Critical Analysis: Disciplinary Action vs. Staff Growth at Starbucks

This essay critically analyzes the disciplinary case of Starbucks, contrasting the need for disciplinary action with the importance of staff development. It discusses the company's HRM policies, referencing McGregor's X and Y theory to highlight both 'hard' and 'soft' approaches within Starbucks. The analysis extends to performance management and leadership styles, identifying an autocratic tendency in the District Manager's handling of the situation. Furthermore, the essay evaluates the case against the ACAS Code of Conduct, revealing potential inconsistencies in the treatment of the Store Manager. The conclusion emphasizes the need for Starbucks to handle disciplinary matters more formally and justly, ensuring a balance between maintaining standards and fostering employee growth. Desklib is a valuable resource for students seeking similar case studies and academic support.

Running head: DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
Disciplinary case of Starbucks Coffee
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Discussion..................................................................................................................................2
Wider Debates surrounding Hard versus Soft HRM..............................................................2
Performance Management and Leadership............................................................................4
Consistency versus Circumstances........................................................................................5
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................7
References..................................................................................................................................8

2DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
Introduction
Starbucks is an American coffeehouse chain and company, which was founded in the
year 1971. The company is one of the fastest growing and the best known companies of the
world. The company has some well regulated employee relations in the terms of human
resource management policies, staff manual, employee relations procedures, guiding the
employees as well as management and others. Starbucks prefer hiring the right employee for
the right position. In addition to this, Starbucks encourages diversified workforce and
currently, a large number of employees from Thailand, Bangladesh, Spain, United Kingdom
and Nigeria works with the company (Starbucks.in 2018). Moreover, the human resource
management policies of the company introduce good disciplinary approaches, equity,
consistency, fairness and mutual trust among the employees. Additionally, the human
resource policies of the company are highly appreciated and commendable. Transformational
leaders of the company have managed to retain the maximum number of employees and
maintain a positive organizational culture (Anitha 2014).
Discussion
Wider Debates surrounding Hard versus Soft HRM
Starbucks Corporation has some good policies and procedures of human resource
management. The company engages its employees in order to achieve the organizational
goals and objectives. The vision of the company is to become the primary provider of high
quality coffee and other related products to its consumers (Starbucks.in 2018). The case study
of Starbucks Corporation provides with sound evidence regarding the company’s highly
admirable human resource management policies. The district manager of the company paid a
visit to one of the stores, where she found that the employees were not at all happy working

3DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
there. After investigating the matter, it was found that the employees were having some
issues with their store manager (Ashleigh, Higgs and Dulewicz 2012).
According to Douglas McGregor’s X and Y theory, there are two different approaches
of organizational management style. ‘Theory X’ represents the hard approach and it stresses
on the importance of strict supervision, penalties and other factors within the organization.
On the other hand, ‘Theory Y’ throws light on the motivating role of the job satisfaction as
well as it encourages the workers to perform their activities without any direct supervision.
Theory Y emphasizes on the belief that if the employees are motivated and encouraged
internally, they will take the company to the ultimate level of success (Odumeru and
Ogbonna 2013). In addition to this, this theory also gives stress on the importance of reward
system in an organization.
However, on linking the case study of Starbucks with McGregor’s theory, it can be
said that the company has both hard and soft human resource management skills. On
conducting a meeting with the employees of the store, the District Manager came to know
that the Store Manager was not working properly. In addition to this, the manager was been
alleged of bullying and shouting at the employees. The company did not accept such
improper conduct of the manager and thus, ended up sending a letter of suspension.
Therefore, from this situation, it can be said that the company do not encourage such
behaviors from the organizational managers and can do anything for its employees (Girling
2012). Moreover, the company’s hard human resource management skills have supervised
very strictly before sending the suspension letter.
In addition to this, the company has also soft skills of human resource management
for the promising and dedicated employees. The company provides its employees with ten
minutes of training every day, where they are being asked to share their views and opinions,

4DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
without any fear (Dunning 2012). Moreover, organizational leaders motivate and encourage
them on a daily basis, to give their best for the company. Furthermore, the organization has
sound reward and recognition systems, which helps in motivating the employees to work
better every day (Forsgren and Johanson 2014).
Performance Management and Leadership
The performance management is a continuous process for improving the
performances of the staff members. The Starbucks Corporation prefers improving their
employees’ performance standards and levels by setting up individual and team goals
(Starbucks.in 2018). In addition to this, an effective system of performance management is
also considered to be the best way of developing employee engagement. In turn, it helps in
establishing the true pay of the performance culture. In addition to this, the company also
focuses on improving morale of the employees through creating better programs of rewards
and recognitions. It helps in increasing the overall productivity of the staff members, which in
turn contributes to the company’s managing and retaining policies (Downs and Swailes
2013).
However, from the case study, it can be said that the company needs to focus more on
its performance evaluation and reviewing procedure. The District Manager took an important
step very quickly, without even considering the Store Manager’s case. The organization
needs to improve their performance evaluation procedures as it lacks a performance review
plan from the beginning. The District Manager could have monitored the entire situation in a
better way (Cavusgil et al. 2014). It fell under her responsibility to listen to the Store
Manager’s version, before sending any letter of suspension. Moreover, the District Manager
could have managed the situation by communicating the matter to the senior authorities as
well.

5DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
The company’s organizational culture is a bit autocratic. Autocratic Leadership can
also be referred as authoritarian culture and this sort of leaders prefer making their choices
and imposing them on their followers. This statement is being made because the
organizational leader, without even monitoring the whole situation, preferred suspending the
Store Manager. The theory of leader and member exchange refers to the two way relationship
which focuses on the leaders as well as their followers (Deyoe and Fox 2012). However, in
the case of Starbucks Corporation it can be said that the organizational leaders prefer keeping
their relationships autocratic in nature.
This is because the District Manager’s leadership style is authoritative in nature. This
style is characterized by her individual control over all the decisions and a very little input
from her group members. She did not even consult other regional managers and senior
authorities before taking such a major decision. Autocratic leaders generally make their own
choices on the basis of their own judgments and ideas (Odumeru and Ogbonna 2013). They
rarely accept advices and opinions from their followers and supporters. However, this sort of
leadership approach can prove to be highly disadvantageous for the Starbucks Corporation
(Austin and Pinkleton 2015).
Consistency versus Circumstances
The ACAS Code of Conduct is being designed to help the employees, employers as
well as their representatives to deal with the grievance and disciplinary situations at the
workplace. The disciplinary situations consist of misconduct or poor performance. The basic
principles include fairness, credibility and fixed term contracts. Similarly, the grievances are
the complaints, problems and concerns which the employees raise along with their
employers. Transparency as well as fairness must be promoted by using and developing
several rules and regulations in order to handle grievance and disciplinary situations (Dillon

6DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
2012). However, taking the case of Starbucks Corporation into consideration, it can be said
that the District Manager did not treat the Store Manager fairly.
The ACAS Code of Conduct mentions that the employers should allow the employees
to appeal against the formal decision. In addition to this, the employees must be allowed to
get accompanied at any grievance and disciplinary meeting (Grant 2016). However, none of
the situations occurred in the case of Starbucks. The District Manager did not give time to the
Store Manager to get prepared for the whole incident, as she got a letter during her holidays.
In addition to this, the organization did not even organize a formal meeting for the Store
Manager and suspended her informally, which is not at all right.
It was important for the human resource manager of the company to give the Store
Manager a chance, to show her best skills for the overall development of the company. In
addition to this, it falls under the responsibility of the human resource managers to organize a
formal training for an employee, before dismissing them. It is considered as a last chance
given to the employees or employers, to rectify their mistakes. However, Starbucks
Corporation could have taken such factors into consideration as the Store Manager was being
dismissed in an unjustified manner.
According to the ACAS Code of Conduct, it is highly important to share a healthy
employer-employee relation in order to conduct all the activities in a fair and justified
manner. Moreover, the employee has the right to know the nature of the grievance. The
organizational leaders and managers must raise the issues in a formal manner (Mullen 2014).
In addition to this, the managers of the organization should conduct a meeting for discussing
the grievances in a formal manner. In such cases, the employee must be allowed to get
accompanied at the meeting. However, in such meetings the actual action must be taken and

7DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
discussed formally. Handling the matter informally can malign the overall reputation of the
company. Therefore, Starbucks must take care of such things (Ball et al. 2012).
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be said that Starbucks Corporation is one of the fastest growing
coffee companies of the world. The company’s mission and vision is to become one of the
leading providers of coffees and related products. In addition to this, the company’s human
resource management policies as well as procedures are highly commendable and admirable.
However, from the above case study, it has been found that the company’s District Manager
took a wrong step and dismissed the Store Manager in an unjustified manner. The report
throws light on the overall situation, by linking it with the leadership theories and ACAS
Code of Conduct. Therefore, the company needs to take care of such things and handle these
matters in a formal and justified manner.

8DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
References
Anitha, J., 2014. Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee
performance. International journal of productivity and performance management.
Ashleigh, M.J., Higgs, M. and Dulewicz, V., 2012. A new propensity to trust scale and its
relationship with individual well‐being: implications for HRM policies and practices. Human
Resource Management Journal, 22(4), pp.360-376.
Austin, E.W. and Pinkleton, B.E., 2015. Strategic public relations management: Planning
and managing effective communication campaigns (Vol. 10). Routledge.
Ball, D., Geringer, M., Minor, M. and McNett, J., 2012. International business. McGraw-Hill
Higher Education.
Cavusgil, S.T., Knight, G., Riesenberger, J.R., Rammal, H.G. and Rose, E.L.,
2014. International business. Pearson Australia.
Deyoe, R.H. and Fox, T.L., 2012. Identifying strategies to minimize workplace conflict due
to generational differences. Journal of Behavioral Studies in Business, 5, p.1.
Dillon, B.L., 2012. Workplace violence: impact, causes, and prevention. Work, 42(1), pp.15-
20.
Downs, Y. and Swailes, S., 2013. A capability approach to organizational talent
management. Human Resource Development International, 16(3), pp.267-281.
Dunning, J.H., 2012. International Production and the Multinational Enterprise (RLE
International Business). Routledge.

9DISCIPLINARY CASE OF STARBUCKS COFFEE
Forsgren, M. and Johanson, J., 2014. Managing networks in international business.
Routledge.
Girling, P., 2012. Policies and Procedures. Operational Risk Management: A Complete Guide
to a Successful Operational Risk Framework, pp.77-88.
Grant, R.M., 2016. Contemporary Strategy Analysis Text Only. John Wiley & Sons.
Mullen, C., 2014. Accountability and delegation explained. British Journal of Healthcare
Assistants, 8(9), pp.450-453.
Odumeru, J.A. and Ogbonna, I.G., 2013. Transformational vs. transactional leadership
theories: Evidence in literature. International Review of Management and Business
Research, 2(2), p.355.
Starbucks.in (2018). Starbucks. [online] Starbucks Coffee Company. Available at:
http://www.starbucks.in/ [Accessed 20 Feb. 2018].