July 19, 2010
Instructor: Lisa Siegal
Starbuck’s Commitment and Communication
Starbucks has many different commitments and communications, but here it will discuss the different leadership styles, different sources of power and how it affects group communication, motivational theories and the commitment of the workforce.
Leadership style is an approach of giving direction, motivating people and implementing plans. As there are many leaders, there are different leadership styles. A good leader uses the right leadership style and bad leaders tend to use only one style. At Starbucks there are two types of leadership styles that would affect group communication which are Authoritarian and Participative. Using the Authoritarian leadership the leader informs the employees of what they should do and how should they accomplish the task. The leader (boss) does not take advice of the employees only when the leader has less time to complete the tasks and the employees are motivated. This style should be used on exceptional or uncommon occasions. The second leadership style is Participative. The leader and one or two employees are involved in decision making process. Decision making process includes how to accomplish a given task. Most people think if Starbucks is using this style then they are indicating they are weak. But on the contrary using this style they are indicating strength. This style is used when the leader has incomplete information and the employees have accurate and complete information. This is why Starbucks employ highly skilled and knowledgeable employees. If the leader decides to use this style then he/she will be able to make faster and better decision. There are different types of source of power that can be found. In Starbucks you will find expert, positional and reward power. It is the exoteric nature of the technical professional’s subject matter that means most superiors or colleagues do not possess the same applicable knowledge or judgment as the CEO. It is most common that employees can have more expert power than their leaders. This can put the CEO in a vulnerable position. To gain the same level of knowledge can be time consuming and possibly not practical, if skills are hard to acquire. You would expect a CEO to take a course so that he/she could directly influence the outcome of the network. As a leader in this situation, he/she should not rely only on expert power to influence outcomes but use other sources of power for influences. Y possessing expert power you have something that most others cannot easily acquire. It is a powerful asset. The question is it always used for the greater good? The answer would e NO. Withholding knowledge as a means of gaining or maintaining power is all too common. If Starbucks leaders were to identify this practice they would have a difficult challenge, but it must be avoided. One might see this where the IT department is in the process of being outsourced, or if an employee feels threatened by new members of their team. As a leader of Starbucks in this situation they would apply other powers to resolve the problem, such as rewarding knowledge sharing or building closer relationships that would affect employees to persuade him/her out of this way of thinking. You should use expert power when you have a genuine expertise in a subject or when you have access to resources within your control. Most leaders should not use expert power when you are unsure of your competence in a subject. Positional power is gained by a person’s role in their organization. At Starbucks there is a grading system used to position an employee and then it is placed in an organization chart. Starbucks elevates its employees in structure but as for positional power is a function of formal authority such as the boss, CEO, or administrator. As the formal authority, he/she will have influence because...