Conscious Leadership – Philadelphia Starbucks Incident

Conscious Leadership – Philadelphia Starbucks Incident

Great organizational leaders across the globe have successfully employed conscious leadership skills in their decision-making. Conscious leaders tap into their leadership skills to influence other people to achieve organizational goals. Many organization leaders who have steered their firms to great heights have always made extraordinary decisions that have greatly impacted the organization’s operations. Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Starbucks, is one of the outstanding conscious leaders who have managed to make great decisions that have helped Starbucks move towards achieving its goals.

Just one year after taking the CEO position at Starbucks, Johnson faced a leadership test. Still, through his conscious leadership skills, he managed to make great decisions that impacted the future operation of Starbucks. In 2018, two black men visited the Philadelphia Starbucks shop where they just seated without ordering anything. The men said they were waiting to meet a business associate, but they did not purchase as they were waiting (Tangdall, 2018). The store manager asked them to leave, but the men refused, explaining that they were waiting to meet someone. The store manager called the police because the men refused to leave, and they were arrested. One individual recorded the incident and posted it online, and it quickly went viral (Vermey, 2014). The people who watched the video labeled it as a discriminatory and racist act, thus blaming the Starbucks leadership.

A week later, Starbucks CEO Johnson apologized on behalf of the company, saying the video circulated was very hard to watch because it was harrowing and shameful. Johnson blamed the store manager’s action claiming that the video did not display Starbucks’ mission and values (Vermey, 2014). He emphasized that Starbucks’s values and missions were to create a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, which is paramount to every Starbucks shop (Tangdall, 2018). Johnson regretted that Starbucks’s training and practice led to a bad outcome and affirmed that the basis of the store manager calling the police was wrong. Before this incident, Starbucks did not have any companywide policy concerning asking customers to leave, and thus, the decisions were left in the hands of the store manager.

Due to this flexible policy, Starbucks has become a community hub where anyone can come and sit without being required to order or spend any money. In his apology statement, Johnson Johnson mentioned this community and said that Starbucks works to create safe and welcoming environments for everyone. He went further by outlining the detailed, actionable steps the company would take (Tangdall, 2018).  Johnson took full responsibility for the actions of his employees and acknowledged that Starbucks, the company’s clients, was hurt by the unfair treatment and arrest of the two men. He went further by meeting with the two victims to apologize and discuss what the company should improve.

Johnson’s power bases in handling this situation were: first, he aimed at creating a community. Johnson emphasized that Starbucks’s mission was to create a community. He instituted the third-place policy, which stated that anyone could use Starbucks facilities without necessarily buying anything (Vermey, 2014). This policy aligned with Starbucks’ mission and goals. Jo0hsnsosn’s action helped improve the employee-customer relationships by retraining the employees on customer management. Johnson understood that training employees on handling customers was the ultimate way of bringing change and building a community.

Johnson used his powers to encourage ethical conduct among the employees. He condemned the incident by asserting that the store manager went against the ethical conduits required by Starbucks. However, his apology and actions helped in promoting awareness of the ethical issue. Johnson used this incident to create a positive difference in the company and in the community that the company serves. Johnson also used his powers and position to display discipline in his role (Vermey, 2014). He did not deny the incident; he accepted it and accepted and took the blame on himself, but he went ahead to provide the direction for the course of the action. He managed to show he understands his role in the fixing of the problem.

Johnson also used his powers as a CEO to clarify Starbucks ‘ culture. He clarified the company’s values in his apology with the subsequent action after the shameful incident. His apology and action upheld the company’s core values and mission since he identified the gaps in its operations and figured out necessary actions that would correct the anomalies so that the company could operate according to its goals, values, and mission.

Johnson displayed a pacesetting leadership style; this is a style of leadership where the leader sets the pace, as in racing. The pacesetters always set the bar high and pushed the team members to run hard and fast to finish. The pacesetting leadership style gets things done. After the incident, Johnson declared that the way the employees were trained was wrong, and he decided to order training for all Starbucks employees on matters of customer handling (Vermey, 2014). He established the third-place policy and other measures to ensure that Starbucks provides a favorable and safe environment to the community. In other words, Johnson set the pace by putting in place the company’s steps and every follow henceforth.

Examining how Johnson handled this incident, it is clear that he understood the value of conscious capitalism. Conscious capitalism is the ideology that holds that every business organization tends to have a purpose that goes beyond making a profit. Johnson believes that it is not about making money but creating community relationships (Klein, 2021). This is why he encouraged the employees and developed policies that promote community relationships. It is why he condemned the manager who chased away the two men who were not buying anything.

In my opinion, Johnson’s leadership style is quite effective because it brought good company results. He used the incident to change many things in the company, and from that time, every employee in the company understood what needed to be done. Johnson acted ethically basing on the fact that he condemned the incident and did not spare the manager. He empathized with the two men arrested unfairly and even apologized to the public and the two men on behalf of the company. The apology meant that the manager had violated corporate ethics; an apology shows that an individual values ethics.

If I were in Johnson’s position, I would also apologize to the public for the unfortunate incident, but I would not have ordered retraining of all the employees. This is because retraining would be very expensive. I would emphasize the company culture and core values and principles that all employees need to adhere to. The incident happened not because the employees did not understand the ethical standards required and the company’s core values but because the employees neglected the values. Therefore, reminding them and re-emphasizing the core values would compel all employees to consider the theme seriously.

References

Klein, J. (2021). The Four Principles of Conscious Capitalism. Retrieved from https://www.consciousconnectionmagazine.com/2014/05/four-principles-conscious-capitalism/

Tangdall, S. (2018). The CEO of Starbucks and the Practice of Ethical Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.scu.edu/leadership-ethics/resources/the-ceo-of-starbucks-and-the-practice-of-ethical-leadership

Vermey, C. (2014). What is ‘conscious leadership,’ and why is it crucial for successful businesses? Philadelphia Business Journal.  Retrieved from         https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/blog/guest-comment/2014/08/what-is-

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Conscious Leadership – Philadelphia Starbucks Incident

Leadership studies demonstrate that the most influential leaders know how to draw upon self-leadership skills to, in turn, motivate and lead others to expand their strengths to ultimately better serve the goals of an organization. For this assignment, you will continue to study conscious leadership, look at a leadership example from contemporary media, and evaluate how well the particular leader exemplifies the qualities of effective and ethical conscious leadership.

Select a relevant and topical leadership issue from current news media that revolves around ethics and ethical decision-making. Research the situation and gather information in order to evaluate the leaderRemember, the issueat you choose will serve as the backdrop for your evaluation while using the key terms and concepts covered in your course readings. Write an evaluation of a minimum of 1,000-1,250 words of the situation that addresses the following:

• The power bases used by the leader.
• The influence tactics used by the leader.
• The leadership style of the leader.
• The outcome (or potential outcome) of the situation.

Conclude by justifying whether you think this leader supports the values of conscious capitalism. Is the leader’s leadership style effective? Do you believe the leader acted ethically in the situation? Be sure to consider each tenet of conscious capitalism in your leader evaluation.

Next, imagine yourself as a practitioner of servant leadership. You have been appointed to the leadership role in this exact circumstance. Explain how the situation would be different. Address the four criteria listed above in your discussion and incorporate the principles of conscious capitalism by explaining how each tenet influences your personal values and style.

Strengthen your claims in each content section of your essay with supporting citations and specific examples.