Discussion
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).
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 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.
Wider Debates surrounding Hard versus Soft HRM
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, 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).
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.
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.
Performance Management and Leadership
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).
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 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 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.
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.
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: https://www.starbucks.in/ [Accessed 20 Feb. 2018].
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
