Perceptions of Starbucks Brand Among Gen Z: Consumer Responses to Communications About Unionization Efforts

By

Katie Grillo, MS Candidate

Chair: Hugo H. Ottolenghi

A PROFESSIONAL PROJECT PRESENTED TO

THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATION+JOURNALISM

OF FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF SCIENCE

FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

FALL 2022

Table of Contents

ABSTRACT3

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW6

Communication Activities: Starbucks vs. Starbucks Workers United6

Corporate Social Responsibility8

Starbucks, CSR, and Brand Image9

Current Unionization Trends10

Purpose of Study10

CHAPTER 3: METHODS & DATA COLLECTION10

Participants and Procedures11

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS12

Sample12

Broad Findings14

Responses from Gen Z18

Where Gen Z Differed from Other Cohorts21

Participants with Union Affiliations22

Thematic Analysis25

Data Set #126

Data Set #229

Data Set #331

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION33

Limitations34

Recommendations35

Conclusion35

REFERENCES36

APPENDICES42

Abstract

This paper explores whether recent negative press about the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees has damaged perception of the brand among Gen Z consumers. A 12-question survey was distributed online for approximately two weeks. A total of 171 responses were collected and examined; written responses were interpreted using Braun & Clark (2006)’s thematic analysis framework. The results of the survey suggest that the majority of Gen Z consumers continue to view Starbucks favorably and are not deeply familiar with the unionization efforts of employees. However, this finding is not unanimous across the sample; participants’ written responses added complexity as several reported the desire to support workers and their rights. Given the ongoing nature of unionization efforts and communications in both traditional and nontraditional spheres, a follow-up study is recommended.

Keywords: Starbucks, unionization, thematic analysis, brand sentiment, brand

Chapter 1: Introduction

On August 23, 2021, The New York Times reported that Starbucks employees in the Buffalo region had partnered with Workers United, an American labor union, to form an organizing committee (Scheiber, 2021a). Staff members from three store locations filed petitions to conduct elections to certify union representation (Scheiber, 2021a). A flurry of communication activity ensued. Journalists and union advocates across traditional and social media channels depicted a tension-laden clash between Starbucks and the workers (Eidelson, 2022; Garone, 2022; Rahman, 2022; Starbucks Workers United, n.d.; Scheiber, 2021b).

As unionization efforts continued to spread and an increasing number of stores elected to unionize, the company came under public scrutiny for allegations of retaliation and aggressive union-busting tactics (Hsu, 2022; NLRB, 2022; Scheiber, 2022b).

Starbucks has issued conciliatory statements addressing these controversies and outlining its position on unionization (Starbucks Stories, 2021a; Starbucks Stories, 2021b). However, the results of a recent internal survey suggest that positive sentiment among Starbucks employees has considerably declined (Eidelson, 2022).

This trend triggers the question: Has the negative press about unionization also harmed Starbucks’s brand image among customers? Existing literature has highlighted the important role of brand image in marketing strategy (Sasmita & Suki, 2014). Companies that utilize effective communication practices to convey their values to customers can develop an appealing brand image that elicits customer loyalty and favorable perceptions of product quality (Momen et al., 2019). While Starbucks has generally been successful at cultivating a strong brand image and a responsible and ethical corporate reputation (“World’s Most Admirable Companies,” 2018), news and social media reports, as well as Starbucks’s own communications on its position on unionization, may have negatively affected the company’s brand.

This research explores current perceptions of the Starbucks brand among Gen Z consumers (defined here as individuals born in the year 1997 and thereafter). This paper examines this cohort because Gen Z employees and activists have been prominently portrayed as the face of unionization activities (Garone, 2022; Scheiber, 2022a; Scheiber, 2022c; Rahman, 2022), yet Gen Z consumers were also the driving force behind Starbucks sales this past quarter (Creswell, 2022). The group is also projected to become the largest age group by 2026 (Meola, 2022).

Perhaps due to the ongoing nature of the Starbucks-Starbucks Workers United controversy, little research exists on current Gen Z customer perceptions of the Starbucks brand. This paper contributes to scholarship by investigating this topic and by examining the possible influence of communications in the media about the conflict.

The remainder of this paper is structured as follows: a brief rhetorical analysis of the communication activities that exemplify the Starbucks-Starbucks Workers United dispute is presented. Starbucks’s response to continuing unionization efforts is outlined in this section. Some background on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and unionization trends is then provided. The third section includes an explanation of methods and data collection. An opinion questionnaire was distributed via social media platforms and other online channels. In the concluding sections, findings and implications are presented; limitations and suggestions for further study are also discussed.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Communication Activities: Starbucks vs. Starbucks Workers United

In recent media, the story of Starbucks and Starbucks Workers United has largely been positioned as a battle. The New York Times, The Washington Post, NPR, and Times Magazine, for instance, have used the language of combat in their headlines to describe unfolding events [emphasis added]:

“Starbucks Showdown in Boston Points to New Phase of Union Campaign” (Scheiber, 2022c)

“Taking on Starbucks, Inspired by Bernie Sanders” (Scheiber, 2022a)

“The Starbucks Unionization Fight Is Getting Messy” (Garone, 2022)

“Howard Schultz’s fight to stop a Starbucks barista uprising” (Jaffe, 2022)

“Store by store, the union drive at Starbucks is gaining ground” (Fadel & Hsu, 2022)

These headlines reflect an inclination toward metaphorical narrative wherein Starbucks and Starbucks Workers United’s conflict is envisioned as fundamentally warlike. Consider the NPR headline featured above—the phrase “gaining ground” is used. In this headline, Starbucks Workers United is depicted as a military force advancing and taking territory from its enemy. Such tendencies are present in other media reports, as well (Lucas, 2022; Spauster & Campbell, 2022) and, overall, have the effect of casting Starbucks and Starbucks Workers United into contentious roles.

Starbucks Workers United and Starbucks have respectively framed their conflict differently.

Starbucks Workers United’s Messaging

Starbucks Workers United has employed social media platforms, such as Twitter and TikTok to promote pro-unionization messages, recruit support, and signal disapproval for Starbucks. An October 26 tweet on the @SBWorkersUnited Twitter feed reads:

“Across the country this week, we’re proposing a system of fair and consistent scheduling, with guaranteed hours so we have a consistent work lives and stable incomes. Starbucks is walking away from the table.” (2022)

The group communicates an intention to better the conditions of Starbucks employees and implies that the company is unwilling to listen to its requests and commit to its mission.

This sentiment is also reflected on the group’s TikTok page. In late October 2022, Starbucks Workers United posted a short video recording of a Starbucks-Starbucks Workers United negotiation meeting. The clip features a Starbucks representative abruptly ending the assembly, purportedly after learning that other union members were attending via Zoom. The post captions read:

“A day in the life of Starbucks union-busting. Their tactic this time? Refusing to bargain with virtual members of our bargaining committee EVEN THOUGH THEY PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO VIRTUAL BARGAINING!”

Starbucks’s Communications & Response

Starbucks has crafted communications that address allegations of retaliation and explain the company’s stance on unionization. These communications are styled as open letters to Starbucks stakeholders (consumers, followers, staff, and shareholders) and are published on Starbucks’s Stories & News website (Starbucks Stories, 2021a; Starbucks Stories, 2021b).	In Starbucks’s messaging, phrases such as “one Starbucks,” “creating sense of family,” “sense of community,” and “our strength is our relationships” are commonplace (Starbucks Stories, 2021a; Starbucks Stories, 2021b). This verbiage suggests themes of unity and consensus building; they recollect Starbucks’s values and are representative of the position management has taken in the ongoing conflict. In essence, the company articulates the desire to regain the trust of stakeholders to “co-create” a new future with its partners (Starbucks Stories, 2021a; Starbucks Stories, 2021b). In its communications, Starbucks disavows the need for a union to act as an intermediary between the company and its employees (Starbucks Stories, 2021a; Starbucks Stories, 2021b).

Starbucks has also contended that recent accusations are false or misconstrued. The company created a “Get the Facts” webpage (officially titled One.Starbucks). On the site, the corporation chronicles its responses to “misleading claims made by [Workers United]” (One.Starbucks, n.d.). An article posted on October 28, 2022, for example, charges Workers United with failing to bargain in good faith (“Starbucks Charges Workers United,” 2022).

Corporate Social Responsibility

The concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) emerged in the 1960s (Tonello, 2011) and has been defined as a “…business model in which companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations…instead of only considering economic profits” (HEC, n.d.). CSR can broadly be understood as business practices that promote the societal, environmental, and profit objectives of a given organization (HEC, n.d.). Significantly, CSR-oriented initiatives can enhance a company’s corporate reputation and brand image (Mahmood & Bashir, 2020).

Consumer response to a company’s CSR practices (or lack thereof) is contingent on whether the organization is perceived primarily as values-driven or market-driven (Janney & Gove, 2011). Organizations are considered values-driven when their brand image is overtly and intentionally connected to an established core set of values or mission (Korschun et al., 2019). Customers anticipate that such companies will uphold their recognized values via internal (e.g., treatment of workers, work culture) and external (e.g., activism, partnerships with other organizations) practices (Korschun et al., 2019).

In contrast, organizations are perceived as market-driven when they center their image on expansion, profit, and growth (Korschun et al., 2019). Janney and Gove (2011) suggest that consumers may respond more negatively to values-based companies that stray from their core mission due to the perception of corporate hypocrisy. When market-driven organizations are caught in scandal, the accompanying backlash may not be as severe (Janney & Gove, 2011).

Starbucks, CSR, and Brand Image

Starbucks is arguably a values-based company. It has long been lauded as one of the most ethical businesses among retail competitors (Thoelcke, 2017; Sam, 2017). In its most recent CSR report, Starbucks identified the following as issues of concern: the economic condition of coffee farmers, the company’s environmental footprint, the impact of the pandemic on consumers and employees, the lack of resources in marginalized communities, and sense of belonging/inclusion within Starbucks (“Global Environmental & Social Impact Report,” 2022).

Starbucks’s CSR philosophy is tied to its mission to “inspire and nurture the human spirit” (“Global Environmental & Social Impact Report,” 2022). To realize this mission, the company articulates a commitment to be transparent and facilitate positive relationships by targeting local and global communities in need (“Global Environmental & Social Impact Report,” 2022).

The company’s response to unionization efforts may have damaged the company’s brand image. Li (2022) advanced a negative assessment of Starbucks’s construction of corporate identity. The study determined that Starbucks strategically erased its scandals and attitudes about unionization from CSR reports (2022). In doing so, the company labored to maintain its high CSR image (Li, 2022). This paper will expand on this scholarly analysis by investigating current Gen Z consumer perceptions of the Starbucks brand. In the final section of the Literature Review, this paper will briefly discuss unionization trends among retail companies.

Current Unionization Trends

Retail companies have historically resisted unionization (Pazzanese, 2022). Recent reports suggest that corporations remain unwilling to support such efforts and often create measures to suppress their formation (Danzinger, 2022; Sainato, 2020; Schoolov, 2019). Starbucks Workers United’s successes has been credited with spurring unionization activities among other retail chains (Danzinger, 2022), and a recent survey found that public support for unions is high — at a 71% approval rate (Diaz, 2022). However, the number of American workers in unions remains low (Diaz, 2022).

Purpose of Study

Given (1) Janney & Give’s 2011 finding that value-based companies earn stronger public censure when their actions are perceived as departing from their core mission, (2) current positive sentiment for unions (Diaz, 2022), and (3) Gen Z’s inclination toward social justice (Bhargava et al., 2020), this paper explores whether negative media communications related to Starbucks’s response to unionization efforts have harmed Starbucks’s brand image among Gen Z customers.

Chapter 3: Methods and Data Collection

Methods

To address the research question, a 12-question opinion survey was distributed for nearly two weeks, from November 5 until November 18.

Participants

Data was initially collected from 244 participants. A filter question was used to identify respondents who were not Starbucks customers; these entries (22 in total) were excluded. Fifty-one participants who did not complete the majority of the survey were also omitted, leaving the final collection total at 171.

This survey was distributed online via Qualtrics. Due to time constraints, the method in which the participants were selected was convenience sampling. This method also allowed for qualitative information to be collected and assessed. The participants were recruited on social media and networking channels such as Reddit and LinkedIn. Additionally, Florida International University students were recruited via electronic distribution of the survey link. These channels were used to reach larger segments of the target population. Participants ranged in age, from 17 to 58 and above. While consumers in the Gen Z cohort (18-25) were the principal focus of this study, data was also collected from older participants.

Procedures

The survey consisted of six multiple-choice questions. These were used to filter participants, acquire demographic data, and identify the channels where respondents obtained information about Starbucks. Three Likert-Type scale questions were included to measure consumer perceptions and attitudes. Levels of intensity ranged from Not Likely to Very Likely (3-point) Very Familiar to Not at All Familiar (3-point), and Extremely Likely to Extremely Unlikely (5-point). Lastly, the survey included three open-ended questions on customers’ experiences and motivations. The benefit of this qualitative approach is that it yielded narrative data on participants’ views and assumptions about the Starbucks brand.

This paper adopts Braun & Clarke’s (2006) framework in order to identify themes in Gen Z participants’ written responses. A descriptive analysis was developed for three data sets (Figure 1.2).

Figure 1.1

Data Analysis Steps
Step 1: Familiarize yourself with your data.
Step 2: Generate initial codes.
Step 3: Search for themes.
Step 4: Review themes.
Step 5: Define and name themes. Step 6: Produce the report.

Note. Taken from Braun & Clarke (2006).

Figure 1.2

Data Sets
Data Set 1: When you think of the Starbucks brand, what adjectives comes to mind?
Data Set 2: What have you heard (both positive and negative) about Starbucks as a place to work?
Data Set 3: Why? (In reference to question: ‘How likely are you to shop at a unionized Starbucks versus a non-unionized location?’)

Notes. Participants were asked to write out responses to the listed open-ended questions.

Chapter 4: Results

Sample

Most respondents, 79.88%, were aged 18-25. The second largest surveyed group consisted of millennial-aged respondents (15.38%), followed by the 42-57 cohort (2.96%), participants aged 58 and older (1.18%), and, last, respondents in the 17 and younger category (0.59%).

Figure 2

Survey Respondents by Age Group

Note. Gen Z respondents represented a wide majority.

The most widely reported educational credentials earned among the sample were a high school diploma or GED (35.88%) and an associate degree (38.24%).

Figure 3

Survey Respondents by Highest Education Level Completed

Notes. Participants who reported a bachelor’s degree as their highest educational credential represented 14.71% of the total sample.

Most of those surveyed reported a household income between $25,000 and $50,000 a year (26.51%). Twenty-five percent reported an annual income between $50,000 and $100,000, and 24.70% reported a household income of less than $25,000.

Figure 4

Survey Respondents by Reported Annual Household Income

Note. Participants who reported a household income of $100,000 or higher represented 22.89% of the total.

Broad Findings

The majority of respondents, 76.03%, reported that that they visit Starbucks monthly. Approximately 64% were also likely or extremely likely to recommend the store to others for specialty beverages.

Figure 5

Rates of Purchases Made at Starbucks by Frequency

Note. A minority of participants, 23.98%, indicated that that they rarely shop at Starbucks.

Figure 6

Likelihood of Starbucks Referral

Note. Only 15.3 % of the sample suggested that they were unlikely or extremely unlikely to recommend Starbucks to others. A total of 20.59% responded neutrally.

When asked how they hear about Starbucks, 42.21% said from family members, friends, and colleagues, and 33.61% said from social media accounts such as TikTok, Instagram, and Reddit. Only 4.29% of survey respondents reported that they learn about Starbucks through the company website and press releases.

Figure 7

Sources of Information on the Starbucks Workplace

Note. A small fraction of participants, 8.61%, heard about Starbucks from news outlets and article sources. Another minority, 10.66%, reported learning about Starbucks through ‘other’ means, such as personal observation.

The majority of participants, 44.71%, were not at all familiar with the unionization efforts mounted by employees. Another 33.53% reported that they were somewhat familiar, and 21.76% cited that they were very familiar with related developments.

Figure 8

Familiarity with the Unionization Efforts of Employees

Note. The majority of the sample, 66.47%, professed to have (at most) a negligible amount of familiarity with the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees.

When asked if they were likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks, 47.90% of participants reported that they were somewhat likely to shop at a unionized location, while 14.97% indicated that they likely would not.

Figure 9

Likelihood of Shopping at Unionized Starbucks

Note. A total of 37.13% of respondents indicated they were very likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks.

Finally, 67.65% of respondents cited no affiliation to a union. Twenty percent were uncertain whether a close friend or relative was affiliated, and 12.35% confirmed their association to a union.

Figure 10

Affiliation to a Union

Note. Most participants either had no affiliation to a union or were uncertain if a relative has such ties.

Responses from Gen Z

Data from 135 Gen Z Starbucks customers were collected and analyzed. A total of 25.19% of participants from this cohort reported that they make purchases at Starbucks at an average of once or twice a week. Additionally, 23.70% indicated that they visited once or twice a month, and 21.48% disclosed that they rarely make purchases from the store. Comparatively, 23.08% of millennials (the second-largest age cohort in the sample), reported that they make purchases from Starbucks three or more times a week.

Figure 11

Rates of Purchases Made at Starbucks by Frequency (Filtered by Age)

Note. Comparison of Gen Z and Millennial cohorts.

Approximately 68% of Gen Z respondents indicated that they were extremely likely or likely to recommend Starbucks to others. In contrast, just 12.59% responded that they were unlikely or extremely unlikely to recommend Starbucks’s specialty drinks.

The majority of Gen Z customers surveyed obtained their information about the Starbucks workplace via word of mouth and social media channels. Seventy-eight percent of responses correspond to these two selections. Just 9.70% of responses correspond to information gathered from the Starbucks website or Starbucks’s press releases.

Roughly half (50.38%) of participants maintained that they were somewhat likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks, and 34.59% indicated they would very likely shop at a unionized store. Only 15.04% reported they likely would not. The majority, 91.85%, listed that they had no or uncertain affiliation with unions.

Figure 12

Likelihood of Starbucks Referral (Filtered by Age)

Note. Both Gen Z and Millennial cohorts trended toward recommending Starbucks specialty drinks to others.

Figure 13

Sources of Information on the Starbucks Workplace (Filtered by Age)

Note. Word of mouth was the most widely used channel among most of the cohorts.

Figure 14

Likelihood of Shopping at Unionized Starbucks (Filtered by Age)

Note. Most Gen Z participants were somewhat likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks location.

Figure 15

Affiliation to a Union (Filtered by Age)

Note. The majority of Gen Z participants had no affiliation to a union.

Where Gen Z Responses Differ from Other Cohorts

Higher percentages of Millennial and Gen X respondents indicated that they would very likely shop at a unionized Starbucks (Figure 13). Gen Z participants exhibited more ambiguity in their responses, the majority indicating that they were somewhat likely to shop at a unionized location. However, it is worth noting that Gen Z respondents comprised a great majority of the sample.

Gen X and Boomer participants tended toward utilizing news articles and other news outlets, rather than social media, to learn about Starbucks (Figure 12). This trend aligns with recent research that suggests that younger audiences rely more on social media to obtain news and are more casual news consumers (Eddy, 2022).

Participants with Union Affiliations

The majority of participants with union affiliations, 76.19%, reported that they make Starbuck purchases at least 1 to 2 times a month. Approximately half also indicated that they were likely to recommend Starbucks for its specialty beverages.

Figure 16

Rates of Purchases Made at Starbucks by Frequency (Filtered by Age)

Note. Less than a quarter of union-affiliated participants indicated that they rarely make Starbucks purchases.

Figure 17

Likelihood of Starbucks Referral (Filtered by Union Affiliation)

Note. A total of 30% of union-affiliated participants maintained that they were extremely likely to recommend Starbucks to others.

Several respondents indicated that they received news about the Starbucks workplace via word of mouth (friends, family, colleagues). A total of 51.61% of responses represented this information channel. When asked whether they were familiar with the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees, 80.95% maintained that they were very familiar or somewhat familiar with the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees, and 45% reported that they were very likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks. Another 40% indicated that they were somewhat likely to do so.

Figure 18

Sources of Information About the Starbucks Workplace (Filtered by Union Affiliation)

Notes. Word of mouth was the dominant channel across the three groups.

Figure 19

Familiarity with the Unionization Efforts of Employees (Filtered by Union Affiliation)

Notes. The majority of union-affiliated participants were very familiar with the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees.

Figure 20

Likelihood of Shopping at Unionized Starbucks (Filtered by Union Affiliation)

Note. The majority of union-affiliated participants suggested they were very likely to shop at a unionized Starbucks.

Themes

Thematic analysis of the data resulted in the identification of five themes with respect to Data Set 1:

(a) Tasty Food and Beverages

(b) A Luxury Product

(c) Quick and Welcoming Service

(d) A Refreshing Reward, and (e) Fake and Not Worth the Price

Two themes emerged from Data Set 2:

(a) Good Benefits but Customers (and Management) Suck

(b) Overworked and Underpaid Employees

Finally, four themes emerged from Data Set 3:

(a) I’ll Go If There’s One Nearby

(b) Coffee is Coffee

(c) I Can’t Tell the Difference and (d) The Ethical Choice

Data Set 1: Perceptions of the Starbucks Brand

Tasty Food and Beverages. Gen Z participants held positive associations with the quality of the store’s food and beverage items. When prompted to identify adjectives that portrayed their view of the Starbucks brand, many respondents identified words that describe the quality of flavor and food. ‘Tasty,’ ‘delicious,’ and ‘sweet’ were three of the most frequently appearing adjectives. Other descriptors, such as ‘yummy’ appeared repeatedly, as well.

A Luxury Product. Many respondents associated the Starbucks brand with comfort and indulgence. Starbucks products were perceived as an unnecessary and pricey luxury, albeit a popular one and on the forefront of trends. Related descriptors included ‘expensive,’ ‘luxurious,’ ‘modern,’ ‘trendy,’ and ‘upper-class.’ Notably, this theme aligns with existing categorizations of Starbucks as an “affordable luxury” (Seaford et al., 2012).

Quick and Welcoming Service. Participants connected the brand to its quality of customer service. Starbucks was repeatedly rated as ‘efficient,’ and staff were described as ‘friendly,’ ‘warm,’ and ‘welcoming.’ Service speed was especially praised as ‘quick,’ ‘effortless,’ and ‘dependable.’

A Refreshing Reward. Respondents linked Starbucks to stimulus and reward. One participant stated, “It’s a reward for my hard work.” Multiple respondents also highlighted the positive psychological impacts of Starbucks beverages. Products were described as reviving and mood-enhancing; descriptors such as ‘refreshing,’ ‘joy,’ and ‘happiness’ were used to denote these effects.

Fake and Not Worth the Price. Not all Gen Z participants held positive perceptions of the brand. A segment of respondents conveyed the idea that Starbucks products were overpriced, too sugary, or bland. Others negatively associated the brand with inconsistency, fakeness, and union-busting. Hence, while many favorable attributions were made by Gen Z survey-takers, it was not unanimous. Some participants even expressed awareness of a contradiction, such as in the case of the respondent who assigned the following three descriptors to the Starbucks brand: ‘inclusive,’ ‘anti-union,’ ‘inconsistent.’

Figure 21

Most Frequently Occurring Adjectives in Data Set 1

Adjective	Frequency
Expensive	29
Tasty	12
Green	10
Delicious	10
Sweet	8
Good	8
Overpriced	6

Note. Frequency here is defined as the count of word occurrences.

Figure 22

Sample Data Extract with Initial Codes

Data Extract	Initially Coded For
Refreshing	A positive effect on the consumer (essentially, what the consumer gets out of the consumption of the product).
Cozy	Perception of store ambience and environment.
High-class	Corresponds to the view that Starbucks products are luxury items.
Tasty	Related to the perception of flavor.
Fast	Related to perceptions of Starbuck’s quality of customer service.

Notes. Data extract sample, with initial codes applied.

Figure 23

Final Thematic Map.

Note. Candidate themes were reviewed and refined, resulting in the final thematic map.

Data Set 2: Perceptions of the Starbucks Workplace

Good Benefits but Customers (and Management) Suck. Many respondents favorably alluded to the benefits that Starbucks provides its employees. However, these commendations were frequently tempered by more negative perceptions of customer-employee and management-employee interactions. One participant disclosed:

“My friend said she used to love working the morning rush because it kept her busy, but I’ve seen online how certain things workers can do to make things easier (like batching frappes in blenders) are looked down upon by the company. Also, apparently, they aren’t allowed to take food home, so it goes to waste.”

Another participant agreed and discussed workers’ rights: “They offer great medical benefits for part time and full-time associates. However, they often union bust, and many stores across the country are actively struggling to unionize.”

Overworked and Underpaid Employees. Gen Z respondents often cited the rigor and stress that Starbucks employees endure for modest compensation:

“I haven’t heard anything positive. One of my friends worked at Starbucks and would tell me about how he had to fight for holidays off or sick leave. He was also severely underpaid and overworked to the point that his entire family always said he was being abused at work. He did opening and closing shifts for peanuts. I’ve also heard similar from other friends that have worked there.”

Other participants agreed with the assertion that employees are underpaid while expressing negative views of the company’s anti-union stance: “I know workers don't get paid well and are being kept from unionizing.”

Figure 24

Sample Data Extract with Initial Codes

Data Extract	Initially Coded For
I have heard they have good health insurance that helps cover a lot of the costs for gender affirming surgeries for transgender people. For this reason, I have considered working there. On the negative side, I have heard that it can be very frustrating to serve customers who are upset and rude.	Culture of belonging, Starbucks’s commitment to invest in the health of its employees, employee benefits, frustrating customers.
Positive: learn to make unique drinks. Negative: customer’s order is too long or pay isn’t great.	Learning new skills is perceived as a positive element of the Starbucks workplace. What employees make is seen as being too little.
I follow someone on TikTok who has recorded terrible experiences with customers and management.	Perception of the Starbucks workplace has been informed by TikTok recordings, negative experiences observed have centered on interactions with customers and management.

Notes. Data extract sample, with initial codes applied.

Figure 25

Final Thematic Map.

Note. Potential themes were reviewed and refined, resulting in the final thematic map. Participants were asked to write about both positive and negative narratives about the Starbucks workplace. This theme was refined to capture several participant responses that lauded Starbucks’s employee benefits but also integrated a negative view of customers and managers.

Data Set 3: Participants Expand on Why They Are or Are Not Likely to Visit a Unionized Spot

Coffee is Coffee. One of the more prevalent themes that emerged from this data set came from participants who expressed a strictly transactional view of the customer-company relationship. One participant stated: “I just want coffee. It doesn’t matter if it’s unionized or non-unionized.” Another participant clarified: “It doesn’t matter to me because I don’t work there. I just go for coffee.” Others communicated a more apathetic stance: “It would not make a difference to me.”

I’ll Go If There’s One Nearby. A segment of participants suggested that convenience of location is the primary factor they consider when deciding whether to visit a unionized or non-unionized location. As one individual simplified: “I don't have a car, so if I'm going to Starbucks, I am going to the one in walking distance. Doesn't matter if its unionized or not.” Another respondent agreed: “I’ll go to a unionized Starbucks if it’s close to my location.”

I Can’t Tell the Difference. Many participants confided that they did not have sufficient knowledge of unions in general, or of the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees, and the impact of unionization: “I don’t know what unionization means or what difference it would make.” A different participant echoed: “I don't even know what the difference would be, so I just chose the middle option.” Another explained: “In reality, I wouldn’t be able to tell whether they are unionized or not.”

The Ethical Choice. A notable segment of the respondents articulated the intent to support unionized locations out of a sense of morality and ethics: “I believe in unionizing and basic human rights and respect for employees working any job.” This sentiment was reiterated in other responses: “Workers’ rights matter. They are people that deserve good pay and fair rules that can benefit both the company and the workplace.” Other participants alluded to the positive effects of unionization: “I believe that the workers will perform better under better working conditions under a union.”

Figure 26

Sample Data Extract with Initial Codes

Data Extract	Initially Coded For
At the current moment, there is only one Starbucks location in Orlando that is unionized, and it is far out of my normal driving routes. If I had more accessible, I would go to those.	Convenience of location, limited number of unionized stores, expresses intent to visit a unionized location if one becomes reachable.
I just want coffee. It doesn’t matter if it’s unionized or non-unionized.	Lack of interest in supporting unionized locations, primary motivation is to obtain Starbucks product.
I wouldn’t know the difference between them. I just go to whatever Starbucks is there. I would go to whichever Starbucks is in my area if it was unionized or not. Unions are there to protect workers and prevent exploitation, so when I hear that Starbucks doesn’t want to allow unions, I understand that as a means to keep exploiting/abusing their employees.	Unable to identify a unionized location from a non-unionized location, convenience of location. Convenience of location. Concern with issues of worker abuse and exploitation, positive perception of unions, negative perception of Starbucks’s alleged union-busting tactics.

Notes. Data extract sample, with initial codes applied.

Figure 27

Final Thematic Map.

Note. Candidate themes were reviewed and refined, resulting in the final thematic map.

Chapter 5: Discussion

This paper examines whether negative media communications related to Starbucks’s response to unionization efforts have damaged Starbucks’s brand image among Gen Z customers. The survey results suggest that while the Gen Z segment continues to hold positive associations of the Starbucks brand, customers’ views of Starbucks may be shifting, specifically in the dimension of CSR.

Overall, Gen Z customers continue to hold mostly favorable interpretations of the Starbucks brand despite the media’s recent focus on Starbucks’s breaches of ethics. This conclusion is supported by the information disclosed by consumers in this paper: the majority of Gen Z customers surveyed shared that they shop at Starbucks at least once or twice a month and are likely to recommend the store’s specialty drinks to others (effectively serving as ambassadors for the brand). The qualitative analysis portion of this paper also supports this finding as several of the themes identified were positive; Gen Z customers see Starbucks as a provider of premium and refreshing beverages. They associate the brand with comfort, luxury, and friendly service. These attributes align with Starbucks’s classic brand image.

However, the descriptive responses shared by participants also suggest that customers’ image of Starbucks is developing into a more fraught one. Many customers held negative associations of the Starbucks workplace and cited a desire to support Starbucks employees. This dimension of the Starbucks brand, most closely aligned with ethics and corporate social responsibility, is where participants exhibited the most ambiguity toward Starbucks.

One noteworthy finding is that 43.7% of Gen Z customers surveyed have no familiarity with the unionization efforts of Starbucks employees. This is surprising given the generation’s predilection toward issues of social justice.

This may be explained by Gen Z’s disinclination for traditional news sources. Unlike the older cohorts surveyed, Gen Z participants cited word of mouth and social media channels as their primary sources for information about Starbucks. Thus, participants may be better informed on the general difficulties Starbucks employees face in the workplace rather than specific unionization efforts and developments taking place.

Limitations

Time constraints limited the number of survey responses that could be collected for analysis. Due to the focus of this paper, Gen Z participants were specifically targeted. A larger and more diverse sample would have been preferred for generalizing the quantitative results. Owing to the fact that the majority of participants in the sample were in the 18-25 cohort, meaningful comparisons across the different age categories were not always feasible.

Another limitation of this paper is that it relied on self-disclosure. When distributing an online questionnaire, there are few ways to validate the identity of participants; the researcher must often take for granted that the majority of respondents are authentic in their entries.

Recommendations

Further research may be warranted given the evolving nature of recent unionization efforts. On November 17, 2022, several employees in Starbucks locations across the United States went on strike, and the event has been covered across various media channels (Schieiber, 2022d). A follow-up study in a few months’ time that analyzes all age cohorts could provide new insights into possible changes in brand sentiment among customers and the efficacy of Starbucks’s corporate communication strategies.

Conclusion

This paper examined the perceptions of Gen Z customers with respect to the Starbucks brand and recent communications about the unionization efforts of store employees. Given the timeliness of the topic, this paper provides preliminary and meaningful data on the Gen Z consumer cohort and their sentiment toward a corporation caught up in controversy.

Ultimately, this paper surmises that Gen Z customers generally continue to view the Starbucks brand favorably; however, the same group is also cognizant of the struggles of Starbucks employees, have been (to a degree) exposed to news about unionization efforts, and rely primarily on word of mouth and social media channels. A relevant question for future researchers is whether Starbucks will keep the goodwill of this consumer base.

References

Bhargava S., Finneman B., Schmidt J., Spagnuolo E. (2020). The Young and the Restless: Generation Z in America. New York: McKinsey & Company. http://mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/the-young-and-the-restless-generation-z-in-america

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.

Creswell, J. (2022). Starbucks reports record revenue, driven mostly by Gen Z’s love of iced drinks. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/02/business/starbucks-quarterly-earnings.html

Danzinger, P. (2022). First Starbucks, now REI: The movement to unionize retail workers picks up. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pamdanziger/2022/03/03/first-starbucks-now-rei-next-amazon-and-apple-the-movement-to-unionize-retail-workers-picks-up/?sh=2383939f10ad

Diaz, J. (2022). Support for labor unions in the U.S. is at a 57-year high. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120111276/labor-union-support-in-us

Eddy, K. (2022). The differences seem to be growing: A look at the rising generation of news consumers. Nieman Lab. https://www.niemanlab.org/2022/06/the-differences-seem-to-be-growing-a-look-at-the-rising-generation-of-news-consumers/

Eidelson, J. (2022). Starbucks is sued by pro-union staff for defamation, abusing legal process. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-17/pro-union-starbucks-workers-sue-company-for-defamation

Fadel, L., & Hsu, A. (2022). Store by store, the union drive at Starbucks is gaining ground. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/08/1091569080/store-by-store-the-union-drive-at-starbucks-is-gaining-ground

Garone, E. (2022). How Gen Z baristas are spreading the Starbucks unionization effort. Time. https://time.com/6148475/starbucks-union-organizers-gen-z/

Global environmental and social impact report. (2022). Starbucks. https://stories.starbucks.com/uploads/2022/04/Starbucks-2021-Global-Environmental-and-Social-Impact-Report-1.pdf

HEC. (n.d.). What is corporate social responsibility (CSR)? HEC Paris. https://www.hec.edu/en/faculty-research/centers/society-organizations-institute/think/so-institute-executive-factsheets/what-corporate-social-responsability-csr

Hsu, A. (2022). Starbucks workers have unionized at record speed; many fear retaliation now. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/10/02/1124680518/starbucks-union-busting-howard-schultz-nlrb

Janney, J., & Gove, S. (2011). Reputation and corporate social responsibility aberrations, Trends, and hypocrisy: Reactions to firm choices in the stock option backdating scandal. Journal of Management Studies, 48(7), 1562-1585. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00984.x

Jaffe, G. (2022). Howard Schultz’s fight to stop a Starbucks barista uprising. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/08/starbucks-union-ceo-howard-schultz/

Korschun, D., Rafieian, H., Aggarwal, A., & Swain, S.D. (2019). Taking a stand: Consumer responses when companies get (or don’t get) political. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2806476

Li, X. (2022). The discursive construction of corporate identity in the corporate social responsibility reports: A case study of Starbucks. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.940541

Lucas, A. (2022). Starbucks’ union battle is getting aggressive and expensive, and Wall Street is backing away. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/21/starbucks-union-battle-pushes-wall-street-away.html

Mahmood, A., & Bashir, J. (2020). How does corporate social responsibility transform brand reputation into brand equity? Economic and noneconomic perspectives of CSR. International Journal of Engineering Business Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/1847979020927547

Meola, A. (2022). Generation Z News: Latest characteristics, research, and facts. Insider Intelligence. https://www.insiderintelligence.com/insights/generation-z-facts/

Momen, M.A., Sultana, S. and Haque, A.K.M.A. (2019). Web-based marketing communication to develop brand image and brand equity of higher educational institutions: a structural equation modelling approach, global knowledge. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, 69(3), 151-169.

NLRB. (2022). NLRB region-15 wins injunction requiring Starbucks to rehire seven unlawfully fired workers. https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/nlrb-region-15-wins-injunction-requiring-starbucks-to-rehire-seven

One.Starbucks (n.d.). https://one.starbucks.com/get-the-facts/

Pazzanese, C. (2022). Will the message sent by Amazon workers turn into a movement? The Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/04/the-future-of-labor-unions-according-to-harvard-economist/

Rahman, K. (2022). Gen Z activists flood Starbucks with fake job applications over firings. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/gen-z-activists-flood-starbucks-fake-job-applications-over-firings-1681786

Sainato, M. (2020). Trader Joe’s and other US firms suppress unionization efforts during pandemic. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/labor-unions-trader-joes-workers-coronavirus-us

Sam, M. (2017). Starbucks and Howard Schultz: Socially responsible and profitable. Medium. https://medium.com/@maddiesam/starbucks-a-socially-responsible-american-company-3b9ba2a52726

Sasmita, J., & Suki, N.M. (2015). Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(3), 276-292. doi: 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024

Scheiber, N. (2021a). Starbucks faces rare union challenge as Buffalo workers seek vote. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/30/business/starbucks-coffee-buffalo-union.html

Scheiber, N. (2021b). Starbucks faces rare union challenge as Buffalo workers seek vote. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/08/business/starbucks-union-election.html

Scheiber, N. (2022a). Taking on Starbucks, inspired by Bernie Sanders. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/14/business/economy/starbucks-union.html

Scheiber, N. (2022b). Starbucks fires Memphis workers involved in unionization efforts. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/08/business/economy/starbucks-memphis union-workers-fired.html

Scheiber, N. (2022c). Starbucks showdown in Boston points to new phase of union campaign. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/24/business/economy/starbucks-union-campaign.html

Scheiber, N. (2022d). Starbucks workers strike at dozens of stores nationally. NYTimes. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/17/business/economy/starbucks-union-strike.html

Schoolov, K. (2019). How Amazon is fighting back against workers’ increasing efforts to unionize. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-against-workers-efforts-to-unionize.html

Seaford, B. C., Culp, R. C., & Brooks, B. W. (2012). Starbucks: Maintaining a clear position. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 18(3), 39-57. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/starbucks-maintaining-clear-position/docview/1037815154/se-2

Spauster, P., & Campbell, M. (2022). The bitter fight for unions at Starbucks, one year later. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-30/the-bitter-fight-for-unions-at-starbucks-one-year-later

Starbucks charges Workers United. (2022). One.Starbucks. https://one.starbucks.com/union-charged-for-failing-to-bargain-in-good-faith/

Starbucks Stories (2021a). Working directly together as Partners, we can build a different Kind of Company. https://stories.starbucks.com/press/2021/working-directly-together-as-partners-we-can-build-a-different-kind-of-company/

Starbucks Stories (2021b). Letter to Starbucks partners: Our path forward after Buffalo union vote. https://stories.starbucks.com/press/2021/letter-to-starbucks-partners-our-path-forward-after-buffalo-union-vote/

Starbucks Workers United [@SBWorkersUnited]. (n.d.). Tweets [Twitter profile]. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://twitter.com/SBWorkersUnited

Starbucks Workers United [@SBWorkersUnited]. (2022, October 25). A day in the life of Starbucks union-busting. [TikTok Video; thumbnail link to video]. TikTok. https://www.tiktok.com/@sbworkersunited/video/7158465595296763182

Starbucks Workers United [@SBWorkersUnited]. (2022, October 26). Across the country this week, we’re proposing a system of fair and consistent scheduling, with guaranteed hours so we have consistent work lives. [Tweet; thumbnail link to article]. Twitter. https://twitter.com/SBWorkersUnited/status/1585375006426828800?s=20&t=GWYhuG1E50WxBhWaPl-SfA

Thoelcke, T. (2017). Starbucks remains one of the most ethical companies. Yahoo Finance. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/starbucks-remains-one-most-ethical-120528787.html

Tonello, M. (2011). The business case for corporate social responsibility. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance. https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2011/06/26/the-business-case-for-corporate-social-responsibility/

World’s most admirable companies. (2018). Fortune. https://fortune.com/worlds-most-admired-companies/2018/

Appendix A

Phases of Thematic Analysis

Appendix A. Braun & Clark (2006).

Appendix B

Survey Results Report: All Participants (Closed-Ended Questions)

Q1 - How often do you make a purchase at Starbucks?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	How often do you make a purchase at Starbucks?	1.00	5.00	3.09	1.49	2.23	171

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Three or more times a week	20.47%	35
2	Once or twice a week	22.22%	38
3	Three or more times a month	9.36%	16
4	Once or twice a month	23.98%	41
5	Rarely	23.98%	41
6	Never	0.00%	0
Total	100%	171

Q3 - How likely are you to recommend Starbucks to others for specialty drinks?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	How likely are you to recommend Starbucks to others for specialty drinks?	1.00	5.00	2.31	1.10	1.21	170

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Extremely Likely	25.29%	43
2	Likely	38.82%	66
3	Neither Likely nor Unlikely	20.59%	35
4	Unlikely	10.59%	18
5	Extremely Unlikely	4.71%	8
Total	100%	170

Q5 - Where did you hear this information?

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Starbucks Website	3.28%	8
2	Starbucks Press Release	1.64%	4
3	Social Media (Tiktok, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, etc.)	33.61%	82
4	News Outlets & Articles	8.61%	21
5	Word-of-Mouth (Friends, family, and co-workers)	42.21%	103
6	Other	10.66%	26
Total	100%	244

Q6 - How familiar are you with efforts by Starbucks employees to unionize their stores?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	How familiar are you with efforts by Starbucks employees to unionize their stores?	1.00	3.00	2.23	0.78	0.61	170

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Very familiar	21.76%	37
2	Somewhat familiar	33.53%	57
3	Not at all familiar	44.71%	76
Total	100%	170

Q7 - How likely are you to shop at a unionized Starbucks versus a non-unionized location?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	How likely are you to shop at a unionized Starbucks versus a non-unionized location?	1.00	3.00	2.22	0.69	0.47	167

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Not Likely	14.97%	25
2	Somewhat Likely	47.90%	80
3	Very Likely	37.13%	62
Total	100%	167

Q9 - Are you or a close relative a member of a union?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	Are you or a close relative a member of a union?	1.00	3.00	2.08	0.56	0.32	170

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Yes	12.35%	21
2	No	67.65%	115
3	Uncertain	20.00%	34
Total	100%	170

Q10 - Please indicate your age.

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	Please indicate your age.	1.00	5.00	2.24	0.57	0.33	169

#	Answer	%	Count
1	17 and younger	0.59%	1
2	18-25	79.88%	135
3	26-41	15.38%	26
4	42-57	2.96%	5
5	58 and older	1.18%	2
Total	100%	169

Q11 - Highest level of education completed?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	Highest level of education completed?	1.00	7.00	2.98	1.03	1.05	170

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Some High School	1.18%	2
2	High School (HS, GED)	35.88%	61
3	Associate Degree (AA, AS)	38.24%	65
4	Bachelor's Degree (BA, BS)	14.71%	25
5	Master's Degree (MA, MS)	8.82%	15
6	Doctorate or higher (Ph.D)	0.59%	1
7	Trade School	0.59%	1
Total	100%	170

Q12 - What is your annual household income?

#	Field	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std Deviation	Variance	Count
1	What is your annual household income?	1.00	5.00	2.53	1.20	1.44	166

#	Answer	%	Count
1	Less than $25,000	24.70%	41
2	$25,000 - $50,000	26.51%	44
3	$50,000 - $100,000	25.90%	43
4	$100,000 - $200,000	16.87%	28
5	More than $200,000	6.02%	10
Total	100%	166