Starbucks Coffee Company

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Conclusion
Recommendations
Reference List

Introduction

Overview

Starbucks Corporation is a famous coffee retail shop well known for selling coffee beans as well as other coffee and tea drinks. The corporation is well known for its fair prices and excellent customer service. Starbucks has about 4000 branches across the globe and it is among the fastest growing companies in America.

Compared to other competitors however, the company’s turnover rate is relatively low hence the need to improve its service delivery, ensure customer satisfaction, motivate its workers as well enhancing teamwork. The report looks at the motivation theories applicable to the organization, their success as well as setbacks (Banks 2007, p. 44-47).

Motivation Theories

Motivation of laborers is vital for the productivity of any organization. Unlike machines that ensure the same production without motivation, people only become maximally productive when motivated. In fact the outcome for such motivation is usually much higher than when new machines and equipment are purchased.

Increase in people’s productivity is never basically based on money or other physical motivation (Zipp 2000, p. 35). In fact, it has been proved that if money or physical reward is used as the only source of motivation, then productivity declines especially in the industries that demand for creativity.

Issues like employee relations for instance play a significant role in the motivation of employees. Workers may for instance find motivation from other informal groups at the workplace (Caufield 2007, pp. 100-105).

The working environment is vital as well. It has proved that improving the working environment for employees according to their need results into increased productivity as compared to improving their internal factors as it is believed that the people are mainly influenced by what happens around them.

This is in relation to the reinforcement theory which stipulates that making the working environment conducive is of more importance and it motivates the workers than dealing with the internal factors some of which include the workers cognitive behavior like their attitudes, feelings and impressions (Desmond 2005, p. 57).

Treating them with equality also plays the same trick. Non-financial incentives are therefore of very great importance in motivating the workers of any organization. Starbucks’ Chief executive officer has used this to ensure increased productivity (Zukin 2000, p. 6-8).

The corporation values its workers more. The corporation rewards its employees by promotion and this works as a motivation tool to ensure increased productivity among them. The organization has education and training programs to ensure that the workforce is always up to date in skills and service delivery.

The organization has an excellent interactive structure and this helps in motivation of workers. Motivated employees motivate others as well and this ensures increased productivity (Dunn 2006, pp. 3-5).

Equal Treatment

The equity theory stipulates that equality in the reward system results in increased productivity as workers are motivated to work harder knowing that the reward will be based on the efforts put in and not on any other basis like one’s position.

In the event of inequitable rewarding, employees are de-motivated and they might opt to reduce not just the quantity but the quality of work as well. Some may in fact opt to leave the job and search for other places where there is equality in rewarding (Duvall 2006, pp. 4-6).

People act differently though consistently to the issue of equity. The theory is depended on a person’s perception of equity in relation to go a given relationship. Equity is usually perceived as the ration between the input and the output in ones production. The efforts that one puts in his/her work should be proportional to the production and hence the pay.

If one person has his/her salary or wage increased yet the others who do the same kind of work have their salaries kept at the same old level, then this could be perceived as inequality. If the salary/wage is raised and at the same time the amount of work increased, then this will not be perceived as inequality.

For equity to be achieved, the ratio of input over output of an employee should be the same as for the other employees. As long as there is inequality, people will always strive for equity to be achieved (Edward 2000, pp. 306-314).

Starbucks is well known for its equal treatment of the employees. The workers refer to each other as partner and the managers’ co-work with their juniors under the same working environment and at times the less senior workers are put at the frontline.

This has created a good working environment as all workers feel equally appreciated (Trugman 2003, pp. 5-9). This motivates them hence ensuring increased productivity. Their enthusiasm translates into good customer service hence encouraging customers to stick to the corporation (Hoegl 2001, p. 450).

Listening to Employees

Starbucks has good communication channels. Working schedules are for instance made according to each individual’s needs so as to avoid inconveniences. Much emphasis is placed on the laborers. Surveys are made on a regular basis to determine the needs of the employees and determine the best way to go about them. All these motivate the employees hence ensuring increased productivity and service delivery.

In Starbucks, it is believed that employees know what is best for them. Their opinions are therefore collected when the organization intends to lay down its plans and principles. The company usually ensures that its objectives and principles are well communicated to the staff members.

This is a recipe for improvement in the company’s service delivery as well as enhancing innovativeness. The communication of such objectives is in line with the Goal Setting theory put forth by Edwin Locke.

Such communication helps in avoiding any misunderstandings that might arise from the employees as the goals of the organization are clearly relayed to the employees hence making their tasks specific and easier (Howard 2011, p. 45-50).

Starbucks also offer several benefits to its employees some of which include discounts for the company’s products that the employees buy. They are also entitled to other allowances like the medical and vacation allowances. Those employees that work for more than 20 hours within a week are also rewarded.

Dept financing is discouraged by rewarding those employees that have free scripts (Thornhill 2005, p. 5). The employees are encouraged to increase their individual sales hence maximizing the company’s profits.

This in the long run ensures that the company’s goals are met. Starbucks take employees as the most significant assets of the organization. They are respected and provided with the best working environment and this result in increased productivity and service delivery. Customer satisfaction is enhanced through this hence resulting in increased profits (Isaac 2001, pp. 10-13).

Teamwork

Teamwork is vital in any organization if at all the set goals are to be achieved. It enhances rapport and communication among the members of that organization. Every member of the team is perceived as unique and of equal importance to others (Yegge 2006, pp. 11-15).

Given that each person is equipped with different skill and abilities, members are able to learn from each other and in the end the goals of the organization are met. Starbuck uses teamwork as a tool for ensuring maximized service delivery and ensuring that all members are at par in relation to their productivity (Kohn 2003, pp. 54-63).

Keeping Well Relationships

Starbucks Company has several strategies that enhance good relationship among workers. To begin with, all employees are referred to as partner and this helps to remove the hierarchical barriers that always exist between the junior workers and their managers. They co-work hence fostering a good working environment (Wintour 2009, p. 5).

Employees in retail shops are in small numbers like three and six and this helps them to know and understand each other well hence enhancing their ability to cooperate for better results. The workers are consulted by the management while coming up with new policies for the company and this makes them appreciated hence making them to have a sense of belonging.

This is in line with the cognitive evaluation theory which stipulates that motivation for workers should not just be depended on material rewards but it is should mostly focus on the internal rewards which include the interests of the workers, their drives as well as their responsibility. This is because internal factor may stand even when the people cannot get the external rewards (Link 2002, pp. 50-55).

Public welfare goal

The company provides its employees with places to rest away from work or even their homes. This is meant to provide harmony and comfort for the people. Some of the company’s profits are channeled towards community development.

It therefore improves the life of the other people as well and this makes the workers to appreciate the fact that they are working towards improving the lives of other people within the community. This is an indication that corporate social responsibility is just as important is enhancing the productivity of a business organization and hence its success (Lui 2005, pp. 45-50).

Inefficiency in Theory Application

It is evident that in some cases these motivation theories are not effectively applied and this may significantly affect the production. For instance in the goal setting theory, the tasks as well as the objectives that are passed to the people are supposed to be precise and specific. Most of what is done is to pass the objectives to the employees although not much specification is done.

This may slow down the production or bring about confusion. The employees are allowed to work without necessarily setting a higher standard for them to achieve as it is stipulated in this theory. The workers may therefore not be motivated to go beyond their capabilities (Thompson 2010, pp. 5-7).

Conclusion

Starbucks has had a very significant impact on people’s consumption of coffee and its products given due to the excellent products and services delivered by the company. The company has a lean taskforce yet its productivity is very high with high profits margins. The company has continued to grow at a steadfast rate and its success has made it to be used as a model for most businesses (Tuller 2004, p. 44).

The company has put more emphasis on employee motivation hence proving that employee motivation is vital for any significant productivity to be realized. This is in contrary to the classical management principles that are mainly ignore the welfare of the employee yet concentrate on the produce (Pugh 2009, p. 155).

Success in business is however only made possible by rewarding employees both emotionally and financially. Personal satisfaction of the employees is of great importance. Good relationship between the management and the employees is vital for productivity. An organization needs to use the right strategy so as to be successful (Sullivan 2008, p. 43).

Recommendations

The goals and objectives of the company need to be specific and the goals should be set much higher than what the employees are used to hence motivating to work beyond what they are used to (Roger 2000, p. 174).

The company needs to employ the expectancy theory which is based on the beliefs of the employees like valance, expectancy and instrumentality. The theory explains how individuals make their decisions as well as why they do it. It looks at people’s individual differences and how they interact with the situational variables (Smith 2004, p. 55).

The desired outcomes in production can only be achieved when the three mentioned variables are either high or positive and if only one or two are, then the desired production will not be attained. Starbucks therefore needs to consider the three while trying to motivate the employees (Schnepper 2002, p. 40).

Reference List

Banks, C. H., 2007. Met Expectations Hypothesis: The use of Direct Measures to Develop Participant Surveys. Journal of Workforce Education and Development, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 44-47.

Caufield, J., 2007. An Expectancy Theory Perspective.International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.100- 105.

Desmond, G., & John, A. M., 2001. Valuation Formulas and Rules of Thumb. Handbook of Small Business. Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 55-58.

Dunn, R. L. (2006) Recovery of Damages for Lost Profits. Lawpress. 2(3) 2-5.

Duvall, A. C., 2000. Valuation of a Closely Held Business Asset, Business economics. 5(6), 4-6.

Edward E. L., 2000. Effects of hourly overpayment on productivity and work quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 306-314.

Hoegl, M & Gemuenden, H. G., 2001. Teamwork Quality and the Success of innovative Projects. A Theoretical Concept and Empirical Evidence Organization science, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 435-449.

Howard S., & Joanne, G., 2011. How Starbucks Fought for Its Life without Losing Its Soul. Onward, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 45-50.

Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, Wilfred J., Pitt, & Douglas, C., 2001. Leadership and Motivation: The Effective Application of Expectancy Theory. Journal of Management Issues, Vol.13, No. 2, pp. 10-13.

Kohn, A. (2003) Why incentive plans cannot work. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 54-63.

Link, A. N., 2002. Evaluating Economic Damages. A journal for Attorneys, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 50-55.

Lui, L. Z., 2007. Why People Blog: An Expectancy Theory Analysis. Issues in Information Management, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 45-49.

Pugh, D S & Hickson, D. J., 2009. Writers on Organisations – An invaluable introduction to the ideas and arguments of leading writers on MGMT. Penguin Business, Vol. 5, No. 3, p.155.

Roger J. C. and Anthony B. (2000). Successful Industrial Product Innovation: An Integrative Literature Review. New Products, Vol. 3, No. 4, p. 174.

Schnepper, Jeff A., 2002. Business Valuation.The Professional Journal, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 38-44.

Smith, G.V., & Russell P. (2004) Valuation of Intellectual Property and Intangible. Assets, 3 (2)54-60.

Sullivan, J., & Keith E. W., 2008. Business Litigation Tactics and Techniques. Motivation, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 40-45

Thompson, M., 2010. Starbucks Howard Schultz on how he became coffee king. Sunday Mirror. Sunday August 5 2010, p. 5.

Thornhill, W. (2005) How to Investigate Financial Fraud. Forensic Accounting, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 4-9.

Trugman, Gary R. (2003) Guide to Conducting a Valuation of a Closely Held Business, Business Journal, Vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 5-9.

Tuller, Lawrence W. (2004) Small Business Valuation Book : Easy-To-Use Techniques

for Determining Fair Price. Resolving Disputes, and Minimizing Taxes, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 44-50.

Wintour, P., 2009. Mandelson and Starbucks clash on UK economy. The Guardian, February 19 2009, p. 5-6.

Yegge, W. M., 2006. Valuing a Company. A Basic Guide, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.11-15.

Zipp, Alan S. (2000) Business Valuation Methods. Public Accountants, Vol.4, pp. 33- 40.

Zukin, J. H., & John, G. M., 2000. Financial Valuation: Businesses and Business Interests. Annual supplements, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 6-8.

Click Here To Order Now!