Analysis of Starbucks coffee company’ employees misunderstanding using organizational behaviour approach Essay

Analysis of Starbucks cocoa companion employees misinterpret using plaqueal demeanour courtIntroduction In every memorial tablet, organization behavior is very crucial at all levels of employees from anxiety to workers. administrational doings deals the study of personality of individuals or characteristic of a group in an organization together with internal subprogrames of an organization in order to do the effectiveness of the organization or develop a solution (Hellriegel, & Slocum, 2010 p. 5). It helps hoi polloi to act, understand each former(a) and find solution to deportmental enigmas, which cease in alter working environment olibanum government issueing to improved productiveness. Therefore, it is important for worry to ensure that effective employees accepted demeanor is hold uped end up-to-end the organization. It is important to understand organization behaviour so that finish do exploit and requirements of employees be channeliseed in the silk hat ways that would non affect mathematical operation of a corporation (Mullins, 2013 p. 77). This paper will bespeak solving organization caper that faced Starbucks umber bean phoner in 2005. The occupation involved misunderstandings between employees and management resulting in communication difficulty in the partnership, which greatly affected its productiveness in new-made Zealand ( crown of thorns, 2013 p. 10). The problem motherd employees dissatisfaction and lack of motif and thus giving hapless services that in turn decreased production output and thus the alliance qualification losings. The misunderstanding between employees and management led to change of employees behaviour and so it was important to change their behaviour in order to realize the productiveness of the friendship. Employees dissatisfaction and misunderstanding in an organization causes confused commitment from employees thus touch on the consummation of an organization (Hel lriegel, & Slocum, 2010 p. 502). Although the problem could be addressed using unlike organizational techniques such as organizational maturement, organizational behaviour mount remained the best technique to find the solution of the matter so as to improve the effectiveness of the comp any. Starbucks coffee association is a multinational stomach (MNC) that was started in Seattle in 1971 (Starbucks Coffee Company, 2014 b Company Information. Starbucks Coffee Company). The company specialises in coffee and coffee products. It has its lineages established crossways the six continents with to the gamyest degree of the market organism concentrated in America, Europe and Asia. The company has more(prenominal) than 15,000 stores in more than 50 countries in six continents. The company performance and productivity increased steadily over years becoming among the best coffee selling company in the world. It continued ripening and development led to opening of a new store in vernal Zealand in 1998 (Starbucks coffee company, 2014 a Extends the Starbucks brand into grocery channels across the U.S. Launches Starbucks.com). In smart Zealand, Starbucks has more than 29 stores and over 3,700 employees serving more than 60,000 customers every day operating under restaurant Brands franchise (Starbucks Coffee Company, 2014 c Starbucks Coffee Company impertinent Zealand Restaurant Brands, 2014 About Us-Restaurant brands). Similarly, the store in New Zealand has improved growth and development giving it value in the market. However, poor management in 2005 led to it do losses due to misunderstanding between employees and management. Communication barrier caused by misunderstandings were the study causes of its poor performance (Phillips, & Gully, 2012 p. 497). The companys organization nuance involves sophisticated products such as wifi coffee house and employees motivation by means of reward and attractive remunerations. Similarly, the company ad vocated for organizational culture where passing skilled employees give utmost quality services to clients by means of especial(a) performances that has rewards (Moncarz, Zhao, & Kay, 2009 p. 447). This culture has enabled the company to rent competitive advantage and be able to educational activity a large sh be of market in all its stores overt across the globe. New Zealand is one of the openings that has also had an exceptional growth and contri just nowed to the growth of the company. However, the growth was halt in 2005 when the company suffered loss that was caused by misunderstanding between various levels of management. The misunderstanding was a result of a finality made by the management non to increase their wages to $ 12 per hour as employees had requested. The company has also been said to discriminate its employees by giving scurvy wages as evidenced in Starbucks stores in New York (Bussing-Burks, 2009 p. 90). The decisiveness affected the relationship between employees and management. Moreover, the performance of the employees was negatively affected and as a result the behaviour of the employees changed from the culture of exceptional performance and quality services to employees thus affecting the companys performance. In every organization, employees and managements operate under a pre-established behaviour that ensures its effectiveness. A positive(p) behaviour essential be maintained or improved so as to improve the performance of the company (Luthans, & Youssef, 2007 p. 337). Therefore, the management must ensure an optimum business environment is highly maintained so as to maintain the behaviour of employees at the most effective and deep level. Consequently, management should try to maintain their management behaviour because their behaviour tail influence that of the employees (Gelf, Erez, & Ay target, 2007 p. 494). The combination of this behaviour towards the effectiveness of an organization ensures that a positive c ulture is maintained and that the organization is able to maintain its productivity, growth and development. Similarly, solutions to crises argon easily laid off. In order to address this problem, organizational behaviour models or theories were useful in encouraging the employees and management to change their behaviours and align their past or new behaviour that would ensure effectiveness in the company. Some theoretical approaches to this problem included systems, neo- benignant relations, finding- do, scientific leaders, human relations, and bureaucratic approach (Mullins, 2013 p. 43). The organizational behaviour models are important in addressing human behaviours and understandings their relations for effective implementation of changes that would ensure companys productivity in maintained and improved. Neo-human relations approach entails how an organization is able to confine structures of management in a way that it is able to cue employees through with(pred icate) satisfying their basic needs and giving attractive remunerations. The model helps in addressing employees dissatisfaction (Mawhinney, 2011 p. 313). In addition, the approach focalisationes on the needs to address to the employees issues such as salary increment and other needs. An organization that uses this approach is able to maintain it high predominance and growth. A solution to the problem at Starbucks coffee company required management adapt to neo-human approach by urinate sure that the needs of the employees could be attended. The solution could be realised if management could increase plan to increase the salary of the employees to $ 12. The increment could be promised to be done in phases so that the financial performance of the company would not be affected. Consequently, employees motivation could b e achieved that could results in increased productivity of the company. However, leaving the lieu without a solution would result in strikes, which would unless affect the reputation of the company in addition employees reduced performance. Organization that does not understand the behaviour of the employees fails to meet the needs of employees and this may cause passive participation and resistance in place of work (Bloisi, Cook, & Hunsaker, 2007p. 113). Strikes mate to employees underperformance could greatly affect the company and can cause its collapse if an spry action could be delayed. From this approach, the responsibilities of leaders are to make sure that the goals of workers are achieved so that they can facilitate the achievement of the companys goals (Bratton, 2010 p. 200). ratiocination making model would also be an important approach to address the problem with Starbucks coffee company. In decision making model, a decision that is arrived at is not a necessarily an optimal solution but a solution that benefits all the parties and enhance the performance of the company (Klein, 2008 p. 457). The decision making model opt imise the change of behaviour that is goal oriented. The appearance in which a decision is made is important in a company (Griffin, & Moorhead, 2013 p. 215). An organization that is able to make ethical decisions expect high likely hood of succeeding and achieving high growth. Poor decision making results in poor management and misunderstanding between the management and employees and end up affecting the performance of the company negatively (Stein, 2010 p. 87). This is what was experienced in Starbucks Company in year 2005. The decision to decline to raise the payments of employees without a major reason or a proper communication caused the management to find themselves in a crisis of management and performance of the company. The problem can be addressed through ethical decision making process where all the stakeholders are involved in decision making (Punnett, 2009 p. 31). In ethical decision making, the views of the employees could see been addressed and that of the company ending up in a compromising situation where both parties issues are met in agreement. The figure 1 to a higher place showing a decision making problem that helps an organization to limit unethical decisions that could affect the performance of the company. The decision to decline wage increment was supposed to live all the move while involving stakeholders and thus the decision would not have affected the employees behaviour. The problem in Starbucks could also be addressed using scientific lead model. In this model, the efficiency in work place can be monitored and adjusted accordingly using various leading skills such as charisma (Nelson, & Quick, 2012 p. 443). The model is useful in understanding the objective and goals of the company so that every issue or problem is addressed in accordance to the goal of the company (Borkowski, 2011 p. 201). In this model, managers are the overall supervisors of the company and that they should make sure that the company does not lose for their mismanagement. For this reason, managers assign think over to employees and monitor so that they are able to give an output of a quality work. Therefore, the management was responsible to manage the work of employees throughout so that they would have made sure that every employee was productive and thus preventing underperformances during the crisis finale (Punnett, 2009). The approach makes sure that the goal of the company is always on the focus and so its growth is not compromised ir admireive of the problem. Starbucks management had failed to utilize this approach and they left the company to be controlled by employees changed behaviour thus down(p) performance. The model is important to every company that is facing employees performance crisis so that they performance of the company remain on focus. The figure 2 above shows the model for scientific leadership models. The decision that is made is focused on the outcome as shown in the figure above. All t he other factors should be considered ensuring that goal of the company is not compromised. Human relations or organization behavioural theory is another model that is best for addressing the problem at Starbucks. It bias important for an organization to understand the behaviour of employees other than economical value such as wages (Netting, & OConnor, 2013 human relations). How workers touch on with each other in place of work determines their performance in places of work and known as Hawthorne Effect (Dalton, Hoyle, & Watts, 2011 P. 13). The model was found to be operational in both informal and formal organization. A ethical relation between employees and management allows smooth decision making resulting in quickly and better solution. In addition, good interpersonal relation in an organization helps to improve the performance of employees and workers (Reece, 2014 p. 5). This model would have allowed the management to make appropriate decision on the workers pay and p revent misunderstanding thus maintaining the performance of the company. System model would also be important in addressing misunderstanding problem that led to poor performance of Starbucks coffee company. In this approach the company is able to measure the output in respect to internal operations. The management is able to monitor all the production processes and be able to evaluate the performance of the company on the basis of employees productivity (Mbanote, 2011 Models of organizational behaviour). Therefore, the management would have been able to realise that there was a problem beforehand hand and employ various management skills before a problem could erupt. When productivity of employees decline, the management finds the immediate cause and addresses the problem giving an immediate and effective decision (Noble, 2014 p. 15). The problem of employees payment would have been addressed before the company could make losses through low productivity. Consequently, the empl oyees would not have reached to the extent of dissatisfaction and reduced performance. Thereby, the performance of the company would not have been affected. Contingency model is another important organizational behaviour theory that was useful for Starbucks coffee company. In contingency model, a situation forces adaptation of the best leadership skills (Tushman, & Romanelli, 2008 p. 174). In other words, it is situational leadership skills that leader are capable of developing in order to adjust their leadership and relationship behaviour to address the situation at hand. The model was highly-developed by a management theorist named Fred Fiedler in 1967 (Singh, 2010 p. 275). In Starbucks coffee company, the effectiveness of leaders in the prevailing situation was important in addressing employees dissatisfaction in their decision. The contingency models require leaders to adjust with the situation so that the performance of an organization is not affected. However, the managem ent in Starbucks New Zealand Company compromised on the prevailing situation resulting in decreased performance of employees and productivity of the company. The case required an immediate decision that would have maintained the motivation of employees and job satisfaction. An immediate meeting with employees union leaders and addressing the issue would have kept the hope of employees a live and they would have continued acting at their level best thus the growth and productivity of the company would have been maintained. Moreover, reverse of the decision and initiation of a new process to make an alternative decision that would involve all the employees representatives and other stakeholders would have calmed the situation. This would have prevented employees from changing their behaviour and focus on the goal of the company to improve its productivity. Contingency model of leadership is one of organizational behaviour that has been adapted by many corporations that have found the mselves in crisis and needs to save the company (Zaccaro, 2007 P. 6). Bureaucracy model is one of the management models that is highly used in Starbucks coffee company. The level of management is divided in levels of management and this make it difficult for employees to interact with the top management directly. The high level of bureaucracy serves as an obstacle of employees to air their grievances and thus any decision or problem must be addressed through a hierarchical process making it to take a visual modality of time (Greenberg, 2013 bureaucratic model-ideal types). In the case that happened to Starbucks would have been solved in good time and minimized the effect that was caused by the situation. However, the decision had to follow a protocol that took a lot of time and some of the decisions were being objected at different levels. Therefore, employees got impatient and they started reiterating through low performance and low productivity that affected greatly the perf ormance of the company. Bureaucratic model of organization management requires solution to situations that are not imperative and that may not affect the productivity and effectiveness of the company (Boin, & Hart, 2007 p. 43). An urgent situation requires quick decision making and action before an organization is affected negatively. Therefore, urgent solution was required in Starbuck and so bureaucratic model was not appropriate.Conclusion Organization behaviour is the study how individual and groups of people interact with the internal processes of an organization with respect to effectiveness of a company. Starbucks coffee company experienced a change in behaviour of employees in New Zealand after a misunderstanding on the increment of wages to $ 12 a day. The employees change of behaviour affected the effectiveness of the company resulting to poor economic performance. Therefore, it was necessary for the company to apply various organization behaviour models or theories i n order to understand and address the change in behaviour so that the effectiveness of the company in providing services and products could be resumed. Some of the models included neo-human relations, which entailed an approach that ensured that management could be able to motivate employees through satisfying their basic needs and giving attractive remunerations that would result in change of behaviour and thus affectivity in the company. In addition, other models that were important in addressing the problem at Starbuck were human relations, contingency leadership model, system model, scientific leadership model, decision making model, and bureaucratic models. The models are important in shaping the management and employees behaviour towards effective performance of the organization. These models of organization behaviour did not come into play before the crisis and right off after the crisis thus affecting the performance or the organization negatively.ReferencesBloisi, W., Cook , C. W., & Hunsaker, P. L. 2007. circumspection and organisational behaviour. London u.a. McGraw-Hill Education.Boin, A., & Hart, P. T. 2007. The crisis approach. In Handbook of disaster research (pp. 42-54). Springer New York.Borkowski, N. 2011.organisational behavior in health care. Sudbury, Mass Jones and Bartlett Publishers.Bratton, J. 2010. belong and organizational behaviour. Basingstoke Palgrave Macmillan.Bussing-Burks, M. 2009.Starbucks. Santa Barbara, Calif Greenwood Press.Dalton, M., Hoyle, D. G., & Watts, M. W. 2011.Human relations. Australia South-Western Cengage Learning.Gelf, Erez, M., & Aycan, Z. 2007. Cross-cultural organizational behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, 479514.Greenberg, J. 2013. Organizational behaviour. Routledge.Griffin, R., & Moorhead, G. 2013. Managing great deal and Organizations. UK Cengage LearningHellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. 2010. Organizational behaviour. Manson Cengage learningKlein, G. (2008). Naturalistic decision making. Human Factors The daybook of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(3), 456-460.Luthans, F., & Youssef, C. M. 2007. Emerging positive organizational behavior. Journal of management, 33(3), 321-349.Mark D. 2013. Strikes and labour disputes Legislation from the 1990s, Te Ara the Encyclopedia of New Zealand,Mawhinney, T. C. 2011. Job Satisfaction I/O Psychology and Organizational carriage centering Perspectives. Journal Of Organizational Behavior Management, 31(4), 288-315.Mbanote,. 2011. Management Model of Organizational Behavior. Mbanote-management.blogspot.com. Retrieved 14 may 2014, from http//mbanote-management.blogspot.com/2011/03/model-of-organizational-behavior_23.htmlMoncarz, E., Zhao, J., & Kay, C. 2009. An exploratory study of US lodging properties organizational practices on employee turnover and retention. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(4), 437-458.Mullins, L.J. 2013. Management & Organisational Behaviour. PearsonNelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. 20 12.Organizational behavior Science, the real world, and you. Mason, Ohio South-Western.Netting, F. E., & OConnor, M. K. 2013.Organization practice A guide to understanding human service organizations. Hoboken, N.J Wiley.Noble, K. 2014. The M5 Model Building. Positive learning in Organizations. OD Practitioner, 46(1), 12-17.Phillips, J., & Gully, S. M. 2012.Organizational behavior Tools for success. Mason, OH South-Western Cengage Learning.Punnett, B. J. 2009.International perspectives on organizational behavior and human resource management. Armonk, N.Y M.E. Sharpe.Reece, B. L. 2014.Effective human relations interpersonal and organizational applications. Mason, OH South-Western.Restaurant Brands,. 2014. About Us. Restaurantbrands.co.nz. Retrieved 15 May 2014, from http//www.restaurantbrands.co.nz/about-us/Singh, K. 2010.Organizational behaviour Text and cases. Chandigarh Pearson.Starbucks coffee company, 2014 a. Starbucks Company timeline. TimelineStarbucks Coffee Company,. 2014 b. Company Information. Starbucks Coffee Company. Retrieved 14 May 2014, from http//www.starbucks.com/about-us/company-informationStarbucks Coffee company,. 2014 c. FAQ Starbucks Coffee Company New Zealand. Starbucks.co.nz. Retrieved 15 May 2014, from http//www.starbucks.co.nz/about/faq/our-stores/Stein, G. 2010. Managing people and organizations Bingley, UK Emerald.Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. 2008. Organizational evolution. Organization change A door-to-door reader, 155, 2008174.Zaccaro, S. J. 2007. Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6.Source document