Organisational Behaviour at Starbucks - Case Study Example

Organization behavior assessment Name Course Tutor Date Introduction In the current society, we have different functional organizations that operate in different kinds of work service. We have business organizations, non-profit entities, government organizations, non-governmental organizations etc that service the public with the necessary requirements. All these kinds of organizations have the managements and the subordinate staff or employees. It is normal that some entities tend perform well in their operations than other entities of the same level. One may wonder why this is so. Many scholars have researched over this issue and many pointed out that one of the main reasons that lead some organizations to be more efficient to others of the same level is the motivation state of the employees working in these organizations (Graham& Weiner1990:80). Furthermore, other scholars focused on studying the factor of motivation that tends to affect the efficiency of the workers in any kind of organization. Most of them came up with some theories that tend to explain how motivation factor influence employee efficiency at work. Some famous theorists over this factor of motivation are; Abraham Maslow, Fredrick Herzberg and John Adams among others. This paper focus on the theories of motivation that were postulated by these theorists. The paper will also show the application of these theories in a Starbucks organization behavior as a case study. Overview of the theories Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory Abraham Maslow was an American psychologist who studied human motivation and developed the hierarchy of needs theory of motivation between 1940-1950. Maslow’s ideas in this theory surround the hierarchy of needs that concern the responsibilities of employers to provide a conducive workplace environment that encourages the employees to work to their full potential (Chapman 2010:1). Maslow’s theory states that human needs can be classified into different levels, the levels starts with those needs that are more basic for human survival. The subsequent levels have the human needs that tend to make the life of a person to be more comfortable (Rakowski 2011:12).The main concept in his explanation in this theory is that a person tends to struggle to satisfy the needs of the lower level before him/her ascents to the upper level (Chapman 2010:1). This means that the lower level needs are more important as compared to the upper level needs. In brief, Maslow identified five levels where he classified the human needs according their priorities. He arranged the levels in a form of a pyramid, where the lower level as mentioned represented the basic or psychological needs that every human being would need to survive, that is; food, shelter and clothing, excretion, sleep, breathing etc (Rakowski 2011:12). Indeed, every normal human being would try to satisfy these needs before he looks for another need. The second level composed of safety needs, which include the security of; body, employment, healthy, property, resources etc. Thus, a person will have to ascent to this level after he/she has satisfied the psychological needs. For example, one would start looking for safety of his body after he has eaten food and has clothed on. The third level composed of belonging or love needs; they include family, friendship and sexual intimacy. This level explain that a person would want to be associated with others; human being tend to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance thus would want to prove that actually he/she is accepted by other people around (Chapman 2010:1)Fourthly, we have the level of esteem; every human being has the desire of having self-esteem and self-respect. People tend to engage themselves in activities that would see them contributing to the society so that they main gain recognition by others. Under this level, people look for self-esteem, confidence, respect of others, respect by others and personal achievements. Maslow warns that the imbalances at this stage leads to low self-esteem and inferiority complex Lastly, we have the self-actualization level at the top of the pyramid. This level is narrower than the lower levels since few people reach at this point; this is because people tend to struggle to satisfy the lower level needs and to some extent they encounter some inefficiency in fulfilling them and then develop negative character that hinder them to rise to the top to the level of self actualization (Chapman 2010:1). Under this level of self-actualization, we have the needs such as creativity, morality, spontaneity, acceptance of others and lack of prejudice. Herzberg’s two-factor theory Fredrick Herzberg is another American psychologist who did a lot of research concerning motivation. He was the first person to reveal that satisfaction and dissatisfaction by the workers at work emanates from different factors (Riley 2005:6)He carried out his research and came out with a two-step approach that aids the understanding of workers’ motivation and satisfaction. In his two-step approach, he pointed out that factors that affect the motivation of employees can be categorized into two. We have the hygiene factors and the motivator factors; basically, Herzberg theory divides these factors into intrinsic motivation factors and extrinsic motivation factors (Riley 2005:6). He identified these factors as the source of job dissatisfaction, his reasoning was that because factors causing satisfaction and those causing dissatisfaction of the workers are different hence the two feelings could not be taken as the opposite of the other. Hygiene factors are based on the need for the organization to provide a pleasant environment to enable the workers to work to their full potential. When employees consider the hygiene factors inadequate, then they can easily cause the dissatisfaction of workers. (Hoffman 2007:22). Examples of hygiene factors are; firm administration, quality supervision, quality of interpersonal relation, job security, and good working conditions. On other hand, motivator factors are based on the individual’s need for personal growth (Riley 2005:6). If the motivator factors are effective, they can enable an individual to attain above average performance in his assigned duties. Examples of motivator factors suggested by Herzberg are worker recognition, status, opportunity for individual growth, challenging work and responsibility (Hoffman 2007:22). His explanation was that the best way to motivate workers is to work on intrinsic factors. The main premise in the two-factor theory is that if an employer is trying to improve job satisfaction among his workers, he needs to address those factors that affect employees’ satisfaction. Adams equity theory John Adams is another behavioral psychologist who worked on this issue of motivation and came up with equity theory. Equity theory attempts to explain that relational satisfaction by workers in terms of their perception of fair and unfair distribution of the resources within the firm (Ashrif, n. d: 159). Adams used “inputs and outputs” terms in explaining his theory. Inputs represents the efforts of the employees are putting into the firms work while output is the rewards they are getting from the firms work. Therefore, employees tend to compare the efforts they are sacrificing and the rewards they are getting from this job. (Ashrif, n. d: 159). This theory not only focuses on the efforts and the rewards of employees in the same firm, but also goes not only beyond comparing the efforts and rewards of other people elsewhere who are doing the same job. This theory bases its arguments that people tend to have a belief that people value fair treatment much a factor that causes them to be motivated. The structure of equity in the place of work is based on the inputs and the outputs Chapman, Allan. (2010). This theory argue that when individuals in a firm feel that they are under rewarded or over rewarded will have to experience distress. This distress leads them to find a way out to restore equity within the relationship. In simple terms, equity theory emphasizes the balance between the efforts and the rewards of the workers. Therefore, managers and the employers must try to gauge and compare what workers are bringing to the organization and what they are paying the workers in return. Application to Starbucks case study Starbucks is a coffee processing company that is well established due to the high quality management and service to the customers. From the case study, we find that this company has intelligent, satisfied and well-motivated employees who even are willing to work overtime to ensure that the company attains its goals. The enthusiasm of the Starbucks employees did not just come easily, but it came due to the intelligent managers who understood the importance of valuing the employees of the firm. Actually, Howard Schultz the chief executive officer applied the skills explained in the motivational theories of the above-discussed psychologists to drive Starbucks to such heights. Schultz majorly applied the two-factor theory postulated by Herzberg in raising the efficiency standards in the performance of Starbucks Company. As much as the company had good working conditions for its employees i.e. the hygiene factors such as job security, good personal relationship and quality supervision, still he reasoned that there is still a lot to do to enable the employees produce more. Therefore, he shifted his mind in providing intrinsic or motivator factors which are based on individual needs and personal growth. He initiated this through actions like expanding health care coverage to part time workers. He showed at the board meeting that a large percentage of Starbucks employees are part timers, hence when their health is covered are covered they would work to their full potential. Secondly, he introduced the stock options plans where the employees were allowed to purchase the stock in Starbucks hence making them to be partners not just mere workers. This was a big motivator to the employees since it gave a sense of belonging of the company by the workers. This would enhance their personal growth. Thirdly, there were personal development courses for both the junior workers and the top-level managers. Anybody who was willing to take a course in a particular field he/she just took it as he continued to work. This provision enhanced personal development. In regards to Robbins, S. & Judge, T. (2013).Another intrinsic factor was that the management of Starbucks engages the employees in the decision making process, when they are looking for a solution towards a certain issue, they print some cards where the employees would write their opinion and the managers will go through these opinion and make the final decision basing on the opinions of the workers. Lastly, forming caring units (CUP) which were responsible in uplifting any employee who had encountered a problem for example sickness, death or any other disaster was a great boost to motivation of employees. Therefore, Schultz indeed considered the concepts in the two-factor theory hold the employees interest and motivation in this company. Equity theory like the two factor theory was also greatly applied by the Schultz and his management team. As mentioned earlier. Equity theory majorly focuses on the give and take or effort verses reward principle. Actually, employees in Starbucks are motivated to work hard because of the many benefits they get from the company. From the case study, we find that most employees compel themselves to work overtime not because they have been forced, but because they are more satisfied in that they feel guilt to work less when they the benefits they are getting are beyond expectations. We find that the paying scale of Starbucks Company is good as compared to other competing firms, Starbucks has numerous fringe benefits such as health coverage, free courses, stock options plans, caring unit partners plans (CUP) etc. Therefore, it seems like the rewards employees are getting from the company surpass the effort they are putting into the company. Moreover, the case study shows as that Schultz as the CEO belies that if you treat the employees well, they will in turn treat the customers well. This justifies the equity theory principle input and output or give and take. Actually, he realized that even if they produce quality products, at a fair price without taking care of the employees, it would be hard to meet the targeted sales since the employees in the stores are the ones dealing with the customers directly (Robbins, S. & Judge, T. 2013) Thus, he emphasized in investing in employees so that they reach or capture many customers. The act of extending health coverage to part time workers was a way of practicing equity theory principle. He knew that part time workers are many in this firm, this implies that they are the ones who meet many customers face to face; therefore considering their needs would also in turn raise the close conducts with the customers. Hence, he decided to invest in them knowing very well that the company will benefit in turn at the long run. The concepts in the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs manifested greatly in this case study. Schultz knew that that providing the conducive environment at the work place would enable the employees to work to their full potential hence, the company would have all the benefits. He also knew the needs of the company itself for it to grow to great heights. He was very much aware that the company cannot attain its full potential over night, but it needed time and good blending of the factors that enhance it. Like the Maslow’s pyramid, he identified the basic needs for the company to grow, one of these needs were having motivated employees. He knew that these basic factors have to be fulfilled or satisfied first, before moving to other levels. In the end when he had established a good rapport with the employees by providing hygiene and motivator factors, the performance of the company just grew effortless. In fact, recently, Starbucks was named to be in the top a hundred best perfuming chain stores world by fortune magazines. Like the pyramid, Schultz started establishing employee engagement, where he created the employees positive attitude towards the company (Robbins, S. & Judge, T. 2013) This means that they would work without much supervision and in self-motivated employees. Then he moved to another level of job satisfaction after fulfilling employee engagement. Slowly, he moved to the efficiency and productive organization. Hence, he attained his goal of elevating Starbucks to a high profile. Customers majorly buy the products of Starbucks because of the friendly treatment from the employees of this company. Thus, Starbucks high performance started by considering the lower level needs as it ascended to high level needs., until it reach at a high point of full potential which can be compared to the point of self actualization on the Maslow’s pyramid. Conclusion Managing a firm be it a business firm of a nonprofit making organization, needs highly skilled managers who are able to adopt and apply the management skills learned in class. It is a bit challenging managing people in any organization since these people are from different background and of different age Griffin &Moorhead 2009:2). This means that the managers should apply different motivation ways to get the employees work to their full potential. It is important for every manager to acquaint himself with the concepts in the motivation theories because they would enable him to know different ways to boost the morale of his staff to increase the productivity of his firm. Bibliography Ashrif, T. (n. d). Organization behavior. Accessed on web 23rd Sept 2012. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course02/unit_14.pdf Chapman, Allan. (2010). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs motivational model. Accessed on web. 23rd Sept 2012. Retrieved from http://www.businessballs.com/maslow.htm Covey, Stephen. (n. d). Building trust in the workplace. Accessed on web. 22nd Sept 2012. Graham, Sandra & Weiner, Bernard. (1990). Theories and principles of motivation. Accessed on web. 23rd Sept 2012. Retrieved from http://www.unco.edu/cebs/psychology/kevinpugh/motivation_project/resources/graham_ weiner96.pdf Griffin, Rick &Moorhead Gregory. (2009). Organization behavior and managing people and organization. Cengage Learning. Texas. US Hephaestus books. (2011). Articles of motivation theories. Hephaestus books Hoffman, Stefanie (2007). Classical motivation theories, similarities and differences. GRIN Verlag. Norderstedt. Germany Madsen, K.B (2009). Theories of motivation. Institute of general psychology. The university of California. US. Miner John. (2012). Role motivation theories. Routledge. London. UK. Milken, Mary. (1998).Understanding human behavior. A guide for health care providers. Cengage learning. Net MBA. (2010). Herzberg’s motivation theory: two factor theory. Accessed on web. 23rd Sept 2012.Retrieved from http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/herzberg/ Rakowski, Nina. (2011). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model: The difference of Chinese and western pyramids on the example of purchasing luxurious products. GRIN Verlag. Norderstedt. Germany Riley, Shannon. (2005). Herzberg’s two factor theory of motivation applied to the motivational techniques within financial institutions. Accessed on web. 23rd Sept 2012. Retrieved from http://commons.emich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1118&context=honors Robbins Stephen. (2001). Organization behavior. Prentice Hall. Pennsylvania State University. Tutor2u. (2012). Motivation in theory- Herzberg’s two factor theory. Accessed on web. 22nd Sept 2012. Retrieved from http://tutor2u.net/business/people/motivation_theory_herzberg.asp Robbins, S. & Judge, T. 2013. Organizational Behavior, 15th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NY: Pearson Education. Read More