Starbucks Leadership And Board Decision: Clarification

In my March 24 post – “CEO With Your Coffee, Sir?” in which I discussed Starbucks’ new CEO –

Laxman Narasimhan and his stated goal of working one day a month as a barista – I made a careless mistake. Herewith I apologize to Starbucks and to every reader. Although it was well-meaning and, I thought, reliably sourced, it was wrong and I should have done a better job corroborating my sources – which, I thought, were solid.

In my post, I stated “…Starbucks’ Board voted at the annual shareholders meeting to conduct a Human Rights Impact Assessment.” That was inaccurate.

In a statement to me via email, I was informed that “Starbucks board did not vote to conduct a Human Rights Impact Assessment. It was a proposal submitted by shareholders that called for a vote by all shareholders on. Not the board voting.”

Further, “Starbucks would like to clarify that the human rights impact assessment referenced in its statement in opposition to Proposal 8 - Shareholder Proposal Regarding Assessment of Worker Rights Commitments will be conducted by independent third parties, including those with appropriate subject-matter expertise with respect to the referenced deeper-level review of the principles of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. We expect to make the results of the human rights impact assessment available to shareholders, stakeholders, and other interested parties by the end of our 2023 fiscal year, subject to the legal privilege considerations described in our board recommendation.”

That’s a noteworthy difference, but no excuse for my error. I hope this sets things straight.

Lead from the front

The overall story, though, should not be lost. What Narasimhan is doing is a prime example of “lead from the front” leadership, a unique characteristic of far too few “leaders.” While they are to be found today – in the political, business, and sports fields – I shall refrain from mentioning any by name, lest I slight another or, in the political arena, be branded a partisan. History, however, offers the chance.

As a young, rising officer during the French and Indian Wars, George Washington was wounded four times, at least twice, according to historical accounts, by making decisions that were considered less than wise. But the point was, where was Washington? At the front, not shunning anything he asked his troops to do.

Eleanor Roosevelt, arguably the most empathetic first lady in history, not to mention most influential, was admired for going down into the coal mines of West Virginia or up into the tenements of the Lower East Side of New York City to visit the crowded neighborhoods teeming with immigrants. Only then could she exert her powerful influence on her husband, the governor of New York and then president of the United States, who instituted the broadest, most sweeping initiatives in our history. Unable to do so himself due to his paralysis, FDR’s leadership from the front took the shape of his wife, Eleanor. She was his eyes and his ears, his legs and his voice – from the front.

And then there’s Branch Rickey, who brought Jackie Robinson up to the major leagues in 1947 to break the color barrier. Enough can’t be said about Rickey’s business courage or Jackie’s fight on the front lines, but expanding on those details is not the point here. We all know them already.

The point still is that Laxman Narasimhan has an unusual opportunity – to lead from the front – and he looks like he’s taking it.

I should have gotten the rest of it right the first time.