
Bostonia is published in print three times a year and updated weekly on the web.
The world loves stories of “the good” overcoming “the bad,” perhaps because they are so infrequent. Such a story played out this summer in New England, with the near-collapse of the Market Basket grocery store chain. The family feud between two ownership factions of the multibillion dollar enterprise embroiled 71 stores, 25,000 employees (“associates”), hundreds of suppliers, and thousands of customers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. A massive employee walkout and demonstrations in support of fired CEO Arthur T. (“Artie T.”) Demoulas galvanized public interest and media attention.
As stories hit the media, even candidates for political office pledged either to intervene or stay out of such disputes. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick hesitated at first, but eventually joined New Hampshire Governor Maggie Hassan to broker a deal that took agonizing days to finalize.
After more than 40 days of protests, the parties finally reached “yes.” Boston Globe columnist Shirley Leung hailed it as “People Win Over Profit. For Once.”
I say, not so fast.
The agreement of Arthur S. to sell all of his family’s shares to Artie T. may not be the panacea employees and customers are hoping for. Indeed, the Market Basket “victory” may prove to be an illusion.
Market Basket is a business tragedy (Greek or Shakespearean) that stirs the imagination and offers a number of important lessons. There are apparent heroes and villains—Arthur T. Demoulas and Arthur S. Demoulas, respectively. There is intrigue: Why did sister-in-law Rafaela Evans switch allegiance from the “Good Arthur” to the “Bad Arthur,” thereby shifting power in this most recent battle in the continuing “War of the Arthurs”? There is a cast of courtiers, knaves, and advisors who chant homilies of advice, express rage, and otherwise make crowd noise. And, there are lessons to be drawn from the bloodletting.
At the core of this drama is the deep distrust (or worse) between members of the Demoulas family, whose lives have long been tied up in a bitter, mismanaged generational transfer of power. Two brothers (George and Telemachus) purchased the business from their parents in the 1950s and prospered as the family’s grocery business grew into a supermarket chain by the 1970s. But a legal dispute arose when George’s heirs, including Arthur S., charged Arthur T.’s father with fraud in the handling of his late brother’s family’s wealth. The dispute ended up in a Massachusetts court, where Arthur S.’s branch of the family was awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. But the ownership remained divided and left minority shareholder Rafaela Evans (widow of one of George’s sons) in a position to exercise disproportionate influence. She backed Artie T. as CEO for years, but changed her mind in early 2014 and switched her support to Arthur S.
Arthur S. exercised his new power quickly. In June, the board of directors dismissed Artie T. as CEO and named two outsiders as co-CEOs. They began to undo many of Artie T.’s cherished policies and practices. The Market Basket success formula includes generous compensation for associates, profit sharing, low prices for customers, and modest dividends to shareholders. Artie T. had long resisted Arthur S.’s efforts to increase dividends, and the boardroom battles had become ferocious.
Artie T.’s firing prompted associates, including store managers, and loyal customers to walk out and demand the return of Artie T. The protest continued through mid-August when, amidst plunging sales and financial chaos, the new management issued a “return or lose your job” ultimatum to associates. The company stood at the edge of a financial cliff. Only strong public pressure from the governors and sustained public support of the boycott forced the parties to the bargaining table.
Against this background, several lessons stand out.
First, modern organizations are networks of human relationships, held together by trust. Take away the trust and the business fails. Market Basket’s most valuable asset is the loyalty of employees and customers.
Trust grows when people work together, share values, and display loyalty to the principles for which the organization stands. The larger and more complex the organization becomes, the more essential it is that trust be cultivated in deliberate ways. The complex relations between Market Basket and farmers, distributors, truckers, store employees, and many others highlighted the role of trust amidst modern supply chains.
Second, the trust relationship requires leaders with integrity, sound corporate governance, and an organizational culture that fosters communication.
If one of these “legs” is deficient, the culture breaks down. Prior to Artie T.’s ouster, the boardroom acrimony intensified as Artie T. acted more autocratically while Arthur S. challenged real estate and other business deals made by the CEO. Outside directors were ineffectual. Poor governance eventually took its toll.
Arthur T.’s decisions won praise from many of the company’s stakeholders, but failed to satisfy a majority of Arthur S.’s family. Whatever led Rafaela Evans to switch her support from Arthur T. to Arthur S. several months ago, she must have recognized that her vote would be consequential.
Values are not just philosophy. They are the way we live, day by day, and what we stand for as people. They are the bedrock of our culture and the way we raise our children and grandchildren. For decades Market Basket put the values of respect and loyalty to stakeholders into action. That’s what was at the heart of this dispute.
Tragedy can produce a wide swath of injury. The boycott affected many of the 25,000 associates who faced a loss of jobs, pay, and benefits. Customers lost a retailer that provided high-quality products at low prices. New England farmers lost seasonal sales amounting to millions of dollars. Massachusetts and New Hampshire communities lost a respected corporate citizen and community partner. And investors faced huge financial losses as daily revenue losses of $10 million mounted and business dropped off by 90 percent.
Sadly, there are times when all we bystanders can do is bear witness to a tragedy and hope to apply its lessons in the future.
Despite the August 27 agreement, this tragedy may not be over yet.
Artie T. now has “full operational control” of the business. He will spend $1.5 billion to buy Arthur S.’s family’s shares. Arthur S. walks away rich but loses the control he coveted. But the deal requires Artie T. to raise $550 million in the private equity and commercial markets, mortgage Market Basket real estate, and invest a huge piece of his personal wealth. Market Basket will be a debt-laden enterprise that will have a tough time making payments while also keeping good wages and benefits for associates, fair deals with suppliers, and low prices for customers. Something in the traditional success formula will change.
Artie T. and Arthur S. seem destined to carry their feud to their graves. Optimism prevails among associates and customers for the moment, but reality will soon set in. The collateral damage will soon be felt. Who wins in such a case? In my opinion, only the advisers and lawyers who earned lucrative fees as they negotiated the deal for both sides are smiling at their good fortune. Victory may be an illusion. Shakespeare would have it no other way.
James E. Post, Professor Emeritus, holds the School of Management’s John F. Smith, Jr., Professorship in Management.
“POV” is an opinion page that provides timely commentaries from students, faculty, and staff on a variety of issues: on-campus, local, state, national, or international. Anyone interested in submitting a piece, which should be about 700 words long, should contact Rich Barlow at barlowr@bu.edu.
I’ve seen some prices go up, but I’m still paying less than I spend at a competitor store. I expected this and believe that ATD will use these price increase revenues to offset. As well, 2014-12-28 will see additional 4% in revenue as the discount period is no longer in effect; I expect ATD to use this revenue to pay down debt. Maybe I’m all wrong, but I suspect that the 4% discount was something ATD planned and he expectd the whole situation to play out as is. Here’s to hoping and here’s to being oblivious to the basis for illusion.
“…a tough time making payments while also keeping good wages and benefits for associates, fair deals with suppliers, and low prices for customers.”
Nearly every article about Market Basket’s business model (and each claim made by those sharing this view), completely neglects a ‘reduced focus on profitability’ as a fourth option. Why is that? Wasn’t the disagreement over how much of the business’ value to funnel to the shareholders at the very center of this boardroom drama between the cousins? And why have Americans learned to ignore the possibility that shareholders might also be called upon to shoulder any of the cost of sustaining a business?
If I understand you correctly, you’re saying that although we MB customers (I am one) and employees feel happy at the moment, our happiness may be short-lived as the new debt carried by the company may force Artie T to make a new kind of business decision. You may be right, although I would guess Artie T has enough creativity to find a way to keep what appear to be his bedrock principles. He knows the reason we’re committed to shopping at MB is low prices, and he knows that if that changes so will his edge in the market. He knows his employees are as committed as they are because he takes care of them, and if that changes, he’ll lose the financial edge he gets from low turnover. So I humbly submit that he’ll find a way to keep those principles in play.
Even if, for some reason, he has to change something for the worse, and even if prices go up and it’s no longer the cheapest place to get quality food, I believe it will all have been worth it. It’s been almost a month now that I’ve been able to shop there again (I boycotted). Almost a month I’ve been able to save significantly on our groceries. Even if prices went up a year from now, I still got another year of savings. And the same goes for the other millions of customers.
So I disagree. No matter what happens, this is already an absolute victory for the customers and employees. Even if what we fought for doesn’t remain permanent for decades to come, even a shorter-term victory will more than outweigh the 6 weeks of sacrifice we had to make. Even if I only get 6 more months of MB as I know it (which I think is unlikely), that far outweighs 6 weeks of sacrifice to make it happen.
I think this author is dead wrong!!! Is he saying that standing up for one’s beliefs is wrong? That because there might be negative consequences we should give up our core values? As in the song, “You have to stand for something or you’ll fall for anything!” We stood for fairness, for justice, for a family united, customers, associates, and vendors. We won’t stand for naysaying at this point but proudly move ahead knowing we did the right thing!!
Would you like catsup on these words that you will soon eat?
Nothing but an old repeat of the uninformed , not privy to the family and business. We stand at 2+ million strong for a reason!
Stop printing old propaganda. Try printing some real news. Market Basket is very busy, in fact hiring!
I wish Arthur T. Demoulas the best, as we all do, and am happy, more than happy, to be back.
MC