Case Analysis of Starbucks
Case Analysis of Starbucks
Case Analysis of Starbucks
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The first Starbucks location opened in 1971. The name is inspired by
Moby Dicks first mate. This name and the mermaid logo were inspired by
the love of the sea, from Starbucks original location in Seattle Washington
in the heart of Pike Place Market. Starting as a single shop specializing in
high quality coffee and brewing products the company grew to be the
largest roaster in Washington with multiple locations until the early 80s.
In 1981, current CEO Howard Schultz, recognized a great opportunity and
began working with the founder Jerry Baldwin. After a trip to Italy to find
new products, Schultz realized an opportunity to bring the caf community
environment he found in Italy to the United States and the Starbucks
brand we know today began to take form. Selling espresso by the cup was
the first test. Schultz left Baldwin to open his own Italian coffee house Il
Giornale which found outrageous success.
In 1987 when Starbucks decided to sell the original 6 locations, Schultz
raised the money with investors and purchased the company and fused
them with his Italian bistro locations. The company experienced rapid
growth going public in 1992, and growing tenfold by 1997, with locations
around the United States, Japan and Singapore.
Starbucks also began expanding its brand. According to George Garza in
his article The history of Starbucks the following product lines were added:
Offering Starbucks coffee on United Airlines flights.
Selling premium teas through Starbucks own Tazo Tea Company.
Using the Internet to offer people the option to purchase Starbucks
coffee online.
Distributing whole bean and ground coffee to supermarkets.
coffee
products
actually helped
his
firm
by creating
BACKGROUND
Vision
To inspire and nurture the human spirit - one person, one cup, and one
neighborhood at a time.
Mission
To inspire and nurture the human spirit - one person, one cup, and one
neighborhood at a time.
Values
With our partners, our coffee and our customers at our core, we live these
values:
welcome.
Acting with courage, challenging the status quo and finding new
for results.
We are performance driven, through the lens of humanity.
Our Coffee
It has always been, and will always be, about quality. Were passionate
about ethically sourcing the finest coffee beans, roasting them with great care,
and improving the lives of people who grow them. We care deeply about all of
this; our work is never done.
Our Partners
Were called partners, because its not a job, its our passion. Together, we
embrace diversity to create a place where each of us can be ourselves. We
always treat each other with respect and dignity. And we hold each other to that
standard.
Our Customers
When we are fully engaged, we connect with, laugh with, and uplift the
lives of our customers even if just for a few moments Sure, it starts with the
promise of a perfectly made beverage, but our work goes far beyond that. Its
really about human connection.
Our Stores
When our customers feel this sense of belonging, our stores become a
haven, a break from the worries outside, a place where you can meet with
friends. Its about enjoyment at the speed of life sometimes slow and savored,
sometimes faster. Always full of humanity.
Our Neighborhood
Every store is part of a community, and we take our responsibility to be
good neighbors seriously. We want to be invited in wherever we do business. We
can be a force for positive action bringing together our partners, customers,
and the community to contribute every day. Now we see that our responsibility
and our potential for good is even larger. The world is looking to Starbucks to
set the new standard, yet again. We will lead.
Our Shareholders
We know that as we deliver in each of these areas, we enjoy the kind of
success that rewards our shareholders. We are fully accountable to get each of
these elements right so that Starbucks and everyone it touches can endure
and thrive.
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
I.
TIME CONTEXT
The problem arose in 2008
II.
VIEWPOINT
Howard Schultz, Chief Executive Officer
III.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
A. MAJOR PROBLEM
STEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
A. Wants or Long Term Objectives
A1. To dominate or monopolize the specialty coffee industry in global scale by
enhancing their marketing capacity and inducing innovative marketing strategies in
a span of five
B. Needs or Short Term Objectives
B1. To be an above the standard performance expected in its industry.
B2. To increase market share for present products or services in present markets
through greater marketing efforts.
B3. To provide intimate and uplifting experience each time.
A. Wants or Long Term Objectives
A2. To be customer centric based company who utilize the marketing and IT
Channels as a media to be closed and interactive with the customers within three
years.
B. Needs / Short Term Objectives
B1. To provide brand awareness to customers through advertising and promotion.
B2. To retain pleasant customer relation.
B3. To increase brand popularity using social networking sites.
V.
AREAS OF CONSIDERATION
A. SWOT ANALYSIS
A.1 Strengths
1. Quality of Product
They give the highest importance to the quality of their
products and avoid standardization of their quality even for higher
production output like searching for quality beans worldwide.
2. Location
Consumers will look more up to them because they are giving back to the
community. It could also gain more loyal customers.
Disadvantage: Creating a foundation takes time, effort and money.
Because a foundation is a legal entity under federal, state and local laws, the use
of an attorney, accountant or other professional may well prove necessary.
5. A strategy should be formulated to tackle the competition by
entering agreement, long-term contracts with the food service companies that
Starbucks are competing against.
Advantage: In this way their coffee would be sold at these outlets
and would gain access to new markets and sales while decreasing
competition.
Disadvantage: It would cost higher investment and higher risk.
H. Decision Matrix
PROFITABILITY
RISK
R&D
A.C.A.
FACTORS
COST
TECHNOLOGY
COMPETITORS
WEIGHTING
3.5
2.67
2.83
3.5
VII.
RECOMMENDATION
VIII.
CONCLUSION