ARTIFACTS
1
Artifacts 5 & 6
Jamie Wipperman
Saint Mary's University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate & Professional Programs
OL 655 - Capstone Symposium
August 7, 2014
ARTIFACTS
2
Artifact 5 Summary: Economic & Political Concepts
This artifact is a cultural advisory report. Basically, what I did was to take a fictional
company and discover and evaluate the differences and challenges this company would deal with
in a global environment. This company for instance, never operated globally before. However,
they are set to begin working in Japan.
OL 634 Economic & Political concepts challenged me considerably. Although, I have
spent a lot of time working globally, it was usually confined to the Middle East. Therefore, I
decided to challenge myself to investigate an area that I had visited but never worked. An
Organizational Leadership Course Outcomes (2014) has an objective to “articulate the
challenges unique to organizations that operate globally.” This artifact allowed me to model this.
The Japanese culture and work practices are very different from those in the US or other places
around the world. The research in not only Japanese culture but also in how to recognize the
challenges was significant.
This was probably one of the most difficult courses I had. I learned a lot about how
politics and culture play such a large role in international business.
Artifact 6 Summary: Social, Legal, & Cultural Perspectives
For OL 635 Social, Legal, and Cultural Perspectives, I felt that my gap analysis paper on
the social responsibility was a great artifact. This paper takes a close look at Starbucks business
practices and determines whether they are considered socially responsible or not. Considering
the wealth of information available, this was a difficult research paper.
One of the objectives of Organizational Leadership Course Outcomes (2014) was to
“evaluate the choices and decisions required for social responsibility.” I don’t think I could have
chosen a better subject than Starbucks. In my paper I looked at both things Starbucks was doing
ARTIFACTS
that were socially responsible as well as those that were not. I looked at what Starbucks said
they were doing and compared it to the reality written in news articles and oversight
publications.
This activity not only gave me an understanding of the practices of an organization that I
use daily, but it also taught me to not take what the company says it’s doing at such face value.
The results turned out to be surprising.
3
ARTIFACTS
4
References
Saint Mary’s University (2014) Organizational Leadership Course Outcomes. Retrieved from:
https://engage.smumn.edu/learn/mod/resource/view.php?id=70966
ARTIFACTS
5
Cultural Advisory Report: Process Consultants, Inc.
Jamie Wipperman
Saint Mary's University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate & Professional Programs
OL634 – Political & Economic Contexts
6/23/2013
ARTIFACTS
6
Cultural Advisory Report: Process Consultants, Inc.
At Process Consultants, Inc. (PCI) we specialize in analyzing the business processes of
organizations in order to increase efficiency and revenue. We do this by working with clients to
find inefficiencies and areas of improvement within their organization. Process Consultants, Inc.
currently operates in many markets within North America. However, due to phenomenal growth
over the past 12 months, we are now able to expand into new markets. We have recently
developed a relationship and an agreement with Yokohama Business Machines (YBM). YBM is
a Japanese organization that specializes in computer hardware and networking solutions for
small to medium sized businesses. They are currently looking to use our expertise to improve
their business efficiency. This relationship will be very beneficial to YBM, but will also allow
PCI to gain international experience and an international presence. Although this new endeavor
is very exciting for our company, it doesn’t come without its challenges. Time differences and
distance are of course of primary concern. However, what is even more important is to
understand social, cultural, and business practice differences between what we are used to and
our new client. Because of this we have created this Cultural Advisory Report to use as a guide
to get us off on the right foot.
Since we have very little experience working internationally, specifically in Japan, we
have developed this report using Hofstede (1994) article titled The Business of International
Business is Culture. This article contains a five dimensional approach to understanding cultural
differences throughout the world. Although one study, or model, alone cannot illustrate all the
ARTIFACTS
7
differences we will face, this will at least allow PCI to have a framework in which to begin our
work outside North America.
The first dimension we look at is power distance. According to Hofstede (1994) this is
the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions accept and
expect that power is distributed unequally. When doing research on this dimension in relation to
Japan, Jun & Muto (1995) say that Japan has a vertical relationship in their society. All human
relationship is based on “person’s hierarchal position, status, educational background, seniority,
and gender.” This means it is important to understand a person’s position and seniority and that
we are working with the appropriate person in our dealings.
Hofstede (1994) next discusses the concepts of individualism. In other words,
individualism on the one side versus its opposite, collectivism, is the degree to which individuals
are integrated into groups. Jun & Muto (1995) see Japan as much less individualistic and a
highly collective society. They speak of the concept of amae which is “a basic human behavior
to depend and presume upon another benevolence that develops in childhood and continues
throughout a person’s life.” The Japanese have strong family ties which translates over into the
work environment. This is important to know as you are less likely to get decisions and
directions from one person and may have to rely more on meetings for a joint consensus on a
decision or direction.
Next, Hofstede (1994) discusses societies that are more masculine or feminine in nature.
Masculinity versus its opposite, femininity, refers to the distribution of roles between the sexes
which is another fundamental issue for any society to which a range of solutions are found.
Fredric & Jun (2003) says that Japan has a strongly masculine society that can trace its roots
back to the samurai culture with its stress on masculine assertiveness, honor, and absolute sex
ARTIFACTS
8
role separation. It’s important to note this as it may be that management is overwhelming male
due to this culture and the woman of our organization have to understand this culture in order to
make sure that they are not offended by the lack of females in these positions. Fredric & June
(2003) go on to say that this can also be seen in the concept that Japan’s work ethic is more “live
in order to work as opposed to work in order to live”. This might be somewhat contrary to what
we are used to so it is something to be aware of.
Hofstede’s (1994) next dimension refers to a society’s tolerance for uncertainty and
ambiguity. ITIM International (2003) says that in Japanese culture there is a low tolerance for
uncertainty making it difficult for people to perform in unstructured or uncertain situations. It
goes on to say that the Japanese culture works much better when a set of protocols and rules or
regulations are followed to avoid uncertainty. This is much different that we at PCI are used to
as we have operated as a startup company for many years where uncertainty was the norm. Even
though we are now an established company our roots give us a high comfort level when working
in these uncertain situations. We will need to be certain that our clients have a high comfort
level and in order to achieve this we will have to insure that we are using proper protocols and
adhering closely to our project plans.
Hofstede’s (1994) fifth dimension can be said to deal with values associated with long
term orientation are thrift and perseverance; values associated with short-term orientation are
respect for tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one's "face". Fredric & Jun
(2003) say that based on a study conducted, “Japanese mangers develop a business plan for a
period of at least three years and require their employees to follow the same time frame for their
work plan”. This points out that the Japanese culture prizes long term orientation in business. I
would like to point out that this came as a surprise to me. My assumption was that the Japanese
ARTIFACTS
9
were more concerned with tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and protecting one’s “face”.
This is a belief or stereotype that I held. The reason I brought this up is to highlight how
important it is that we at PCI work with an open mind and understand that our beliefs may not be
accurate or there may be more to the reality then meets the eye.
In conclusion, we hope that this guide will give some insight into the society and cultural
similarities and differences that we need to be aware of. As we know, no document or study is
going to be 100% so it is important to keep an open mind and listen to what our client’s ask for.
If in doubt about how a client would like to have something handled it never hurts to have a
conversation with them and give them some options. We need them to understand that
respecting their culture and way of doing business is very important to us and that we look
forward to working with new cultures so we can grow as an organization.
ARTIFACTS
10
References
Fredric, S. & Jun, O. (2003) Culture & Conflict: Japanese manager & Thai subordinates. Culture
& Conflict, 187-210
Hofstede, G. (1994). The business of international business is culture. International Business
Review, 3(1), 1-14
ITIM International. (2003). Retrieved August 17, 2009 from Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimension:
http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_japan.shtml
Jun, J. & Muto, H. (1995). The hidden dimension of Japanese administration: Culture and its
impact. Public Administration Review, 125-134.
ARTIFACTS
11
Starbucks: Socially Responsible?
Jamie Wipperman
Saint Mary's University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate & Professional Programs
OL 635: Social, Legal, and Cultural Perspectives
October 16, 2013
ARTIFACTS
12
Starbucks: Socially Responsible?
There are few places on earth where you can’t find a Starbucks. Starbucks is a global
coffee chain that was founded in 1971 and now has almost 18,000 stores worldwide with
hundreds of thousands of employees. Since the proliferation of gourmet coffee stores, Starbucks
has become a global leader. As a matter of fact, Larson (2013) states that today at least one in a
hundred cups of coffee served every day is Starbucks and it's estimated at 32.6% shares in the
market. Because of this Starbucks isn’t only powerful when it comes to the coffee market but is
a global force in the world economy. A company so powerful is bound to have a strong sense of
values and policies on social responsibility. Such a company is also bound to come under heavy
scrutiny regarding their policies and procedures. In this paper I examined the company’s
expressed beliefs, values, and culture and compare this to their actions. I would say that I was
surprised by the results as I went into this assignment with my own preconceived notions. So, do
Starbucks actions live up to their proclamations?
In order to determine if Starbucks lives up to their beliefs, values, and culture, as well as
determining whether they are a socially responsible organization on a global scale, we must first
look at what the company says about itself. I think for a company like this, you must look at
certain areas where they have the biggest impact. Since this is a global organization that depends
on agriculture for its livelihood the most logical areas to consider are ethical, environmental, and
cultural responsibility on a global scale. Starbucks (2013) says they have always believed they
can – and should — have a positive impact on the communities it serves. The company releases
what they call a “Global Responsibility Report” each year. When comparing this report to the
key elements discussed before, we can first look at the company’s ethical claims. Since it’s such
ARTIFACTS
13
a high profile issue in the industry we first examine the sources of the company’s products.
Starbucks (2013) reports that the majority of their coffee comes from emerging countries such as
Columbia, Costa Rica, Brazil, and Guatemala. These markets, and others like them, have many
times been exploited due to cheap labor and minimal regulations. De Neve (2009) understands
this dynamic and explains that ethical standards go beyond just following the laws. In his article,
he illustrates that practices such as good working conditions, humane treatment, minimum wage,
and freedom of association are all part of an ethical code. Starbucks (2013) report says that their
approach includes responsible purchasing practices, farmer support efforts, and socially
responsibility standards for suppliers. They report that 93% of their coffee was ethically sourced
in 2012 with a goal of 100% in 2015. Starbucks, in cooperation with other sources, developed
the Coffee and Farmer Equity (C.A.F.E) practices. This is a coffee buying program which
Starbucks (2013) says promotes social, economic, and environmental standards. It sounds like
the company is truly striving to practice ethical standards when buying its product. So is this all
too good to be true? That depends on who you ask. Although some see this program as a step in
the right direction, others are not so sure. Timmerman (2013) says that Starbuck’s farmer equity
program is just a logo on the bag to help sell coffee. He said that his attempts to contact
Starbucks to find the location of the farms from which they bought coffee went unanswered.
When he finally discovered the location of the farms, he visited one in Narino, Columbia. No
one I met knew much about Starbucks or their C.A.F.E. practices. Some farmers did know of
Starbucks but said they were just another company that bought coffee. Even the farmers who
sell knowingly to Starbucks and those who had received assistance prefer to get their beans
certified by and sold to Nespresso, which pays 28 cents more per kilogram. So where Starbucks
claims to be an innovator in these practices, others see this as perhaps an effort but not much
ARTIFACTS
14
more than a sales ploy. As I researched though, I started to find that Timmerman was in the
minority in his views. Though Starbucks has been criticized widely in years past for their coffee
buying practices, most of the research I have done shows at least a concerted effort to follow
more ethical standards when buying products. Something to remember is that when buying their
coffee, Starbucks is not bound by many laws since they are operating outside the United States.
However, Steers (2010) says that most individuals that make up companies will do what is right
over what is legal many times. Steers points to an in-house training program at Motorola where
they advise their global managers to research any initiatives they plan to implement to insure
they don’t conflict with any human rights or environmental principals before they apply them.
Fair Trade USA, a third-party certifier of Fair Trade Certified coffee in the United States, has
noted the impact Starbucks has made in the area of Fair Trade and coffee farmer's lives. Hardie
(2013) says that since launching its FTC coffee line in 2000, Starbucks has undeniably made a
significant contribution to family farmers through their rapidly growing FTC coffee volume. By
offering FTC coffee in thousands of stores, Starbucks has also given the FTC label greater
visibility, helping to raise consumer awareness in the process. So I think the truth lies
somewhere in the middle. Starbucks is making strides to improve the lives of the farmers from
which they buy coffee but it is a slow process. How much is a company expected to do and how
much can they actually control? Whether it is part of a marketing strategy or not, these standards
that Starbucks is self-imposing are seen by most as a good step. Blackett (2001) discusses the
concept of “self-regulation”, like what Starbucks is doing. Blackett points out that through their
own codes of conduct, corporations publicize to consumers that they are acting voluntarily to
insure that workers in their global production chain enjoy certain rights.
ARTIFACTS
15
Part of social responsibility is protecting the environment. It’s making sure that what you
are doing as a company is not having a negative impact on the environment. A company like
Starbucks can have a major impact on the environment due to its many locations, products, and
dependence on agriculture. Starbucks (2013) says they are taking a comprehensive approach to
reducing the environmental impact. They say they have reduced their water usage in company
owned stores by 17% since 2008. They said that 69% of new company owned stored built in
2012 are LEED certified which is a U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) standard. They also
proclaimed an initiative to reduce electricity use by 25% by 2015. They are also reporting an
initiative in the area of recycling that saved over 100,000 trees last year. These are very lofty
goals and claims so how do others feel they are doing? Are they living up to their claims? Many
detractors will look to recycling as a downfall of Starbucks. All those paper cups that are being
used, but many times never being recycled is an issue. However, it is an issue that Starbucks is
working on. Allison (2012) points to the reusable cups that Starbucks has introduced recently in
many stores. Unfortunately this has been a relatively small impact on a major problem. Allison
(2012) does point out that Starbucks does contribute in other ways. For instance, among Fortune
500 companies, it is the ninth leading purchaser of renewable energy certificates. It’s also testing
energy-efficient lighting in several shops. Allison (2012) also points out that Starbucks was
committed to building stores by 2010 that are 25 percent more energy efficient. This is a goal
they did achieve and highlighted this on their website. So by and large, it appears that Starbucks
is making a concerted effort to have less of a negative impact on the environment. Many
skeptics may say this is really just to increase the bottom line. Less energy and water use means
less money spent. That may be the case but it begs the question that is it not socially or
environmentally responsible if it’s a side effect of something else? This is very good question.
ARTIFACTS
16
Finally, let’s look to see whether Starbucks is responsible when it comes to being
culturally sensitive. This is an area in which I found nothing on the Starbucks website. They do
discuss the positive effect on the areas in which they buy coffee but they have no information on
areas in which they open stores and sell their products. Luckily this is an area that I have
personal experience so it makes it a bit easier. Starbucks has a formula for their stores. Just
about every Starbucks you enter has the same basic layout and largely the same products. Many
people find that comforting. This is especially true if you travel globally. However, this is not
always true for everyone. Of course Starbucks has the right to open stores where it likes and is
approved. However, many are becoming offended by the business practices it follows when
opening these stores. For instance, Klein (1999) reports that tactics Starbucks has used to
expand and maintain their dominant market position, including buying out competitors' leases,
intentionally operating at a loss, and clustering several locations in a small geographical area.
For instance, a Starbucks branch was completed on St. James's Street in Kemptown, Brighton,
England, despite having been refused permission by the local planning authority, Brighton and
Hove City Council, who claimed there were many coffee shops already present on the street and
that were local shops more fitting to the culture of the area. In also look to my personal
experience in the Middle East, I understand the importance and significance of the coffee or tea
shop. It’s a gathering place, a place to do business, and a social club. Most Starbucks are not
this way. Therefore many in the region are anti-Starbucks due to the business it takes away from
the local shops. Schein (2010) tells us that the three levels of culture are artifacts, espoused
beliefs and values, and basic underlying assumptions. This issue crosses into all these aspects.
It’s especially true when you look at artifacts. Starbucks is in no way similar to what you would
see and feel in a local coffee shop in Qatar for instance. They are the same wherever you go and
ARTIFACTS
17
don’t make an attempt to blend culturally. It is easy to say that most U.S. corporations do the
same thing. However, in a culture such as the Middle East a coffee shop is more than a
McDonalds.
So what conclusions can we draw from this gap analysis? As I said in the beginning, I
was somewhat surprised by my findings. I expected much more negative than I actually got and
felt the gap would be wider. I know in the past there has been publicity about Starbucks
practices in certain areas but it appears that positive changes have been made. I think that
Starbucks is making an attempt in some areas but not in others. It’s clear that despite its
detractors, Starbucks has had a positive impact on the lives of those who grow the coffee.
Whether it is a major or as Timmerman (2013) believes, not a major impact, it does appear that
an effort is being made in this area. I feel that environmentally they are making an impact. It
seems that the claims made on their website hold true when put under a microscope. It also
seems they are doing more to try to improve this. Many will say these improvements are simply
another way to increase profits. Perhaps that is true and perhaps it’s not. However, if the impact
on the environment is positive does it matter? Finally, we look at cross-cultural impacts. I think
Starbucks is severely lagging in this area. I’ve seen it overseas and I think even in the U.S.
Starbucks has a reputation for running local shops out of business by saturating the market. So
in conclusion can you say 2 out of 3 ain’t bad? I’m not sure about that. However. overall I feel
that this company was more positive in the area of social responsibility than I expected.
ARTIFACTS
18
References
Allison, M. (2012). Starbucks struggles with reducing environmental impacts. Retrieved from:
http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2004412179_starbucks14.html
* The Seattle Times serves the Northwest with thoughtful, independent, Pulitzer Prizewinning journalism that impacts the community.
Blackett, A. (2001). Global governance, legal pluralism and the decentered state: A labor law
critique of codes of corporate conduct. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 8(2),
401-447.
* Professor Adelle Blackett is a William Dawson Scholar at the Faculty of Law, McGill
University. She holds a doctorate in law from Columbia University, and teaches and
researches in the areas of labor and employment law, trade law, and law and development.
De Neve, G. (2009). Power, inequality and Corporate Social responsibility: The Politics of
ethical Compliance in the South Indian Garment industry. Economic & Political, 64(22).
*Geert De Neve’s research examines impacts of economic liberalisation on Indian garment
industries, and on the social dynamics of outsourcing. Geert has begun to examine the
effects of trade liberalization on export industries in Tamilnadu.
Hardie, A (2013). Tea & Coffee Trade Journal: Fair Trade for All. Retrieved from:
http://www.fairtradeusa.org/press-room/in_the_news/tea-coffee-trade-journal-fair-trade
* With over 125 years of history in serving the tea and coffee industries, TEA & COFFEE has
become one of the oldest and most respected trade journals in the industry.
Klein, N (1999). No Logo: Taking Aim at Brand Bullies. Knopf Canada 1999.
*Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist. She writes a weekly column in The Globe and
ARTIFACTS
19
Mail, Canada's national newspaper, and is also a frequent columnist for the British Guardian.
Klein has traveled throughout North America, Asia, and Europe, tracking the rise of anticorporate activism. She is a frequent media commentator and has guest-lectured at Harvard,
Yale, and New York University
Larson, K. (2013). Business: What is Starbucks market share globally? Retrieved from:
http://www.quora.com/Business/What-is-starbucks-market-share-globally-and-in- the-US
*Ken Larson has over 30 years in federal government program and contract management and
10 years in small business consulting. As a Micro Mentor Volunteer Counselor, he assists
many small businesses with their planning and operations processes.
Steers, R. M., Sanchez-Runde, C. J., & Nardo, L. (2010). Managing in an imperfect world (pp.
363-394). In Management across cultures: Challenges and strategies. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press
* Richard Steers and his colleagues provide a comprehensive and useful analysis of the many
areas where culture shapes and influences managerial behaviors and practices. The book
should be an excellent resource for global managers who have to navigate their way through
different countries and cultures
Timmerman, K. (2013). Starbucks Farmer Equity Program is Just a Logo. Retrieved from:
http://dailycoffeenews.com/2013/07/22/starbucks-farmer-equity-program-is-just-a-logofood-author-says/
*Kelsey Timmerman, is an author on the sources of food and clothing that makes its way to
the United States retail economy. He is an authority on products from other countries that
America consumes and has written multiple books on the subject.
Schein, E. H. (2010). The three levels of culture. In Organizational culture and leadership (pp.
ARTIFACTS
23-33). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
*Edgar Schein is a former professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, has made a
notable mark on the field of organizational development in many areas, including career
development, group process consultation, and organizational culture.
Starbucks Corporate Website (2013) Being a responsible company. Retrieved from:
http://www.starbucks.com/responsibility
20