the gift that wasn’t - starbucks 'community stores

8/2/2019 The Gift That Wasnt - Starbucks 'Community Stores'

1/22

April2012

1/22

MichaelSoto

UniversityofSussexMACandidateAnthropologyofDevelopmentandSocialTransformation

THEGIFTTHATWASNT

Thereisnothinginherentinobjectsthatdesignatesthemasgifts;objectscanalmostalwaysfollowvaryingtrajectories.Giftsarepreciselynotobjectsatall,but

transactionsandsocialrelationsAsanorderofsocialrelationsthegifteconomyis

intimatelyboundupwiththeformsofthepersonastheyarediverselyconstitutedandasitconstitutesthem.(Frow1997:124)

InthisessayIexplorethegreyareabetweenthedualityofgiftand

commodityexchangesthathasbeenpreservedacrossinterpretationsfromMauss

theoryofthegift.Asatheoryofsolidarity(Douglass1990:x),manyhaverevisited

TheGiftwithhopesofbetterunderstandingthedifferenttypesofrelations

betweenindividuals.However,maintainingastrictdualityhasconflatedtheterm

giftsbytheinclusionwithinthesamecategoryofverydifferenttypesof

exchanges.

Agiftisgivenselfishlyandwithoutcalculationofbenefittooneself,andit

isthisaspectofthegift,thismadnessofthegiftasDerridahascalledit,which

elicitsreciprocityandinducessolidarity.Bycontrast,thegreyareathatexists

betweengiftandcommodity,whichIwillrefertoasnon-gifts,failstoproducethe

effectthatMausspredicted.Partofwhatdifferentiatesgiftsfromnon-giftsisan

openingoftheselftotheOther,aproximityandacloseness,forontheonehand

thegivermustgiveofhimselfintheformoftimeandlikewise,therecipientmust

feelthedifferenceofintentionandthistoorequirestimeandproximitywiththe

giver.Whatisrequiredforthepredictedeffectofsolidarityisthesensationof

beingtreatedasauniqueindividual,inlinewithEmmanualKantsfamousmaxim,


2/22

April2012

2/22

Actinsuchawaythatyoutreathumanity,whetherinyourownpersonorinthe

personofanyother,nevermerelyasameanstoanend,butalwaysatthesame

timeasanend.

EngagingwiththisrevisedconceptualizationofMausstheoryIconsiderthe

caseofStarbuckscorporatesocialresponsibility(CSR),arguingthatitmanifestsan

ethicofdetachmentascoinedbyJamieCross(2011),whichpreventstheforming

ofmoral,legalandsocialbindingties.Inthisfashion,Starbuckscorporategift

failstoengendersolidaritysinceitisnotinfactagiftbutratheranon-gift.

Inthefirstsection,IbringtheinsightsofJacquesDerridaintothe

conceptionofthegiftinordertoprovideasubstantivedefinitiontoMary

Douglassdefinition,Agiftthatdoesnothingtoenhancesolidarityisa

contradiction(Douglass1990:x).Inthesecondsection,Ireviewthelaunchof

StarbucksCommunityStorepilotinHarlem.Ishowhowdespitetheprofitsharing

venturebeingcouchedinarhetoricofgoodneighborlinessitmanifestsadistinct

ethicofdetachment.Athirdsectionreturnstothisreconceptualizedtheoryofthe

giftandtheethicofdetachment,understandingthelatterasanobstacletothe

realizationoftheformersinducementofsolidarityaspredictedbyMausstheory.

StarbucksCSRpreventsitfromproducingtheeffectsofsolidaritythat

Mausspredicted,bycontrastwhatisproducedaredependenceandclientelismof

thekindthatDinahRajak(2008)hasidentifiedintheCSRofminingcorporations.

AsGeertDeNevestatesIntheIntroductiontoHiddenHandsintheMarket,The

attempttocreateamoralorpoliticalcontenttotherelationshipbetween

producersandconsumersrunsupagainsttheproblemthattherelationshipis

increasinglydisembeddedfromanysharedsocialorpoliticalspace.(2008:4)But

therelianceonanimplicitorexplicitcodeofethicsfurthersthisreducesthis


3/22

April2012

3/22

sharedsocialorpoliticalspacethroughanethicofdetachmentasdescribedby

Cross(2011).ThisclaimisfurthersupportedbylegaltheoristRobertoMangabeira

Unger(1977);whatemergesfromthisessayisthattheproblemofdisembedding

cannotberesolvedsimplybyfollowingarule,butrequiresaturntowards

engagementwithindividuals,astheindividualstheyare.

DERRIDASGIFT&ANETHICOFDETACHMENT

Themostimportantfeatureamongthesespiritualmechanismsisclearlyonethatobligesapersontoreciprocatethepresentthathasbeenreceived.(Mauss1990:9)

theremustbenoreciprocity,return,exchange,countergift,ordebt.IftheothergivesmebackorowesmeorhastogivemebackwhatIgivehimorher,therewill

nothavebeenagift,whetherthisrestitutionisimmediateorwhetheritis

programmedbyacomplexcalculationofalong-termdeferralordifferance(JacquesDerridaquotedinFrow1997:107)

AtfirstglanceDerridasconceptionofthegiftseemstocontradictthe

Maussconceptionofthegift.Isthegiftrelatedtoanobligatedsenseofreciprocity

ornot?Hasthereciprocatedgiftmutatedintoacommodity?Itisinattemptingto

dealwiththistensionthatmanyauthorshavearguedsomevariationofEybenand

Leon(2003)hasbothabrightandashadyside:ontheonehand,personal

commitment,passionandwarmth,andontheother,paternalism,patronage,and

control.(ascitedin(Rajak2009:227)andfordiscussionofParry(1986)and

VatukandVatuk(1971)see(Yan2005:252)Yet,aspreviouslymentioned,thisis

basedonamisconceptionofthegift,Agiftthatdoesnothingtoenhancesolidarity

isacontradiction(Douglass1990:x).

ThroughtheincorporationofDerridasdefinitionwecanreconceptualise

Mausstheoryofsolidarity.For,Atthelimit,thegiftasgiftoughtnotappearas

gift:eithertothedoneeortothedonor.Itcannotbegiftasgiftexceptbynotbeing


4/22

April2012

4/22

presentedasgift.(emphasisintheoriginalascitedinJones2003:230)Thusit

wouldseemthatbeyondthetraditionalbinaryofgiftsandcommodities,wemust

recognizetheexistenceofathirdcategory,whichisneitherfullygiftnorfully

commodity,butnon-gifts.

Commodityexchangeobligessomethingtobegivenbackinreturn,buta

giftcannotdemandreciprocitywithoutlosingitsessencewhichiswhatengenders

solidarity.Bycontrastagiftiswherethereisalsoacertainmadnessofthegift

(1992b:55),anon-rationalizableexcesswhichisdisposedinwaysthatseekno

return.(Jones2003)Byattemptingtoinstrumentalizethegift,itisdefromedinto

somethingelse,anon-gift.

Byanalogy,reviewingDerridasdescriptionoffriendshipmayhelpin

providingclarityonconceptualizingthegift,Agestureoffriendshiporof

politenesswouldbeneitherfriendlynorpoliteifitwerepurelyandsimplytoobey

aritualrule.(Derrida1995:7)Tobeagoodfriendsignifiesgoingbeyondactsof

friendliness.Likewisegivingagiftrequiresmorethansimplygiving,thereisa

criticalintentionalitywhichiscentraltobothconceptionswhichpreventsitfrom

beingpossibleofdefiningex-antewhatafriendoragiftis.

AsDavidGraeberstatesinreferringtothegift,Itisamicroscopicversion

ofthecreationofpersons,whichalmosteverywhereisbasedontheassumption

thatinnerqualities(talent,generosity,decency,etc.)canberealizedonlyin

anotherpersonseyes.(Graeber225)Tounderstandthegift,itisinsufficientto

consideractswithouttheiremotivecontext,ratheritisnecessarytoreadthemfor

cluestotheinnersentimentsofothers.

Thisseemingmetaphysicalactofmagicissomethingwedoeveryday;

everyinteractionwehavewithanotherpersonisinterpretedinlightofour


5/22

April2012

5/22

thoughtsoftheirintentions.Howaccuratewemightbeinthisisacompletely

differentmatter,ifanythingknowncasesofmisunderstandingswouldindicate

thattherearelikelymanymoreinstanceswhenwearenotevenawareofour

misreadingofothers.ThepointIwanttostresshoweveristhecentralityofour

interpretationofintentioninourdefiningthesignificancethatweattributetothe

actionsofothers.Withrespecttothegift,thismeansthatthereisnothing

inherentintheobjectsthatdesignatethemasgifts(Frow1997:124),

commoditiesornon-gifts.Anysetofpredeterminedrulesattemptingtodefinea

giftcouldpossiblybefollowedwhileleavingonlyahollowfacade.

Correspondingly,itisonlyinthelightofhowweunderstandtheintentionbehind

givingthatitmightrealizethesolidarityinducingeffectsthatMarcelMauss

theorized.

InowturntoacasestudyofcorporatesocialresponsibilityatStarbucksto

exploretheseideasinaparticularevent,thelaunchingofaStarbuckspilotin

corporatesocialresponsibility,CommunityStores.Theyareintendedtogiveback

tothecommunityandfosterstrongertiesbetweenthestoreandthesurrounding

community,primarilythroughprofit-sharing.


6/22

April2012

6/22

STARBUCKSCOMMUNITYSTORES

InLosAngelesandNewYorkCity,wearecollaboratingwithtwoinnovativenonprofit

organizationstosupporttheirneighborhoodrevitalizationeffortsandimprovecommunity

education,employment,health,housingandsafety.

Adonationfromeachtransactionatfrom(sic)theStarbuckscommunitystoresintheHarlemandCrenshawneighborhoodsisbeingsharedwithAbyssinianDevelopment

CorporationandtheLosAngelesUrbanLeague.(StarbucksCommunityStores2011)

OnOctober14th,2011Starbuckscelebratedthelaunchofanewpartnershipwith

AbyssinianDevelopmentCorporationinHarlem,NewYorkCity.Thenewcorporatesocial

responsibilityinvolved twostores,oneinHarlem,NewYorkCityandtheotherin

LosAngelesthatwouldbecomeCommunityStores.Bypartneringwithlocal

nonprofitsandsharingprofitswiththem,theStarbucksCEOstateditisintendedto

helpuslearnhowourcompanycansuccessfullyjoinwithchange-makingcommunity

organizationsinalocalized,coordinatedandreplicableway.(Day2011:8:07)

Duringtheevent,theStarbucksCEOreiteratedtheir,goodneighboraims

asheannounced,Ourpromiseandourcommitmentisthatitisnotjustgoingto

bethemoney.Itisgoingtobeourabilitytostandsidebysideduringgoodand

badtimestohelpthecommunitygrow,anddoeverythingwecantoservethis

communityinwaysthatwillmakeyouproudofthecompany.(Day2011:8:36)

Picture1:Sidebyside

Theunionofforces.SidebysidearetherespectiveteamsofAbyssinianBaptistChurchReverendCalvinButts,III,andofStarbucksCEO,HowardSchultz.

Imagesource:HarlemWorldMagazine


7/22

April2012

7/22

Theliteralmanifestationofourabilitytostandsidebyside,wasnotlost

onthelocalpressasillustratedbyacolumnistfromHarlemWorldMagazinethat

wrote,Indeed,hesstandingsidebysidewithapillarofthecommunity:Calvin

ButtsIII,pastoroftheAbyssinianBaptistChurchinHarlem.(HWM2011)This

blatantmanifestationoftheliteralinterpretationofthephrasestandsidebyside

seemstoinstilltrust.TheaudienceshouldbelieveStarbucks,andanydoubts

quelledbythepresenceoftopStarbucksleadership,righthereinHarlem

Starbuckswilldoeverything[they]cantoservethiscommunity.Thisclaim

howeverisnotsonaivelyaccepted,andtheseoutwardlygoodneighboractions

areonlygivenmeaningwithintheirwidercontext.

InthissectionIwillanalyzetwospecificelementsofthewidercontextof

theseproclamationsofgoodneighborlinessthathighlighttheethicsof

detachmentmanifestedintheevent.Subsequently,Iwillsuggestthatthismay

serveinpartasexplanationforthepoorreceptionofStarbucksgoodneighbor

efforts.AsIargue,theproblemisnotthatofthebottomlesspitthatsomeCSR

officialshavecomplainedaboutinRajak(2008:317),butrathertheattemptto

givebacktocommunityinthewrongcurrency:moneybutnotdignity.


8/22

April2012

8/22

Oneoftheelementsofthecontextthatmostclearlymanifeststheethicof

detachmentistheredtapethatseparatestheHarlemcommunityfromthe

StarbucksCEO.Thisimageonitsownmayappearquitenatural,aswehave

becomesoaccustomedtothesecuritydemandsofthoseinthepublicspotlight.

Additionally,fromapracticalstandpointtheresacertainaestheticand

prominencethatcomeswiththeemptyspacesurroundingthespeaker.Yetthis

imagecontrastssharplywiththefirstimage,hereStarbucksCEOisnolonger

standingsidebysidewithcommunityleadersbutstandingaloneatcenterstage.

Anotherimplicationofthestandingsidebysideimageisbroughttothe

foregroundwhencontrastedwiththeseparationbytheredtapeinthisimage.

WheninitiallyconfrontedbythefivesmilingleadersbeforetheStarbuckslogo,one

canthelpbutsenseacertaintotalitybeyondthemeresidebysideaspect,it

almostseemsasifthereisnothingelsebeyondtheedgesofthephotograph.And

so,thisisthemomentwhentheimplicitrepresentationofindividualsfortheir

respectivegreaterentityismoststronglyfelt.Here,whatisclearestisthephysical

manifestationoftheliterarytermsynecdoche,whereapartofsomethingisusedto

refertothewholething.ReverendCalvinButtsisHarlemandtheStarbucksCEOis

Picture2:RedTapeAredtapeseparatestheHarlem

communityfromHowardSchultz,CEOofStarbucksatthepressconferencelaunchingCommunityStores.

Imagesource:SpencerPlatt,GettyImagesNorthAmerica


9/22

April2012

9/22

StarbucksCorporation.Butthisillusionfromthefirstimageisshatteredwhen

juxtaposedwiththesecond,wheretheunveilingofthesynecdochebringstolight

theexistenceofaHarlembeyondReverendCalvinButtsandonethatisonlyto

befoundbeyondtheredtape.1Thehandfulofindividualsstandingwithinthered

tape,whoonecouldcalltheinsiders,accentuatethesignificanceoftheborder,

notonlybyprovidingacountercategorythatpermitstheusageoftheterm

outsiders,butalsoaspossibleenforcersoftheseparation.Onecaneasilyimagine

thatshouldanoutsiderattempttocrossthisseeminglydaintyredtapedivide,

theseprivilegedinsiderswouldbethesecondlineofdefense,andreinforcethe

dividingline.

Soastonotunderestimatethesignificanceoftheseparationbytheredtape

IrefertoJohnRoberts,ProfessorandChairofBusinessandEconomicsofthe

UniversityofSydney,whoclaims(inlinewithEmmanuelLevinas)that,Physical

distancealsohastheeffectofrenderingfacelesstheobjectsofouractions

Securitysurroundingexecutivesuites,thecarefulcontrolofaccessbyoutsiders,as

wellasaschedulethatimmersespeopleinworktotheneglectofalmost

everythingelse,allhelpsecurethissocialdistance.(Roberts2003:259-260)

Throughthesecuritysurrounding[StarbucksCEO,andthrough]thecontrolof

accessbyoutsiders,asocialdistancingissecuredwhichasJamieCrosshasargued

preventstheformingofmoral,legalandsocialbindingties.(2011:35)

1Similarly,thereisaStarbucksbeyondHowardSchultzwhichisnotfullyencapsulatedinthecorporalrepresentativemakingcommitmentstothecommunity.


10/22

April2012

10/22

Newvariationsonthesamethemeofanethicsofdetachmentand

distancingisseenfromyetathirdanotherangleofthesameevent.Whileheretoo

aredtapecanbeseenseparatingtheStarbucksCEO,itisnowclearwho,orrather

whatHowardSchultzislookingat.TheHarlemcommunityisrightbesidehim,as

seeninthepreviousphotographwhichfacedHarlemsheavilytransited125th

street,pedestrianswalkingbycouldhaveapproachedunrestrainedatleastup

untiltheredtape.

Nonetheless,theStarbucksCEOdidnotfacetospeaktothem,hewasfacing

forward,andnowitisclearwhatheldhisattention,thepressbox.Atthefarlefta

maninaredjacketpointsaprofessionalvideocameraattheStarbucksCEOfor

whatonecanonlysuspectmightbetheeveningTVnews,meanwhileatthefar

rightonecanseeasophisticatedstillframecameramostlikelyforsomeother

mediaoutlet.Thisimageitselfcomesfromanamateurjournalistwhouploaded

his15-minutevideotitledStarbucksCEOSeeksToBeAGoodCorporateNeighborIn

HarlemandL.Aontothepeer-sharingsiteVimeo.com(Day2011).

Picture3:TalkingtoCamerasStarbucksCEOfacesacrowdofcamerasattheeventlaunchingStarbucksCommunityStores.

Imagesource:StarbucksCEOSeeksToBeAGoodCorporateNeighborInHarlemandL.A(Vimeo.com)


11/22

April2012

11/22

Itisworthpausingamomentlongeronthiscontradiction.Whilethe

rhetoricoftheStarbucksCEOstressesbeingagoodneighborandmakingthe

communityproudofthecompany,thesignificanceoftheseactionsmustbe

understoodinthewidercontextinwhichStarbucksmanagementflewcross-

countryfromSeattletoHarlemforalauncheventofCommunityStoreswhichkept

thecommunityatadistanceandtreatedthemasofsecondimportanceas

comparedtothevideocameras.AsRobertsargues,thedesiretobeseentobe

ethicaltheethicsofnarcissusistheobverseofbeingresponsiblefor.(2001:

109)

ButbeyondthecertainlyvalidcriticismthatitappearsthattheStarbucks

CEOhereismoreconcernedwithappearingethicaltothewidestnumberofpeople

thanintheethicsofhistreatmentofthoseimmediatelyaroundhim,anadditional

critiquehighlightsthetensionbetweentherelativeeaseofanactwithitsethical

dimensions.RecallingDerrida,Itisperhapsinthissensethatthegiftisthe

impossible.Notimpossiblebuttheimpossible.Theveryfigureoftheimpossible.It

announcesitself,givesitselftobethoughtastheimpossible.(1994:7,emphasisin

theoriginal)

ThiscontrastssharplywiththesuggestionsfromMichaelPorterandMark

KramerfromHarvardUniversitythatstate,

Eachcompanycanidentifytheparticularsetofsocietalproblemsthatitisbestequippedtohelpresolveandfromwhichitcangainthegreatest

competitivebenefitWhenawell-runbusinessappliesitsvast

resources,expertise,andmanagementtalenttoproblemsthatitunderstandsandinwhichithasastake,itcanhaveagreaterimpacton

socialgoodthananyotherinstitutionorphilanthropicorganization.(2009:92)

Thisargumentbeingadvancedheregoesbeyondthecommonlyheldhesitancein

trustingtheclaimbyStarbucks,andbymanyothercorporations,thatcorporate


12/22

April2012

12/22

socialresponsibilitymaybemotivatedasgoodforbusiness.Itgoesindirect

oppositiontotheseeminglylogicalclaimthatCorporationsshouldfocustheir

effortsontheproblemsthattheyarebestequippedtohelpsolve,becausegiving

whatcomeseasyisnotenough.Givingmustentailtheimpossible,oratleastthe

stretchingofthepossible.Whileleftatthistheoreticalextreme,Derridasdemand

mayseemliterallyimpossible.Buttheusageofidealtypesoftheoryisnotmeant

toexcludethecomplicatedamalgamationsfoundinreality,butmoreasapointof

reference.Furthermore,theimpossibilityspokenofisnotintendedasanabsolute

impossibility,butitsperceptionex-ante.Andsothegift,whichmorefully

resembles,theidealtypeismostlikelytoproducetheeffectsofsolidaritythat

MarcelMausstheorypredicts.

Money&Dignity

HavinghighlightedtwokeyelementsoftheCommunityStorelaunchevent

context,Iknowturntoanissueofconcernthathasbeenexpressedinvarious

mediumbytheHarlemcommunityregardingStarbucks.Whileattheheartofthe

profitsharingpilotisagivingbacktothecommunityintheformofmoney,which

consideringthesignificantprofitsofthemultinationalchainonemightconsiderto

berelativelyeasytogiveascomparedtotime.Bycontrastattheheartoftheethic

ofdetachmentisanefforttopreventbindingtiesfromformingbutalsoalogicof

conservationandefficientuseoftime.Inacounterfactualhypothetical,the

StarbucksCEOcouldhavewalkedacrosstheredtapedivideandtalkeddirectly

withthepeopleonthesidewalksofHarlem,yetintermsofefficiency,thatwould

havebeenabsurd.Rather,byvideotaping,photographingandrecordingtheevent

theinformationcanbeeasilyspreadjustaseasilytoaliterallyunlimitednumber


13/22

April2012

13/22

ofpeople,preservedacrossspaceandtime,asitcouldhavetojustasingle

individual.Theimplicitcalculationhereisthatcommunicatingtoanyone

individualintheprofoundanddeepersensethatapersonalconversationwould

secureisnotworththeseeminglyinfinitesuperficialtouchesthatmediapermits

themessage.Butthisscaleofeaseisinverselyrelatedtotheethicaldimensions

andsolidarityinducingeffectsofthegift.Itisonlythroughcontactwiththeother,

thattheethicalcanbedetermined,thattheethicalcanbeenacted.AsRoberts

states,thegroundofethicsliesinourcorporealsensibilitytoproximateothers.

(2001:109)Itisnotviadetachedcodesofconduct.

Inthislight,thepushfrombothactivistsandcorporationstodefinecodesof

conductforcorporatesocialresponsibilityismisguided.Activistsseemjustifiedin

fightingforstricterandstricterregulationstomaintainpressureoncorporations

tobegood,theyseethemselvesfightingthegoodfight,andyetinthesame

gesturetheyeliminatethepossibilityofrealizingwhattheyseek.Codesof

conductdefineandlimittheobligationsthatgiftscreateforemployeesinorderto

avoidthecompanygettinginvolveditself.Thustheyaimatblockingtheeffectsof

thesocialprocessemphasisedbyMarcelMauss(1923),bymaintainingthe

relationshipbetweenemployeesandoutsiderswithinprofessionalboundaries.

(Bethoux,DidryandMias2007:86)Acorporationthatfollowstherulesisnot

good,ithasmerelydonewhatitwasrequiredto.Inthewordsoflegaltheorist

RobertoMangabeiraUnger,

Whenattemptsaremadetocodifystandards,toreducethemtorules,theircharacterisdistorted.Eitheralargeareaofuncontrolleddiscretionandindividualizationsubsistsunderthetrappingsofgeneralnorms,ortheflexibilityneededtomakemanagerialdecisionsortoproduceequitableresultsislost[the]dialecticofillusionand

petrification(Unger1977:197)


14/22

April2012

14/22

Throughthisdiscussionofthetensionbetweeneaseandethics,ofthe

tensionbetweengivingaccordingtoaeasilydefinableruleandthecomplicated

particularitiesofdirectcontactwiththeOther,Ihaveintentionallydelayed

describingthesourceofdiscontentofHarlemresidents.Haditinitiallybeen

expresseddirectlyincomparison,sidebyside,withthepromised$100,000+US

DollarstobegivenbacktotheHarlemcommunityinthefirstyearalonethrough

thepartnershipwithAbyssinianitwouldhavelikelyappearedabsurdthesource

oftheindignityamongHarlemresidentshavebeentheremovalofchairsfromone

ofthelocalStarbucks.

AccordingtoanarticleintheEpochTimes,oneHarlemStarbucks,hadall

theseatingremovedlastyeartokeeppeoplefromloitering.Beforetheseatsand

tableswereremoved,oldermengatheredtoplaychessandreadnewspapers.(

Pentchoukov2011)Thesignificanceintermsofdignityofthesechairsiscaptured

inblogpostbyalocalaward-winningpoet,DelanaR.A.Dameron,

Yesterday,whilevisitingafried(sic),IwalkedbythisStarbucks,andthiscouplebehindmewasremarkingabouthowitsbackopenandtheywonderedwhatwas

differentandIhearan,Oh,thetablesbythewindowhavebeenremoved.AndIlookandsee,andconfirm.IusedtolovewalkingbythisStarbucksonthewaytochurch

andseeingoldermenwhoalwaysremindedmeofmygrandfathersittingthere,

playingchess,readingnewspapers.Theequivalent,Iguess,tosay,youngerfolkssittinginStarbucksdowntownorAnytown,USAwiththeirlaptops.Somethingabout

thiswassooldworldandcharming,andImighthavelikedStarbucksinthatmomentforlettingthemdoit.Soyes,thechairsandtablesbythewindowweregone.Ilooked,

andthecouplelookedwithme,andthenIheardthemvoicemyowndiscovery:Theytookallthetablesandchairsout!AndIshookmyhead.AndIthought:OhStarbucks,youwantourmoney,butyoudontwantus.Isthissometypeofnew-waveyou-can-

shop-here-but-only-if-you-come-through-the-back-door?IdontbelieveIhaveever

witnessedaStarbucksofitssizesansseating.(Dameron2011)

WhileStarbuckspridesitselfonthe$100,000thatitwillgivebacktothe

communitythroughAbyssinian,whatthecommunitycomplainsaboutarethe

symbolicblowsagainstitsdignity.Nopredefinedsetofrulescouldhavebeen


15/22

April2012

15/22

usedtoforeseethesignificancethesemembersofthecommunityattributedtothe

removalofthesechairs.Socialresponsibilityisnotabottomlesspit,but

attemptingtofillitwithoutunderstandingitsevolvingcontoursmaycertainly

makeitappearso.

IwilladdafinaldisclaimerregardingtheselectionofStarbuckscasestudy.

InCollaboratingwithActivists:HowStarbucksWorkswithNGOs,PaulArgenti

highlightsthatThestrongStarbucksbrandprovidedyetanotherreason[for

activists]totargetthecompany.DespiteStarbuckshighvisibilityandrespected

brand,thecompanyattracteditsshareofcritics.(Argenti2004:100)Thisessay

hasfocusedonbringingtolightanethicofdetachment,andhowinturnthis

separation,betweenStarbucksandthecommunityitproclaimsbeingapartof,

preventthisvarietyofCSRinducingthesolidaritythatMausstheoryofthegift

predicted.Yet,itdoesnothavetheintenttotarnishtherespectedbrandand

rathertheimplicationisthatthisisamuchwiderphenomenaofCSRmore

generally.

InFirstasTragedyThenasFarce,SlavojZizekmakesananalogous

argumentaslaidouthere.Hecriticizesculturalcapitalism,asexemplifiedbythe

caseofStarbucks,forpresentingconsumerswiththesolutionthroughtheirown

consumption.ifyourethicalneedsarestillunsatisfiedandyoucontinueto

worryaboutThirdWorldMisery,thenthereareadditionalproductsyoucanbuy.

(2009:54).

Thereishoweverafundamentaldifferencebetweenmyargumentand

Zizeks.Heseemstoascribeacertainagencyandmalevolencetocorporationslike


16/22

April2012

16/22

Starbucks2.Incontrast,thisessayhasnotintendedtoquestionStarbucksefforts

towardsamoreethicalpracticeorofattemptingtouseCSRtogreenwashasother

activistshavealsoindicated(Argenti2004:108).

TryingtoarguethatCSRissimplyacaseofintentionalgreenwashingmust

respondtorealitiessuchasthisCNNnewsreportersobservation:

Butit'sdifficulttobeskepticalwatchingSchultz'semployeesreacttohis

presenceintheirstore.Assoonashewalksinside,allthreebaristassnap

photosoftheCEOandchatterexcitedly.They'refans,notjustemployees.

Thecompanytreatsthemwell.(Roberts2011)

Dismissingthevalue(orpotentialvalue)ofCSRbaseduponsuspicionsofthe

sincerityofmotivesrisksplacingthecriticandthecorporationinanendless

andultimatelyunresolvableheadbutting.Inthisessay,insteadIattemptto

explainwhatisultimatelytheharderbutmoreconstructiveargument,whichis

thatevenpresumingasincereintentiononbehalfofthecorporationtogive

back,theresultisthecontrary.

Fromadetachedperspective,itisunderstandablehowitmightseem

logicalthatwhatneedstobedoneistogivebreadtothehungryandmoneyto

thepoor,andthatthemostefficient,mostscalablesolutionwouldinturnbe

thebest.Inthisconception,easeingivingandethicswouldseemtogohand

andhand.Ratherthangettingboggeddownandentangledinunnecessary

complexities,corporationsshouldfollowPorterandKramers(2009)advice

basedonthebasicconceptofeconomicsknownascomparativeadvantage.

Increasedspecializationofphilanthropicfocus,whiledoingonesbestnottobe

distractedbynon-relatedcomplexitieswouldpermitthegreatestbenefit.Itis

2Istatethisconscientiousthathisowndiscussionselsewherewouldseemtocontradictthisinterpretationbasedontheemphasisoftheroleofthesysteminformingindividuals.


17/22

April2012

17/22

tobeexpectedthatonecontinuingdownthispathwouldseesuccessesaswell

asfailures,butperhapsthiswouldservetomotivatearedoublingofefforts,a

redoublingofthemostefficientwaytodistributetheneededbreadandmoney

longbeforeherealizedthattheverystrategyselectedtoachievethegoalwas

whatkeptitunachievable.

Thisadmittedlyhighlyoptimisticelaborationofthehypotheticalreasoning

behindtheapparentcontradictionofcorporategoodintentionsandnegative

outcomespermitsthepossiblerefocusingofthedebateinamoreconstructive

manner.Ratherthangoingbackandforthaboutwhethercorporationsaresincerely

concernedabouttherestofsocietyorsimplytryingtoappearasiftheyare,thisessay

claimsthatthetermsofgivingbackneedtobereconsideredthatthereexiststhe

possibilitythateventhewell-intentionedwouldhavefailed,lessasaresultofthe

sincerityoftheirintentionsasaresultofthestrategyofefficiencyatoddswiththe

foundationsofethics.

Thisverycritiquemakesdevisingmuchofanythingthatresemblesacodeof

conductanimpossiblecontradictionbecauseoftheimpossibletaskofdelineating

whatagiftis,orwhatbeingagoodneighboris.Theproposalhereisfacingthemuch

easierimpossiblechallengeofdeterminingtheethicalthroughcontactwiththe

other.Atfirstsight,bothareimpossibletasks,butwhiletheformereliminatesthe

possibilityinitsverynaturebyCross(2011)ethicsofdetachmentandtheresulting

illusionorpetrifiedstatedbyUnger(1977),thelatterleavesthepossibilityof

stretchingthatperceivedpossibleintonewhorizonsoftheoncethoughtimpossible.


18/22

April2012

18/22

AfinalanalogyisexcisedfromDavidGraebersdiscussionofthegift,in

whichitcanbeshownonceagaintheincoherenceofapplyingasinglerule

acrossdifferentcontexts.

Letmetakeanotherfamiliarexample:thecustomofbringingabottle

ofwineorsomesuchifinvitedtoafriendsfordinner.Itisacommon

practice,forexample,amongAmericanacademicsInanundergraduatedorm,peoplewalkinandoutofeachothersrooms

fairlycasually;oftenaresidentialhallisnotunlikeavillagewith

everybodykeepingtrackofeverybodyelsesbusiness.(Graeber2001:226)

ItwouldseemthatneithermaximBringabottleofwinewheninvitedto

dinnernorRespectthesanctityofprivacyapplyequallywellinthetwo

contextsaboveitisonlybybeingphysicallypresent,throughcontact

withtheothersinvolvethatonewouldknowwhatwouldentailbeinga

goodneighbor.Theremightcertainlybethingsthatwouldbeabad

neighborinboth(deceiving,maiming,killingtheother,etc)butitwhat

definesagoodneighborisnecessarilycontextualandbaseduponthe

unforeseeableindividualityanduniquenessthateachindividualis.The

truismseemssobanal,yetitcoexistswiththecontradictoryimplicit

beliefinthegoodnessofeconomiesofscaleofgiving,ofincreasingease

togiveahomogenousnon-giftaswidelyaspossible.Itislittledoubtthat

thisnon-giftdoesnotproducethesolidarityexpectedofthegift.Withrespecttothegift,Derridatellsusthatitisthisveryimpossibilitythat

makesthegiftpossible.Currently,Starbucksinanattempttobeeverywhereendsup

beingnowhere.ButassocialtheoristRobertoMangabeiraUngerstates,Forthehero

toimprovehistask,tomakeitworthierofhisefforts,hewouldhavetotransform

societyandculture.Hewouldthereforealsoneedtothrowhimselfintothegiveand

takeofsociallifeandnotallowhimselftobeentirelyruledbythepretenseof


19/22

April2012

19/22

disengagement.(Unger56)Whatwouldbeexpectedofgoodneighborlinessis

preciselytheengagementthatStarbuckssphilanthropylackswhilethepoor

certainlyneedbreadandmoney,theyalsodemandtheirdignity-butthatcanonlybe

sustainedthroughthetreatmentofeachindividualasanindividual,notthroughex-

anterules.


20/22

April2012

20/22

Bibliography

Aasland,DagG.(2004)OntheEthicsbehindBusinessEthics.JournalofBusinessEthics.Vol53.3-8.

Argenti,PaulA.(2004)CollaboratingwithActivists:HowStarbucksworkswithNGOs.CaliforniaManagementReview.Vol47No1Fall91-116Bethoux,loide,ClaudeDidryandArnaudMias.(2007)WhatCodesofConductTellUs:CorporateSocialResponsibilityandTheNatureoftheMultinationalCorporation.CorporateGovernance:AnInternationalReview,15(1)77-90.Browne,KatherineE.(2009)EconomicsandMorality:Introduction.Ineds.Browne,KatherineE.andB.LynneMilgram(2009)EconomicsandMorality:AnthropologicalApproaches.Plymouth:Rowman&LittlefieldPublishers,Inc.Cross,Jamie.(2011)Detachmentasacorporateethic:MaterializingCSRinthediamondsupplychain.FocaalJournalofGlobalandHistoricalAnthropology,60:3446Day,Dennis.(October3,2011)StarbucksCEOSeeksToBeAGoodCorporateNeighborInHarlemandL.A.Availableathttp://vimeo.com/30280565AccessedApril16,2012.DeNeve,Geert,PeterLuetchfordandJeffreyPratt(2003)Introduction:Revealing

theHiddenHandsofGlobalMarketExchange.Ineds.DeNeve,Geert,PeterLuetchfordandJeffreyPrattandDonaldC.Wood.HiddenHandsintheMarket:EthnographiesofFairTrade,EthicalConsumption,andCorporateSocialResponsibility,Bingley:EmeraldGroupPublishingLimited.Derrida,Jacques.(1994)GivingTime:CounterfeitMoney.London:UniversityofChicagoPress.Derrida,Jacques.(1995)OntheName.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.Douglass,Mary.(1990)Introduction.InMauss,Marcel.(2002)TheGift.London:Routledge.Dameron,DelanaR.A.YouCantSitHere.Availableat:http://delanadameron.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/you-cant-sit-here/AccessedApril16,2012.Frow,John.(1997)GiftandCommodity.InFrow,John.(1997)TimeandCommodityCulture:EssaysinCulturalTheoryandPostmodernity.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.


21/22

April2012

21/22

EGhostwriter.(2008)HowardSchultz:StarbucksFirstMate.Entrepreneur,October10.Availableathttp://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197692accessedApril16,2012.Graeber,David.(2001)MarcelMaussRevisitedinGraeber,David.(2001)Toward

anAnthropologicalTheoryofValue:TheFalseCoinofourowndreams.Hampshire:Palgrave.Hart,Keith.(2007)MarcelMauss:InPursuitoftheWhole.AReviewEssay.ComparativeStudiesinSocietyandHistory,49(2)473-385.HWM,Ghostwriter.(2011)StarbucksCaffeinatestheCommunitywithCashinHarlem!HarlemWorldMagazine,October6.http://harlemworldmag.com/2011/10/06/starbucks-caffinates-the-community-with-cash-in-harlem/AccessedApril16,2012.HWM,Ghostwriter.Mr.HowardGoesToHarlem,AuthenticityOrPerformance?HarlemWorldMagazine,November22,2011.Availableathttp://harlemworldmag.com/2011/11/22/mr-howard-goes-to-harlem-authenticity-or-performance/AccessedApril16,2012Jones,Cambell.(2003)AsifBusinessEthicswerePossible,withinSuchLimitsOrganization10(2):223-248.Mauss,Marcel.(2002)TheGift.London:Routledge.

Pentchoukov,Ivan.(2011)HarlemsMixedFeelingsaboutStarbucks.EpochTimes,LastUpdatedOctober6,2011.Availableathttp://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/united-states/harlems-mixed-feelings-about-starbucks-62483.htmlAccessedApril16,2012.Porter,M.E.&Kramer,M.R.(2006)"StrategyandSociety:TheLinkBetweenCompetitiveAdvantageandCorporateSocialResponsibility",HarvardBusinessReview,December2006,pp.7892.Rajak,Dinah(2008)IAmtheConscienceoftheCompany:Responsibilityandthe

GiftinaTransnationalMiningCorporation.Ineds.Browne,KatherineE.andB.LynneMilgram(2009)EconomicsandMorality:AnthropologicalApproaches.Plymouth:Rowman&LittlefieldPublishers,Inc.Rajak,Dinah(2008)UpliftandEmpower:TheMarketMoralityandCoporateResonsibilityonSouthAfricasPlatinumBelt.Ineds.DeNeve,Geert,PeterLuetchfordandJeffreyPrattandDonaldC.Wood.HiddenHandsintheMarket:EthnographiesofFairTrade,EthicalConsumption,andCorporateSocial

Responsibility.Bingley:EmeraldGroupPublishingLimited.Roberts,Daniel.(2011)WhenHowardWenttoHarlem.Fortune:CNNMoney.

November17,2011.Availableat


22/22

April 2012 22/22

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/tag/abyssinian-development-corp/AccessedApril16,2012.Roberts,John.(2001)CorporateGovernanceandtheEthicsofNarcissus.BusinessEthicsQuarterly.Vol11,No1:109-127.

Roberts,John.(2003)TheManufactureofCorporateSocialResponsibility:ConstructingCorporateSensibility.Organization.10(2):249-265.

Schultz,Howard.(1997)Imagination,Dreams,andHumbleOrigins.InSchultz,Howard.PourYourHeartIntoIt:HowStarbucksBuiltaCompanyOneCupataTime.London:Hyperion.Availableathttp://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/schultz-pour.htmlaccessedApril16,2012StarbucksCommunityStores.(2011)Availableathttp://www.starbucks.com/responsibility/community/community-storesAccessedApril16,2012.Strathern,AndrewandPamelaJ.Stewart.(20005)CeremonialExchange.Ined.Carrier,JamesG.(2005)AHandbookofEconomicAnthropology.Cheltenham:EdwardElgarPublishingLimited.Unger,RobertoMangabeira.(1977)LawinModernSociety.FreePress:NewYork.Availableathttp://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/unger/english/lawinmo.phpAccessedApril16,2012

Unger,RobertoMangabeira.(1986)Passion:AnEssayonPersonality.FreePress:NewYork.Availableathttp://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/unger/english/passion.phpAccessedApril16,2012SpencerPlatt/GettyImagesNorthAmerica.(October3,2011)InStarbucksCEOHowardSchultzAnnouncesHarlemCommunityPartnershipProgram.Availableathttp://www.zimbio.com/pictures/moA5eD70aqq/Starbucks+CEO+Howard+Schultz+Announces+Harlem/y6_t4wVAwIDAccessedApril16,2012.Yan,Yunxiang.(2005)TheGiftandGiftEconomy.InedCarrier,JamesG.(2005)AHandbookofEconomicAnthropology.EdwardElgarCheltenham:PublishingLimited.Zizek,Slavoj.(2009)FirstasTragedyThenasFarce.London:Verso.

the gift that wasn’t - starbucks 'community stores

Documents