Case Title: A Crack in the Mug: Can Starbucks mend it?
1. What is the central issue in this case?
Starbucks share price [who] declined double the rate of the rise in 2006, shedding more than 60% of its highest value to that date [what] in 2007 [when] because of [why] * Short-term borrowing debts
* The company using its cash flow and liquid investments in the core business and for other new business opportunities * Starbucks concurrently repurchased shares of common stock
The Starbuck coffee shop has become one of an expending company in Canada. However, current marketing strategy cannot corporate the situation efficiently, the share price was decline sharply, the customer not as satisfied at the products quality as usual. In order to manage the licensing issues caused by the expansion circumstance, Howard Schultz, the CEO of the company is going to amend their marketing strategy especially in Operations.
2. What are the alternatives and chosen alternatives?
Alternative 1: Starbuck’ announces recognition that aggressive growth caused Starbucks to lose sight of its core competencies resulting in poor equity performance and moving forward, the company’s strategic mission will be altered to reflect what will make the company bounce back: refocusing on customer experience in the stores, new products and store design elements, new training and tools for the company’s store partners to help them give customers a superior experience. Alternative 2: Maintain the status quo: Starbucks focus of store growth and licensing strategy, predominately in growing economies like China while losing emphasis on refocusing on customer experience in the stores, new products and store design elements, new training and tools for the company’s store partners to help them give customers a superior experience.
Alternative 1: The market has already responded to Starbucks’ mass-market dominance and bridling of customer focus....