For A-plus Writer Only

Potential Solutions to the Social Problem of Lack of Coffee in the Workplace:

A Sample Literature Review

Laura J. McCormick, Ph.D.

SOCI-4080C-1

Walden University

Potential Solutions to the Social Problem of Lack of Coffee in the Workplace:

A Sample Literature Review

Introduction

Coffee in the workplace has long been considered a necessity for a pleasant and productive work environment. Over the past six decades, it has been commonplace for employers to provide their employees with coffee. However, this practice has been on the decline, leaving many employees without coffee readily available to drink during work hours (Byler, 2009). The purpose of this literature review is to examine potential solutions to this social problem, as covered in the scholarly literature. The feasibility of the potential solutions, conflicts between the solutions, the interests, rights, and values of the stakeholders, and ethical dilemmas are also discussed.

History of Coffee in the Workplace

When coffee was first introduced to the workplace in the United States (U.S.) in the 1950s, productivity and morale increased dramatically across a variety of occupations (Hanks, 2007). As such, numerous companies and organizations began to supply their employees with free coffee to drink during work hours. Despite the cost of the supplies needed to provide free coffee, the majority of companies experienced an increase in profits, which was attributed to having happier, more energetic, motivated employees. Employees became kinder to one another, saying “please” and “thank you,” as well as offering to help with each other’s workloads when needed. In a sense, the introduction of coffee to the workplace helped to boost the U.S. economy. Mr. Howard Jones, an office worker in the 1950s, recalled when coffee was first introduced into the workplace, commenting, “It was a miracle” (Smith & Carter, 2013, p. 33). Over time, coffee in the workplace provided by one’s employer came to be understood as a norm. However, the state of free coffee in the workplace is changing.

Current State of Coffee in the Workplace

The likelihood of companies providing their employees with free coffee during work hours is decreasing. Many employees across occupations are being forced to either go without coffee or bring their own coffee to work (Alexander & Smith, 2010). According to research by Thompson et al. (2014), the number one reason cited by employers for not providing coffee to their employees is theft of coffee-related supplies. What was once increasing profits for companies is now costing them money (Byler, 2009). However, in companies in which employees no longer have access to coffee, productivity and morale are decreasing, which also decreases the companies’ profits. In turn, the U.S. economy suffers. Thus, it is important to investigate the social problem of lack of coffee in the workplace. In an effort to generate solutions to this social problem, researchers have conducted studies with numerous companies, organizations, and employees across a variety of occupations.

Potential Solutions

According to the scholarly literature , there are many potential solutions to the social problem of lack of coffee in the workplace. For the purposes of this paper, two solutions will be reviewed. One of the potential solutions to lack of coffee in the workplace is for employers to address the issue of theft with their employees in hopes of reinstituting the practice of free coffee. A study conducted by Thompson et al. (2014) indicated that employees were less likely to steal coffee-related supplies when a video camera was near the coffee station. Similar research has revealed a decrease in theft of office supplies, including coffee-related supplies, when employees believe they can report theft anonymously (Alexander & Smith, 2010; White, Fox, & Redi, 2013).

A second potential solution to making coffee available in the workplace is for employers to require interested employees to pay a small monthly fee to cover coffee-related expenses. Research by Davis (2011) and Holbert, Robinson, and Segal (2012) revealed that when employees who wanted to drink coffee at work were required to pay a small fee (approximately $5.00) each month, theft of coffee-related supplies decreased. In turn, coffee was readily available to paying employees and office morale improved along with productivity. In addition, Thompson et al. (2014) suggested that this practice might also encourage employees who are paying for the coffee to report any theft of coffee and coffee-related supplies.

Feasibility of Solutions

Based on the scholarly literature, addressing issues regarding theft (Alexander & Smith, 2010; Thompson et al., 2014; White et al., 2013) and requiring employees to pay a small monthly fee for coffee (Davis, 2011; Holbert et al., 2012; Thompson et al., 2014) are feasible potential solutions to the problem of lack of coffee in the workplace. In order to implement these potential solutions, the employer must simply discuss them with his or her employees, explain the purpose of the changes (i.e., video camera, required monthly fee), and make sure the employees understand what is expected of them and any consequences of not following the rules (Davis, 2011; White et al., 2013).

Conflicts

There are no apparent conflicts between the two potential solutions discussed in this paper. As previously mentioned, according to Thompson et al. (2014), the practice of requiring interested employees to pay a small monthly fee for coffee might also encourage paying employees to report any theft of coffee and coffee-related supplies. Thus, the implementation of procedures related to addressing theft and requiring employees to pay for coffee seems practical, whether just one or more of these potential solutions are put into effect.

Stakeholders

Although the potential solutions discussed in this paper are feasible and do not appear to conflict with one another, the employees’ interests, rights, and values may be infringed upon. For example, two of the ten women interviewed in Holbert et al.’s (2010) study reported feeling uncomfortable with having a video camera near the coffee station. “It’s a violation of my right to privacy,” said one of the women (p. 87). In this particular study, employees who wanted to drink coffee were required to pay a monthly fee of $3.00. The two women who reported feeling uncomfortable with the video camera opted out of the option to buy access to coffee in the workplace. More research needs to be conducted to determine if there is a correlation between these feelings of discomfort and choosing to not participate in the practice of paying a monthly fee for coffee.

Another issue to consider regarding the employee’s interests, rights, and values is the belief that one’s employer should pay for employee access to coffee. Since coffee had been provided without charge for decades by most companies and organizations, it is difficult for many employees to accept the idea of being required to pay for coffee in the workplace (Hanks, 2007; Smith & Carter, 2013). Although employees report being sympathetic to employers regarding the theft of coffee-related office supplies, there exists a prevailing belief that employers should maintain responsibility for providing their employees with coffee in the workplace (Alexander & Smith, 2010; Davis, 2011).

Ethical Dilemmas

A number of potential ethical dilemmas are evident in the scholarly literature about implementing solutions to the social problem of lack of coffee in the workplace. For example, as noted in White et al.’s (2013) study, a person who reports that an employee has stolen office supplies might not be telling the truth. Should employers take reporting employees at their word? Another potential ethical dilemma is that some employees might not be able to afford the monthly fee for coffee in the workplace. One participant in Davis’ (2011) study reported a belief that charging for coffee was discriminatory against single parents. A third potential ethical dilemma is related to the use of video cameras near the coffee station. As noted previously, some employees believe this is an infringement upon their right to privacy (Holbert et al., 2010). These potential ethical dilemmas require further consideration and study.

Conclusion

The social problem of lack of coffee in the workplace is important to address because it is negatively affecting office morale, employee productivity, and company profits across a variety of occupations (Byler, 2009; Hanks, 2007). Feasible potential solutions to the problem exist, including addressing the issue of theft with one’s employees and requiring employees to pay for coffee in the workplace. However, these solutions come with potential ethical dilemmas and concerns about infringing upon the interests, rights, and values of employees (Alexander & Smith, 2010; Davis, 2011; Holbert et al., 2012; Thompson et al., 2014; White et al., 2013).

References

Alexander, D., & Smith, H. (2010). My life without coffee: One man’s struggle. Journal of Employee Experiences, 28(3), 14-31. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

Byler, E. (2009). Coffee in the workplace on the decline. Coffee Beans Quarterly, 22, 319-322. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

Davis, T. M. (2011). Paying for coffee in the workplace: An examination of its efficacy. Bi-Monthly Journal of Business Practices, 4(1), 11-21. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

Hanks, P. (2007). The history of coffee and how it changed the workplace. Thousand Oaks, CA: Coffee Beans Publishers.

Holbert, J., Robinson, S., & Segal, J. R. (2012). Keep your hands off the coffee unless you’ve paid: The experiences of ten women working in a small office. Coffee Beans Quarterly, 12(5), 82-98. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

Smith, F., & Carter, J. (2013). A miracle beverage: A worker recalls when coffee entered the workplace. Journal of Coffee Production, 18(3), 33-41. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

Thompson, H., Smith, F., Abraham, D., & Jones, F. (2014). The downfall of free coffee in the workplace. Coffee Beans Quarterly, 18, 323-348. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

White, J., Fox, P., & Redi, K. (2013). Theft in the workplace: A comprehensive analysis. Modern Business Journal, 18(2), 25-36. doi:00.000/COF.00.0.00-00

�Note how the writer of this paper used APA Style headings and subheadings.

You might find it helpful to type your headings and subheadings before you start writing…thus, creating an outline of your literature review.

Then, as you write your paragraphs, keep the “MEAL Plan” in mind to help with organization: � HYPERLINK "http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/paragraphs/organization" �http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/paragraphs/organization�

�Note how the writer of this paper used very few direct quotes…and that the quotes she did use were short.

Also note how the writer cited the page number on which the quote was located in the original source.

It is vital to paraphrase the majority of what you read in the scholarly literature and to give proper credit when using a direct quote.

For information on paraphrasing, please see: � HYPERLINK "http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/paraphrase/effective" �http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence/paraphrase/effective�

�Note how the writer of this paper did not share her opinion. Rather, she discussed the information that was available in the scholarly literature and used evidence to support her statements. She used in-text citations to inform the reader about where she obtained the evidence.

Also note how the writer did not write in the first-person (e.g., “I believe…”).

Use evidence, in-text citations, and do not write in the first person – These are important rules to follow in a literature review.

For more information on how to use evidence, please see: � HYPERLINK "http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence" �http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/evidence�

�Note how the writer of this paper did not discuss the articles she gathered individually. Rather, she noted similarities and differences among the articles and integrated them throughout her paper.

Also note how the writer cited at least two scholarly articles for each potential solution.

�Note that you are not required to make separate sections for issues regarding feasibility, conflicts, stakeholders’ interests, rights, and values, and ethical dilemmas. As long as you address each of these issues, you may combine them in a paragraph or two.

If you believe there are no conflicts or ethical dilemmas, explain how you arrived at this conclusion, supporting your statements with reference to the scholarly literature.