More from these Authors

• Case | HBS Case Collection | November 2019 (Revised February 2020)

  Starbucks: Reaffirming Commitment to the Third Place Ideal

  Francesca Gino, Katherine B. Coffman and Jeff Huizinga

  On April 12, 2018, two African American entrepreneurs had scheduled a business meeting at a Starbucks in Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square neighborhood. They sat without ordering, waiting for a local businessman to show up for the meeting. The store manager called 911 on them, despite the fact that they were behaving neither violently nor disruptively. When the police arrived soon after the call, they arrested the young men. The incident was viewed by the Starbucks’ leadership team, including the CEO, as “a disheartening situation” and, in the words of John Kelly, the company’s Senior VP of Public Affairs and Social Impact, “a profound failure to live up to our ideals and a violation of our values.” Starbucks, which employed around 175,000 individuals nationwide and served more than 4 million customers daily in its approximately 8,000 U.S. stores, strived to abide by its mission statement: “…To inspire and nurture the human spirit, one cup, one person, one neighborhood at a time.”
  The case describes how the company and its leadership responded to the crisis. To react to the incident, the leadership decided to close down its stores for a day of unconscious bias training, aimed at raising awareness of racial bias and discrimination in particular. The company also started a journey of providing more training and development for the partners, to assure that they lived by the company values on a daily basis, and revised store policy that, the leadership believed, contributed to how the store managers and employees in the Rittenhouse Square store behaved back in April 2018. As the case closes, CEO Steve Johnson reflects on how he could assure that every Starbucks employee not only understood the company mission and values, but truly connected to them emotionally and carry them out daily in their work.

  Keywords: Mission and Purpose; Values and Beliefs; Prejudice and Bias; Crisis Management; Employees; Training;

  Citation:

  Gino, Francesca, Katherine B. Coffman, and Jeff Huizinga. "Starbucks: Reaffirming Commitment to the Third Place Ideal." Harvard Business School Case 920-016, November 2019. (Revised February 2020.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related

• Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2020

  Exploration in Behavioral Science

  Hanne Collins, A.V. Whillans and Leslie John

  In the past decade, behavioral science has undergone beneficial shifts towards greater transparency and more rigorous research. However, we wondered whether this heightened focus on confirmation might make researchers feel inhibited towards doing research, and reduce the propensity to explore. Study 1 (N=404), a descriptive survey, indicated that relative to confirmatory research, researchers found exploratory research more enjoyable, motivating, and interesting; and less anxiety-inducing, frustrating, boring, and scientific. It also introduced a scale to measure research inhibition; higher scores were linked to running fewer studies and were particularly common among women, untenured professors, and receiving one’s PhD after 2011—when reforms began. Study 2 (N=463), a pre-registered experiment, indicated that a confirmatory mindset made researchers less likely to find an interesting (non-hypothesized) interaction. A reminder to explore did not mitigate this effect. These studies suggest that work is needed to ensure that rigorous scientific reforms and exploration can coexist.

  Citation:

  Collins, Hanne, A.V. Whillans, and Leslie John. "Exploration in Behavioral Science." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-090, February 2020.  View Details

  CiteView Details Read Now

  Related

• Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2020

  The Bulletproof Glass Effect: When Privacy Notices Backfire

  Aaron R. Brough, David A. Norton and Leslie John

  Firms typically provide assurances to consumers about data management practices in the form of privacy notices. This manuscript proposes that ironically, such assurances can fuel rather than alleviate privacy concerns. Indeed, we show that consumers react to assurances as if they were warnings – a counterintuitive phenomenon because unlike warnings, which communicate danger, assurances are designed to communicate protection. Across one field experiment and five lab experiments, we show that a salient (vs. an absent or less salient) privacy notice can lead to decreased rather than increased purchase intent. This effect is mediated by consumer trust and is robust to the language in the privacy notice—it occurs even when the notice is overtly assuring, as well as when consumers see only a link to the notice but do not view its contents. The attenuation of the effect in joint (vs. separate) evaluation suggests that consumers’ hesitation to transact with organizations that have a salient privacy notice is not likely driven by an active aversion to assurances, but rather by the arousal of dormant privacy concerns.

  Citation:

  Brough, Aaron R., David A. Norton, and Leslie John. "The Bulletproof Glass Effect: When Privacy Notices Backfire." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 20-089, February 2020.  View Details

  CiteView Details Read Now

  Related