Comments on: Lean Thinking at Starbucks

By: MCP UK

MCP UK — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 03:21:50 +0000

I think it’s wrong when Heydon said “If Starbucks can reduce the time each employee spends making a drink, the company could make more drinks with the same number of workers or have fewer workers.”
Because eventually if you want to increase performance and customer service, you will not achieve but sending a message to your employees that new machines might replace them and they will be out of a job when that happens!

By: Ben Weeks

Ben Weeks — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:04:47 +0000

I love when you said, “…when senior executives begin to prioritize labor productivity over service, they often start to erode the competitive distinction that led to the premium pricing. It’s one thing to purposefully pivot away from a premium position. It’s another to creep away from it without making a clear strategic choice.”

So true. Starbucks also brought in automated machines much to the ire of some coffee fans. I’m not sure if they’re better or worse, but that move seems to fit into this model of labor productivity over service and quality.

When starbucks started books about their branding success described how customers could get drinks in real mugs when (drinking in-store) instead of paper cups because the mug delivered a superior tactile experience. In my experience starbucks seems to moved to paper cups. Maybe it’s cheaper to not have to wash mugs constantly. All of this serves to strengthen the smaller independent coffee shops who remember the personal details.

By: noname

noname — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:00:21 +0000

The way Starbucks is going about this is all wrong. They are putting way to much pressure on Baristas on how to move and do a job. These workers are use to working a certain way and now Starbucks is teaching them how to work like “Robots.” “Take two steps foreword, take two steps back.” I think it stresses out employees because now it feels like they are being watched on how they’re doing the job. Who wants to be told on how many steps to walk on making a frappuccino?

By: Frances Frei

Frances Frei — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:55:46 +0000

Mark – your blog is really terrific – incredibly comprehensive coverage of lean concepts. I think we agree about the danger of using lean techniques “to get rid of people,” which makes it very difficult to get employees to participate. In our experience, that dynamic can be made worse by framing the message as service improvement for some groups and cost-cutting for others.

By: Mark Graban

Mark Graban — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 03:05:19 +0000

I also have some concerns about the Starbucks efforts, as I blogged about here:

http://www.leanblog.org/2009/08/defense-of-lean-and-of-lean-at.html

The idea of not needing as many workers to make the same number of drinks… that is a business pressure reality.

I think it’s all in how you communicate it. You can, like a number of organizations (including hospitals), say “nobody will lose their job due to process improvement.”

No layoffs due to Lean. That’s an important committment to make.

So what do you with your productivity improvements? Train and possibly promote employees to new roles — develop them. Maybe ask them to switch to another store if they are agreeable. Give them “coffee master” training. Do anything but lay them off.

Then, take advantage of natural turnover (it must be high at Starbucks due to the nature of the job). Don’t backfill.

As long as the remaining employees aren’t overburdened (you’ve taken waste out of the process), it’s not an unfair deal.

But if Lean is just “get rid of people” without making the job easier for people, that’s a rotten deal. That’s what people are afraid of.

Time will tell which path Starbucks is taking.

It’s much easier to improve productivity when sales are growing. Then you can grow without hiring. That’s not the situation at Starbucks right now, which adds a challenge.