How would you feel as a new employee if your boss asked you to do something and you had to admit that you didn’t know how to do it? Most of us would probably feel pretty inadequate and incompetent. Now imagine how strange and uncomfortable it would be if, after experiencing such an incident, you went home with the boss because you were roommates and have been friends since fourth grade.

That’s the situation faced by John, Glen, and Kurt. John and Kurt are employees at a software company that their friend Glen and three others started. The business now has thirty-nine employees, and the “friends” are finding out that mixing work and friendships can be tricky. At home, they’re equals. They share a three-bedroom condo and divide up housework and other chores. However, at work, equality is out the door. Glen is John’s boss, and Kurt’s boss is another company manager. Recently, the company moved into a new workspace. As part of the four-person management team, Glen has a corner office with windows. However, John was assigned a cubicle and is annoyed at Glen for not standing up for him when offices were assigned. But John didn’t complain because he didn’t want to get an office only because of his friendship with Glen. Another problem brewing is that the roommates compete to outlast one another at working late. Kurt’s boss is afraid that he’s going to burn out. Other awkward moments arise whenever the company’s performance is discussed. When Glen wants to get something off his chest about work matters, he has to stop himself.

And then there’s the “elephant in the room.” If the software company is ever bought out by a larger company, Glen (and his three partners) stand to profit dramatically, thereby creating some interesting emotional issues for the roommates. Although it might seem easy to say the solution is to move, real estate is too expensive and, besides that, these guys are good friends.

Put yourself in Glen’s shoes. Using what you’ve learned in Part 5 about communication, individual behavior, employee motivation, and leadership, how would you handle this situation?

Global Sense As you discovered in this part of the text, employee engagement is an important focus for managers. Managers want their employees to be connected to, satisfied with, and enthusiastic about their jobs; that is, to be engaged. Why is employee engagement so important? The level of employee engagement serves as an indicator of organizational health and ultimately business results. The latest available data on global employee engagement levels showed that only 15 percent of employees (surveyed from 155 countries) were engaged in their jobs, 66 percent were not engaged, and 18 percent were actively disengaged. That is, only 15 percent of employees worldwide say they’re passionate about and deeply connected to their work. The region of East Asia showed the lowest proportion of engaged employees at 6 percent. The global regions of the United States and Canada showed the highest levels of employee engagement at around 34 percent. Latin America was the next highest employee engagement region, with 27 percent of engaged employees.

And the highest level of active disengagement of employees is in the MENA region—Middle East and North Africa.1 So what can managers do to get and keep employees engaged? Some important efforts include providing opportunities for career advancement, offering recognition, and having a good organization reputation.

Discuss the following questions in light of what you learned in Part 5.

• What role do you think external factors, such as the economy or a country’s culture, play in levels of employee engagement? Discuss.

• What role does an organization’s motivational programs play in whether an employee is engaged or not? Discuss.

• How might a manager’s leadership style affect an employee’s level of engagement? Discuss.

• What could a manager do in the way he or she communicates to affect an employee’s level of engagement?

• You’re a manager of a workplace that has different

“generations.” How will you approach engaging your employees? Do you think Gen Y employees (born between 1980 and 1994) and Gen Z (born between 1995 and 2015) will tend to be more difficult to “engage”? Discuss...........

Discussion Questions

1. Which of the functions of communication do you think Kevin Johnson uses when he is involved in a Partner Connection Tour? Are the communication functions any different when he uses the internal social media tool Workplace? Discuss.
2. What potential barriers to effective communication might apply to employees working in a busy Starbucks café? What could a store manager do to minimize those barriers?
3. Besides asking employees for their opinions through attitude surveys, what else could managers at Starbucks do to ensure that employees have as positive attitudes as possible?
4. Look at the description of the types of people Starbucks seeks. What individual behavior issues might arise in managing these types of people? (Think in terms of attitudes, personality, etc.) What work team issues might arise? (Think in terms of what makes teams successful. Hint: Can a person be selfmotivated and passionate and be a good team player?)
5. Discuss the “ideal” Starbucks employee in terms of the various personality trait theories.
6. Describe the workplace environment Starbucks has tried to create. What impact might such an environment have on motivating employees?
7. Using the Job Characteristics Model in Exhibit 16–6, redesign a part-time hourly worker’s job to be more motivating. Do the same with a store manager’s job.
8. Describe Kevin Johnson’s leadership style. Would his approach be appropriate in other types of organizations? Why or why not?
9. What is Starbucks doing “right” with respect to the leading function? Are they doing anything “wrong?” Explain.
10. Which of the company’s mission and values (see website) influence the leading function of management? Explain how the one(s) you chose would affect how Starbucks’ managers deal with

(a) Communication issues,

(b) Individual behavior issues,

(c) Motivational techniques, and 

(d) Leadership styles or approaches.