A Tale of Two CEOs: Responding to a Public Crisis
By Pat Sartory
Earlier this month, two black men were arrested at a Starbucks in Philadelphia, after the store’s manager called police to say the men were trespassing. A video of police arresting the men, who hadn’t purchased anything and were quietly talking amongst themselves, went viral and sparked instant outrage. A firestorm erupted on social media, consumers called for a ban of Starbucks, and protesters gathered at the store.
In today’s climate, this incident could have dominated headlines for days and caused significant damage to Starbucks’ brand. But Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson’s actions following the incident show how a proper public response can help mitigate damage, repair strained relationships with employees and customers, and restore public trust.
Private businesses have the right to remove people from their property, and there is no evidence that the manager violated any company policies. Yet Johnson delivered a full-throated and personal apology that struck the right tone and sent a clear message of contrition. In a public letter, video message and subsequent media interviews, Johnson apologized personally to the two men arrested, calling their treatment “reprehensible,” and apologized to his customers and partners. Johnson took full responsibility, and avoided carefully-crafted corporate speak that can make executive statements seem contrived and inauthentic. “These two gentlemen did not deserve what happened to them. And we are accountable. I am accountable,” Johnson said.
Importantly, Johnson also rejected calls to dismiss the manager who made the call to police, saying, “I believe that blame is misplaced. …I own it. This is a management issue, and I am accountable.” Rather than scapegoating an employee, Johnson took responsibility to address the issue and laid out his plans to fix the problem – ordering a review of company policies, vowing to meet with outside experts and community leaders to understand and adopt best practices, and offering additional store manager and training to recognize unconscious biases Johnson also called a company-wide meeting the following week to hear from employees, share learnings and discuss immediate next steps.
Johnson’s comprehensive and timely response is particularly informative, from a CEO communications standpoint, when compared to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s response following the public outcry over his company’s handling of customer privacy and personal data. Instead of offering a prompt apology, Facebook initially deflected blame to Cambridge Analytica, offered confusing explanations around the timing of changes to their privacy policies, and allowed Zuckerberg’s deputies to address the issue publicly – all while Zuckerberg remained deafeningly silent. As the story continued to gain momentum in the media, Zuckerberg was finally forced to offer an authentic apology. This was an example of poor CEO communications and has since been dubbed a PR disaster (although Zuckerberg’s subsequent performance in front of Congress was quite successful).
Johnson’s actions in the wake of this crisis are another example of the evolving role of CEO communications in the modern era. More and more, CEOs are called on to be active communicators, and to take a stance on social issues on behalf of their companies. Mark Benioff of Salesforce, Paul Polman of Unilever, and Tim Cook of Apple are just a few examples. Kevin Johnson’s deft response to a crisis involving race and community relations sets a clear example for other corporate leaders to follow. Â













