Starbucks remake redux

The Starbucks Story continues as many people continue to chime in on how to “save” the franchise. In my previous Starbuck’s post, I looked at brand premiumness to see where we might find an answer to Starbuck’s ills. BusinessWeek’s Bruce Nussbaum latest column “OnDesign” points to a radical suggestion by Pentagram’s Jim Biber to tackle a tangential point on the “premiumness” of the Starbuck’s franchise.

Let’s look at Jim’s thought provoking make over suggestions:
1. “*$” instead of Starbucks - neat and cute, but a negative connotation if there is ever one. Probably tongue-in-cheek, still, I don’t think the need to dump the Starbuck’s name unless one truly believes it can’t be salvaged from the poor image surrounding the brand. May be it’s worth putting it out for bid amongst the world’s Top 10 Ad agencies and see what they come up with. Let it be a winner-takes-all competition. That’s sure worth a lot of $!
2. Time and Motion - this consideration has a lot going for it. It goes to the heart of the “customer experience” for Starbucks. The key question is to choose which customer experience it wants to focus on. It can’t serve the serious leisure coffee lovers and also serve the on-the-go coffee drinkers. The latter probably best served by the faster McDonald’s or Dunkin Donuts franchises. Serving all means serving none from a customer branding perspective. Take a stand, draw the line in the sand and take on that identity. Starbucks doesn’t have an identity now and that’s contributed mightily to it’s crisis.

But if Starbucks wants to cater to both, it might be worth it to have two types of stores -
a) the “take away” window booth where it’s pure coffee assembly line and truly for the masses and
b) have Jim’s concept store for the serious leisure coffee lovers.

3. Architecture - enhancing the coffee lover’s experience. This is radical and highly creative. Can one reinvent a coffee lover environment that accentuates the individuality of the coffee drinker and promotes the relationship between the drinker and his/her coffee?

To me, finding the key to this is Starbuck’s step toward rebirth and reinvention of itself.

Stay tuned as the coffee drips….

The PEZ and Managing People

A friend and I were talking about a meeting I had this week. And my story-telling caused my friend to make a unique contribution to management theory…

For those not familiar with “The PEZ” it was originally an Austrian candy, but I grew up with it in the States where it was a hit. The method of dispensing rectangular candy was part of the enjoyment and has now become a collector’s item.

PEZ Candy - Disney style

So, I’m having this meeting with a person and it soon becomes a one-way discussion. Complicating matters a bit is that this individual is one of the senior guys and we’re having a chat about things in my area. Trying to get in a word edgewise is a bit difficult because this person has some strong views on things and sometimes doesn’t listen very well (charitably, it could be that he has such firm view on things that he believes he’s correct and that standing firm is the way to get things moving forward). But being this is my area we’re talking about, I’m forced to speak out…but it proves a bit difficult until I just let him speak…and speak…and speak some more.

After what seems like eternity, I get a chance to lay out my views and ideas because it seems that well, like a PEZ candy, after the last one pops out, that’s it, you need to refill and that’s the chance to jump on!

Do you work with people who are like the PEZ candy dispenser? Once they’re out of candy (i.e stop talking), it’s easier for you to get on with the agenda/discussion/meeting? My feeling is that once you figure out that the person you’re dealing with has a PEZ management style, you need to brace yourself for long lasting meetings and several rounds to get to the point. It’s a bit like boxing hmmm….