Kotter & Cohen Change Management: Starbucks Case Study
This paper applies Kotter and Cohen's eight-phase change management framework to Starbucks' organizational turnaround beginning in 2008. After rapid domestic expansion led to quality decline and revenue loss, CEO Howard Schultz led a dramatic recovery effort that included closing nearly all stores for barista retraining, shutting 600 underperforming locations, and refusing to cut employee healthcare benefits. The paper traces each of Kotter and Cohen's stages — from creating urgency and building a guiding team, to empowering action, generating short-term wins, and making change stick — through specific strategic decisions Starbucks made. The analysis concludes with the company's shift toward international expansion into China and India as evidence of a sustainable, ongoing transformation.
- Introduction: Starbucks and the Need for Change: Starbucks crisis context and Kotter framework overview
- Creating Urgency and Building a Guiding Team: Store closure, retraining, and Schultz's return
- Communicating Buy-In and Empowering Action: Employee retraining, healthcare retention, operational changes
- Short-Term Wins and Sustaining Momentum: Menu overhaul, innovation, and international growth plans
- Making the Change Stick: International Expansion: China, India expansion and localized menu strategy
- Conclusion: Customer feedback confirms quality-focused change success
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It consistently maps each of Kotter and Cohen's eight stages to a specific, documented Starbucks action, giving the theoretical framework concrete grounding throughout.
- It balances multiple stakeholder perspectives — employees, customers, shareholders, and international markets — showing awareness of organizational change as a multidimensional process.
- It uses real business decisions (store closures, menu overhauls, healthcare retention) as evidence rather than relying on vague generalizations, making the argument credible and specific.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied theoretical analysis: rather than summarizing Kotter and Cohen's model abstractly, the author uses it as a diagnostic lens, moving step-by-step through the framework while anchoring each stage in primary business reporting. This approach — theory-to-practice mapping — is a core skill in management coursework.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief introduction of the Kotter and Cohen framework and the Starbucks context, then moves chronologically through the eight stages, grouping related steps into cohesive paragraphs. Each body paragraph introduces a stage, cites the theoretical basis, and immediately illustrates it with a Starbucks example. The conclusion ties the analysis back to the opening premise using recent customer feedback as closing evidence. The structure is linear and thesis-driven, appropriate for a short management case study.
Introduction: Starbucks and the Need for Change
Kotter and Cohen (2002) outline an eight-phase change process to explain why some organizations succeed and others fail at change management. These stages include: increasing the sense of urgency for change; building a guiding team; getting the change vision right; communicating to stakeholders to generate enthusiasm or "buy-in"; empowering action; creating short-term wins; not letting up; and making the change "stick" (Kotter & Cohen 2002: 6). All of these principles can be seen in the case of Starbucks, a popular coffee retailer whose fortunes flagged until it decided to drastically improve the quality of its coffee and focus on international rather than domestic expansion.
In 2008, Starbucks was in a state of crisis. The Seattle-based coffee chain had become wildly profitable and popular, spreading across America — often opening stores very close to one another in defiance of conventional business wisdom. The concept behind Starbucks was to provide an accessible European coffee experience with a hometown feel in every store. Unlike many franchises, Starbucks was known for tailoring the resources of its stores to the needs of the specific local customer base. However, by 2008 the company was facing major revenue loss due to criticisms that the quality of its coffee had deteriorated and was no longer worth the price. Additionally, "Starbucks' business model had spiraled out of control," with seven new stores opening per day (Kowitt 2008). This rapid expansion had resulted in a significant loss of quality control.
Creating Urgency and Building a Guiding Team
The deteriorating quality represented a critical failure for Starbucks, given that the price of its coffee occupied an "affordable luxury" position. Although not prohibitively expensive like a luxury fashion item, there were many cheaper alternatives available, and the argument for choosing Starbucks had always rested on its quality. To create an immediate sense of urgency, Starbucks did the unthinkable: it closed down nearly all of its stores for a single day to conduct a massive retraining of its baristas, signaling to customers and staff alike that it was returning to the quality focus that had made it famous (Allison 2008). As Kotter and Cohen (2002: 17) argue, without a genuine sense of urgency, people will not feel motivated to make the necessary behavioral changes or abandon a complacent status quo.
Building a guiding team was also vital, both at the store level and in the executive suite. Starbucks brought back its original CEO, Howard Schultz, to supervise the turnaround — a leader who retained a strong sense of the company's founding vision. This connects directly to the third phase of the change model: getting the vision right. Starbucks was facing intensifying competition from McDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts, both of which were offering similar coffee beverages at lower price points. Schultz understood that unless Starbucks could clearly communicate its quality and uniqueness, its reputation and customer base would continue to erode. The soft economic climate of the period made justifying the company's premium price point all the more urgent.
Communicating Buy-In and Empowering Action
Communicating for buy-in required an intensely personalized strategy. The massive, company-wide retraining effort literally communicated to every employee the necessity of change. Schultz also continued to communicate the need for Starbucks to uphold its value to shareholders. The company shut down 600 stores — "80% of them had been open for less than two years" — in order to concentrate on improving the quality of its core locations (Kowitt 2008). Notably, Schultz refused to bow to considerable pressure to drop healthcare benefits for employees, citing the commitment the company had made to its workforce. This decision increased worker loyalty — always fragile in low-wage retail — and also enhanced customers' positive perceptions of Starbucks as an ethical company, even amid criticisms that it was displacing small independent coffee shops. Worker loyalty also saves the company money in retraining costs; unlike standard fast food, Starbucks requires employees who are genuinely skilled enough to prepare its beverages.
Empowering action was achieved by providing concrete retraining and education for employees rather than relying on rhetoric alone. Workers were not simply told to "get better" — they were given specific instructions on how to do so. The company's standard operating procedures were also revised, returning to older methods of coffee preparation, reducing beverage "hold" time, and thus improving the overall Starbucks experience (Allison 2008). According to Harvard Business Review's change management resources, empowering employees with real tools and authority — rather than issuing mandates — is central to sustaining organizational transformation.
Conclusion
Making the change "stick" means not reverting to old habits and continuing to track metrics tied to the quality that formed the foundational philosophy of the change initiative. Feedback from recently opened locations in India confirms the ongoing importance of emphasizing quality. "Coffee is unique [at Starbucks], better than others… my first preference would obviously be Starbucks now," said one Indian engineering student, citing its superiority over other coffee shops and expressing willingness to pay more because of the brand (Arora 2013). That is precisely the kind of feedback Schultz sought when he launched his change plan — evidence that customers value quality above price, and that Starbucks had successfully reclaimed that identity.
References
Allison, M. (2008). Starbucks stores to shut 3 hours on Feb. 26 for retraining baristas. Seattle Times.
Arora, A. (2013). In Starbucks, taste trumps price. Reuters.
Kotter, J. and Cohen, D. (2002). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Kowitt, B. (2008). [Starbucks business model coverage.] Fortune/CNN Money.
Loeb, W. (2013). Starbucks global coffee giant has new growth plans. Forbes.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.