Starbucks Decision Shines Light on Workplace Training

By Mary Lynn Fayoumi, CAE, SPHR, GPHR, President & CEO
Published April 24, 2018

The incident in a Philadelphia Starbucks that went viral a few weeks ago has stirred up an interesting national debate on the topic of training in the workplace. Starbucks’ CEO Kevin Johnson's decision to close over 8,000 U.S. stores on May 29 to train close to 175,000 employees around the country on racial bias has caught the attention of media, employers, customers, and American citizens. The training curriculum is still being developed by a cast of heavy hitters and, while details of the program have not yet been released, Starbucks has said that it would be available to other employers. According to a variety of news sources, however, many people are questioning whether the training will make an impact.    

As the leader of an employers' association that has been providing workplace training for over a century, I am clearly a supporter of, and believer in, the value of training. I am also traditional (as well as the daughter of teachers), which means I appreciate the difference between "live" classroom training and technology-enabled alternatives. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that I applaud Starbucks' decision to make an investment in training their employees. While some would argue that it is purely a reactive tactic to minimize negative PR, I think that training is a step in the right direction. The real challenge is the complexity of the subject matter, which means that it will take more than an afternoon training session to make inroads on diversity and inclusion and elicit real change. 

Training is rarely ever a panacea, and one-off training sessions have an even lower chance of success.  Some important considerations when trying to boost the impact of training include:

• Leadership and management support and buy-in;
• Organizational culture;
• Policies and procedures; and
• Follow-up and accountability.

If any of these important factors are absent, lacking, or out of sync, the probability that the training will result in noticeable and long-lasting changes in workplace behavior is reduced. 

Time will tell if Starbucks' approach to this high-profile matter will minimize the chances of unconscious bias impacting their employee morale, recruitment efforts, profits, and/or reputation. I like the way their leadership decided to act in a bold, visible manner and am disappointed that pundits have been so critical before the training has even taken place. We definitely have not heard the end of this story, and I will continue to follow it closely. My hope is that this well-publicized training day at Starbucks is just one element of a multi-faceted effort aimed at curbing discrimination and improving their culture. And I hope that other employers will consider the many positive benefits of training, not just on the topic at hand but on a plethora of other important subjects.