Philadelphia’s Starbucks Scandal Analysis
Institution
Name
Author Note
Philadelphia’s Starbucks Scandal Analysis
Introduction
According to Paladin, the scandal involved two Philadelphian African-American men Nelson and Robinson, who were allegedly accused of trespassing by a Starbucks store manager. The two were awaiting a meeting with a local white business associate and had arrived few minutes due time (Paladin). The victims were arrested due to the failure of purchasing anything while they waited for their partner (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). The arrest was considered racist and yielded demonstrations and boycotts from the Philadelphians. However, an apology from the chief executive officer, Johnson, calmed the situation (Paladin). Starbucks management came up with a comprehensive solution to implicit training that would help its employees on observing ethics in service management (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). The training aimed at equipping employees with knowledge on implicit bias, the need to prevent discrimination, and the promotion of collective inclusion, which would ensure everyone felt safe and welcome.
Impact of Implicit Bias Training
Starbucks Stores and News (2018) state that the training was tailored towards preventing further discrimination. Information was availed to employees on the need to employ fairness in service delivery without choosing whom to serve. The argument was put across based on Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that stated, “no discrimination based on race was allowed in hotels, restaurants, theaters and other public accommodations (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018).” Secondly, it aimed at ensuring the safety of all Starbucks customers. This was in alignment with Starbucks’ mission and values, which entailed the creation of an environment that is safe and welcoming for everyone. The training also resulted in the enactment of a new policy called The Third-Party Policy that stated anyone could use the Starbucks facilities without necessarily having to purchase (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). The plan was aimed to create a fair environment where every human was welcome as well (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). Also, it was suited to support the mission of the company, which was, ‘to inspire and nurture the human spirit-one person, one cup, and one neighborhood at a time.’
However, the implicit bias training faced criticisms from a few social scientists who claimed it was not enough to solve the racial bias that is infecting most of the corporations in America currently. An interview from these scientists revealed that training tends to backfire in most of the organizations (Belluz, 2018). Additionally, the method has been considered for quite a while, but racism is still taking its toll in the US business world. For instance, one sociologist claimed that ‘corporate America has been making this symbolic gesture since the 1970s’. He termed these efforts as ‘window dressing’ (Belluz, 2018). The sociologists recommended corporations to act beyond the token of gestures and adopt more lucrative measures that will address inequality more appropriately.
Connection of the Scandal with Ethical Leadership
According to the Starbuck’s Ethics and Compliance, the firm aims at safeguarding its culture and reputation by fostering an ethically committed culture towards leadership alongside observing integrity while conducting business (Lemus, von Feigenblatt, Orta & Rivero, 2015). Starbucks’ CEO Johnson exhibits ethical leadership by showing discipline in his role by taking full responsibility for the actions of his employees (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). He encourages ethical conduct by openly apologizing to the public and acknowledging that Starbucks clients were affected by this arrest; therefore, his employees needed more training on understanding what matters to involve the authorities. Johnson also deploys the services of the manager who perpetuated this case since she had acted contrary to the ethical codes of the firm (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). Additionally, Johnson is ethically alert in the sense that he uses the shared values of the company as a cornerstone for his decisions after the arrest. For instance, after the apology, he meets with the two men in Philadelphia and learns from them what Starbucks needs to do differently (Starbucks Stores and News, 2018). The actions of Johnson send a precedent to other corporate officials on how to be ethical leaders who would promote the corporate culture and reputation.
Conclusion
From the above scandal, racism is still eminent in the American business society up to date. Therefore, it is the high time for firms to adopt more promising measures to curb the race pandemic. It is empirical that both employees’ and leaders’ actions be tailored towards ensuring the fulfillment of the corporate mission alongside aligning with its core values. Additionally, leaders should conform to the ethical codes of leadership in the company to guarantee that client interests are safeguarded at all times. CEO Johnson exhibits an example of a staunch leader whose efforts are geared towards protecting the image of his company alongside securing the safety of his customers. Hence corporate officials need to stand up to their responsibilities and act accordingly.
References
Belluz, J. (2018). Companies like Starbucks Love Anti-Bias Training. But it Doesn’t Work-and May Backfire. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/4/19/17251752/philadelphia-starbucks-arrest-racial-bias-training
Lemus, E., von Feigenblatt, O. F., Orta, M., & Rivero, O. (2015). Starbucks Corporation: Leading Innovation in the 21st Century. Journal of Alternative Perspectives in the Social Sciences, 7(1), 23-38.
Paladin, A. Starbucks, and Anti-Bias Absurdity. Icon, 2, 245.
Starbucks Stores and News. (2018). Starbucks to Close All Stores Nationwide for Racial-Bias Education on May 29. Retrieved from https://stories.starbucks.com/press/2018/starbucks-to-close-stores-nationwide-for-racial-bias-education-may-29/