Crystal being terminated after
an investigation into allegations of Crystal pushing another partner in the back room of
my store were found to be true.
First, a little backstory on Barb and myself. Both Barb and I are store managers
who have been with the company for more than ten years. Barb, coincidentally was one
of my first shift supervisors when I began working for Starbucks, so I had a rapport and
respect for her since the beginning of my career. When I was promoted to store manager,
another one of Barb’s kids was working at the store I would be taking over but ended
being terminated soon after I took over. A few years pass by and Barb’s youngest,
Crystal, is about to graduate high school and wants to work for Starbucks just like the rest
of her siblings have. Reluctant to want to conduct the interview based on a cognitive bias
of interpreting information to confirm my beliefs (Bolman & Deal, 2017) I have towards
her kids, having dealt with one of her other children being terminated. I agreed to
interview Crystal because I felt I owed it to Barb to maintain a good working

1
 relationship. I went into the interview without any expectations and treated it like I would
any other potential hire.

I ended up hiring Crystal because she did well in her interview, and I felt like she
would be a good fit within my team. I was apprehensive about having the daughter of a
peer working in my store because I did not know how that was going to affect my
relationship or if they believed they had a say on what goes on in my store. On to the
conflict, Crystal and a few other female partners become close friends and start hanging
out together outside of work, no problem there, except, one of the girls decides she no
longer wants to hang out with Crystal and stops talking to her altogether, which does not
leave Crystal happy. I received a phone call from a partner telling me Crystal pushed her
in the backroom after refusing to talk to her because she was working. Based on my
training and experience, I call my district manager, Gilbert, and tell him what has
happened and consulted him as to what the next steps are. I was advised not to say
anything to Barb and if she reached out to me let her know I could not discuss the
situation.
Ultimately, Crystal was terminated for pushing the other partner. Barb called me
immediately after Crystal left the building, I did not answer because I knew what she
wanted, and I could not discuss it with her. I was with Gilbert when she began calling
him relentlessly until she showed up at my store wanting to speak to us to try and get
Crystal’s job back because it was a “mistake” to terminate her. Gilbert ended up speaking
to Barb and told her it was a decision that we did not make, it was made for us, we only
executed what our HR person told us to.
At this point, Barb begins telling all our peers how “incompetent and horrible” I
am and all these things about my character (or lack thereof according to her). Barb was
not happy that I did not show respect to our working relationship and let her know what
was going on. I along with Gilbert told her, “it does not matter who the partner is, we do
not discuss an ongoing investigation with anyone you know this.” This did nothing to
console Barb as she continued to gossip about me and call-in erroneous claims about my
store ranging from unacceptable customer service to finding insects in her beverages
(which was not true). Barb needed to figure out what was going on first, rather than
placing the blame on me for this situation. After all that is what leaders are supposed to
do, figure out what is going on, and as Admiral Carlisle Trost said, “that is never easy to
do because situations rarely black and white, they are a pale shade of gray. (Bolman &
Deal, 2017).

2
 Reference or References
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing  organizations: Artistry, choice, and
leadership (6th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass