Case $15\mathrm{.}1$: Should Starbucks Have a Corporate Loitering Policy?

Starbucks launched a multimillion$-$dollar global brand campaign in $2014$ called "Meet Me at Starbucks." The ad focused not on coffee, but

instead on the idea that Starbucks stores were a great place to socialize, whether to catch up with friends, conduct business, or hold a group meeting. But is it OK to hang out at Starbucks if you aren't buying anything?

Starbucks doesn't have a corporate policy on loitering. Instead, individual stores set their own rules about whether people can sit inside or use the restroom for free; at some locations, the answer is no$.$ This was the case at a Philadelphia Starbucks where two black men were recently arrested for trespassing and disturbance. Business partners Donte Robinson and Rashon Nelson were waiting to meet with an associate when one of them asked to use the restroom. They hadn't purchased anything, and the store manager called the police after the men refused to leave. A video of Robinson and Nelson being taken away in handcuffs went viral and sparked public outrage and

accusations of racial profiling.

Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson apologized publicly for the incident and flew to Philadelphia to meet with Robinson and Nelson in person.

The men settled with Starbucks for an undisclosed amount plus an offer of a free college education through the company's partnership with Arizona State University. They also settled with the city of Philadelphia for a symbolic $$1$ each and a promise that the city would start a $$200,000$ entrepreneurship program for its public high school students.

The Philadelphia location did have a no$-$loitering policy, but the guidelines for whether police should be engaged to enforce rules vary by region and may be difficult for managers to interpret. Johnson said that threats and serious disturbances may warrant law enforcement, but that the Philadelphia manager's decision to call the police in this situation was "completely inappropriate." Starbucks did not publicly

discipline the manager, although a corporate spokesperson said she was no longer employed by Starbucks as part of a "mutual decision."

The company closed more than $8,000$ of its U$.$S$.$ locations for a day to conduct training on racial and other unconscious biases.

Starbucks has not announced any changes to its corporate policy $($or lack thereof$)$ on loitering. Do you think the company should

implement a company wide loitering policy?

Solving the Challenge

What would you do if you were CEO of Starbucks?

$1.$ I am not in favor of Starbucks instituting a corporate loitering policy. Decisions on how to manage customers and when to involve police

should be made by store$-$level leadership, not corporate executives. Some locations are busier than others and should be able to decide

whether nonpaying customers are taking up space that would otherwise go to paying customers. Managers should also have the

discretion to call the police when they feel it's appropriate. A single bad decision by one store manager shouldn't represent the entire

company, and most managers know how to apply these types of policies in a fair and nondiscriminatory fashion. The additional bias

training will help prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future.

$2.$ I think it's a good idea for Starbucks to have a corporate loitering policy. This type of leadership should come from the top of the

organization and set the tone for what's important to the company. A corporate policy would provide clearer guidance to store managers

on how to handle nonpaying customers and would also protect the company from liability due to store managers making bad decisions.

Starbucks should also provide clear and consistent guidelines for managers on when it's appropriate to call law enforcement.

$3.$ I think it might be a good idea for Starbucks to have a corporate loitering policy, provided the policy does not lead to the appearance of

discrimination and allows Starbucks to maintain its identity as a socially responsible, warm, welcoming place to spend time with others.

For example, the policy could state that loitering is welcomed as long as there are no paying customers waiting for a seat. If paying

customers don't have anywhere to sit, then nonpaying customers should leave to make room for them. I think all employees should

participate in unconscious$-$bias training to ensure the policy is applied fairly and consistently.

$4.$ Invent other options.

PLEASE PROVIDE ANSWERS FOR ALL FOUR SCENARIOS. PLEASE CITE SOURCES IF APPLICABLE.