stats Making the Business of Life Easier

   Finance globeinvestor   Careers globecareers.workopolis Subscribe to The Globe
The Globe and Mail /
Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels


  This site         Tips

  The Web Google


  Where to Find It

Breaking News
  Home Page

  Report on Business



Subscribe to The Globe

Shop at our Globe Store

Print Edition
  Front Page

  Report on Business




  Arts & Entertainment



   Headline Index

 Other Sections

  Births & Deaths






  Facts & Arguments




  Real Estate









  Food & Dining




  Online Personals

  TV Listings/News

 Specials & Series
  All Reports...


   Where to Find It
 A quick guide to what's available on the site



  Customer Service

  Help & Contact Us



 Web Site

  E-Mail Newsletters

  Free Headlines

  Globe Store New

  Help & Contact Us

  Make Us Home

  Mobile New

  Press Room

  Privacy Policy

  Terms & Conditions


Why is it so hard to get a good cup of office coffee?
Although caffeine is often seen as an essential part of the workday, workplaces are notorious for their terrible brews, Cory Mintz writes
Special to The Globe and Mail

Email this article Print this article
Tuesday, March 13, 2018 – Page A14

Jacqueline Young-Sterling didn't anticipate any problems with the pour-over coffee maker at her office - even if it meant her colleagues had to weigh out 15 grams of coffee and 300 grams of water on a digital scale every time they wanted to use a machine that only makes three cups at a time.

Compliantia, the Toronto retail-software company where Young-Sterling is marketing director, had started with a Nespresso pod machine. But they found the recycling effort too much and the price too high. So Young-Sterling, a former pastry chef and the office "coffee snob," had been tasked with finding a replacement.

"I chose pour over for its cost savings (15 to 20 cents a serving, versus $1.25 for the pods), environmental benefits and ease of cleanup compared to a French press," she said.

But the rest of the office wouldn't touch the machine.

After the pour-over failure, they switched to a Jura XS90. The one-touch espresso machine, which retails for about $3,800, can foam milk. But the 10 employees just make Americanos because no one wants to clean the foam wand. Young-Sterling, who says that even the automatic espresso maker requires calibration every day, now keeps a hand grinder and AeroPress at her desk.

Although caffeine is often seen as an essential part of the workday, "office coffee" has long been a punchline, expected to be of poor quality. Today, once a company has at least 30 employs, they can contract out coffee service for between seven cents and $1.10 a cup. Compared with raising wages, that's relatively little money for something seen by employees as a nice benefit.

"It's a perk in the workplace," said Danielle van Jaarsveld, associate professor at the UBC Sauder School of Business. "In the broader sense, it sends a signal that we value our work force."

Still, consumer tastes can be quite different, and if people don't like the coffee, there's little benefit in providing it, van Jaarsveld added.

"With any perk, if it's not appreciated by the employee, it's not going to have the same motivational effect than if it was."

It's tricky, because everyone thinks they have good taste.

"Most people think they are connoisseurs - and very few are," said Joel Jacobs, general manager of Canada Coffee, a company that has supplied offices since 1987.

Before the 1980s, offices that provided coffee had home percolators or just a kettle and a jar of instant. When the office coffeesupply industry (which has grown into a billion-dollar sector in North America) started in the early eighties, it generally supplied drip machines.

But by the 1990s, companies wised up to the idea that employees running outside for coffee meant lost productivity - and providing good coffee was a relatively low-cost effort.

"In the nineties, people became interested in quality coffee," Jacobs recalled. "We had studies for how much time people spent out of the office for coffee. And at first, clients didn't care.

But I think at the same time as coffee culture was developing, HR was becoming more sophisticated. All of a sudden, companies became aware of the productivity issue."

Over time, demand went up for fancy coffees and appliances that can steam milk. Self-cleaning machines have eliminated much of the resentment over dirty office kitchens, part of the "office housework" that women disproportionately take responsibility for, according to Men and Women of the Corporation author Rosabeth Moss Kanter. But the quantum leaps have been from percolator to drip to single-serve pods, with Keurig dominating the market in North America and Nespresso elsewhere. (Jacobs says Nespresso machines make good cups of coffee that are simply too small for North Americans.)

The pods present a solution to the issue of taste. They come in an endless variety of flavours, so you never have to subject the whole office to a pot of your hazelnut decaf.

But, they're more expensive. And they introduce new environmental concerns: Nespresso and Mars pods have to be taken to a separate location for recycling, and only some flavours of Keurig's K-Cups are currently compostable.

"Its not hard to make a delicious and ethically sourced coffee on a larger scale in an office environment," said Dean Petty, co-founder of Anchored Coffee, a single-origin, unblended coffee roaster in Dartmouth, N.S.

"It takes a bit more of an initial investment, but there are big savings down the road, not to mention creating less waste. Offices seem to want 'easy,' but I would wager that if some education went into informing people about the coffee that they are drinking and better brew methods, people would step up and take the two extra minutes it takes to actually grind and brew a fresh pot of coffee."

Drip machines are seen by some as a greener solution. But it's hard to know if a pot was brewed five minutes or an hour ago.

As a result, Jacobs said, people in offices routinely throw out fresh pots, so about 25 per cent to 35 per cent of drip coffee goes down the drain.

Van Jaarsveld, who keeps a French press at her desk, said an office manager needs to take a democratic approach to coffee: "You should survey your employees to get a sense of what the majority of people prefer." Matthew Slutsky did just that. But he couldn't - or wouldn't - believe what they told him: They preferred Tim Hortons coffee to Starbucks.

When the office percolator was stocked with Starbucks grounds (Slutsky's preference), his employees went through a pound a day but complained all the same, saying they hated it. After polling the staff at BuzzBuzzHome, his real estate database company in Toronto, Slutsky switched to Tim Hortons coffee, but soon found that consumption was down, with half-finished pots being thrown out.

He tried Kirkland and McCafé. But they weren't drinking it. So he secretly replaced the McDonald's coffee in the office kitchen with Starbucks to see if his staff noticed.

If this scheme seems far-fetched yet familiar, that's because it was the premise of a long-running 1980s ad campaign by Folgers. In the commercials, Reaganesque actor Brian Clark invited us into the kitchens of world-famous restaurants (Arnaud's, Brennan's, Tavern on the Green), where floppy-hatted chefs "secretly replaced" their coffee with Folgers crystals, followed by a series of "candid" reactions from enthusiastic diners who preferred the instant coffee.

The TV spots, relics of the hidden-camera testimonial era of advertising, always seemed a bit ridiculous. But they playfully targeted a human failing common to coffee enthusiasts: our taste versus our perception of taste.

Once Slutsky secretly switched back to Starbucks, consumption immediately doubled.

"I don't remember a time in our office that the coffee maker was used so much, throughout the entire morning and afternoon," Slutsky said. "There was always a fresh pot. And there was never coffee left in the pot for more than 20 minutes."

However, the experiment ended after a couple of days, when employees found the empty Starbucks bags. After discovering the subterfuge, they immediately reverted to complaining about the taste.

Associated Graphic


Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Huh? How did I get here?
Return to Main Eric_Duhatschek Page
Subscribe to
The Globe and Mail

Email this article Print this article

space  Advertisement

Need CPR for your RSP? Check your portfolio’s pulse and lower yours by improving the overall health of your investments. Click here.


7-Day Site Search

Breaking News

Today's Weather


Rick Salutin
Merrily marching
off to war
Roy MacGregor
Duct tape might hold
when panic strikes

Where Manley is going with his first budget



For a columnist's most recent stories, click on their name below.


Roy MacGregor arrow
This Country
Jeffrey Simpson arrow
The Nation
Margaret Wente arrow
Hugh Winsor  arrow
The Power Game

Rob Carrick arrow
Personal Finance
Drew Fagan arrow
The Big Picture
Mathew Ingram arrow
Brent Jang arrow
Business West
Brian Milner arrow
Taking Stock
Eric Reguly arrow
To The Point
Andrew Willis arrow

Stephen Brunt arrow
The Game
Eric Duhatschek arrow
Allan Maki arrow
William Houston arrow
Truth & Rumours
Lorne Rubenstein arrow
 The Arts

John Doyle arrow
John MacLachlan Gray arrow
Gray's Anatomy
David Macfarlane arrow
Cheap Seats
Johanna Schneller arrow

Murray Campbell arrow
Ontario Politics
Lysiane Gagnon arrow
Inside Quebec
Marcus Gee arrow
The World
William Johnson arrow
Pit Bill
Paul Knox arrow
Heather Mallick arrow
As If
Leah McLaren arrow
Generation Why
Rex Murphy arrow
Japes of Wrath
Rick Salutin arrow
On The Other Hand
Paul Sullivan arrow
The West
William Thorsell arrow

Home | Business | National | Int'l | Sports | Columnists | The Arts | Tech | Travel | TV | Wheels

© 2003 Bell Globemedia Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Help & Contact Us | Back to the top of this page