The Real Failure Rate of Restaurants

A common assumption in the restaurant industry is that restaurants fail at an exceedingly high rate. However, statistical research to support this assumption is limited. The authors present a study of 10 years in the life of three markets and offer new data for managers to consider.

The Influence of Social Responsibility Image Relative to Product and Service Quality on Brand Loyalty: An Exploratory Study of Quick-service Restaurants

Social responsibility (SR) is becoming an increasingly significant component of many firms’ strategic planning decisions. Research has shown that consumers tend to reward socially responsible behavior. However, there has been little testing of the construct in the hospitality industry. Additionally, when other important variables that influence consumer brand loyalty are considered, will brand social responsibility image (BSRI) still play a significant role? This study investigates the importance of SR and its impact on brand loyalty, relative to product quality and service quality in the quick-service restaurant industry. The authors were also interested to learn whether BSRI impacted consumers' image of product and service quality. It was found that BSRI had a positive impact on brand loyalty, product quality, and service quality. However, product quality was a significantly stronger predictor of brand loyalty than BSRI. Where the vast majority of studies of SR have utilized scenario analysis of hypothetical firms, this study utilizes consumers' perceptions of a real-world firm.

Using the Involvement Construct to Understand the Motivations of Customers of Casual Dining Restaurants in the USA

The purpose of this study was to investigate the motivations that push consumers to dine out and restaurant attributes that pull diners to a specific restaurant. Surveys were administered to a convenience sample of 559 respondents at a large university in the Southwest of the USA. Crosstabs, ANOVA, Correlations, Factor Analysis and Multiple Regression were employed to explore differences and relationships between variables. Findings identified a profile of diners at casual restaurants. Using the involvement construct, the push-pull motivational framework, and the hedonic and utilitarian motivational framework, results of this study indicate two primary reasons behind the decision to dine out at casual restaurants and six principal attributes that draw customers into these types of restaurants. In addition, diners were categorized into high/medium/low involvement categories and the linkages between involvement levels and motivations were explored. Both hedonic and utilitarian motivations were identified. Furthermore, motivational factors and restaurant attributes were found to predict diner loyalty. This paper provides the restaurant industry with insight and understanding as to what attracts diners into an establishment and what influences decisions behind dining out.

The Five Foundations of Leadership in Japan's Lodging Industry

This article discusses the results of pioneer research done by Michigan State University's School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management researchers, in cooperation with the Japanese Management Association, on the foundations of Japanese lodging industry leadership. While the results presented here simply represent the opinions of CEOs and presidents in Japan's lodging industry, the research offers an insight into leadership foundations and the results provide a guide for developing leadership skills in those who aspire to be future leaders in Japan’s lodging industry

Past, Present, and Future: The Food Service Industry and Its Changes

In the article - Past, Present, and Future: The Food Service Industry and Its Changes - by Brother Herman E. Zaccarelli, International Director, Restaurant, Hotel and Institutional Management Institute at Purdue University, Brother Zaccarelli initially states: “Educators play an important role in the evolution of the food service industry. The author discusses that evolution and suggests how educators can be change agents along with management in that evolutionary progression.” The author goes on to wax philosophically, as well as speak generically about the food service industry; to why it offers fascinating and rewarding careers. Additionally, he writes about the influence educators have on students in this regard. “Educators can speak about how the food service industry has benefited them both personally and professionally,” says Brother Zaccarelli. “We get excited about alerting students to the many opportunities and, in fact, serve as “salespersons” for the industry to whoever (school administrators, legislators, and peers in the educational institution) will listen.” Brother Zaccarelli also speaks to growth and changes in food service, and even more importantly about the people and faces behind everything that food service, and hospitality in general comprise. The author will have you know, that people are what drive an educator. “What makes the food service industry so great? At the heart of this question's answer is people: the people whom it serves in institutional and commercial operations of all types; the people who work within it; the people who provide the goods, services, and equipment to it; the people who study it,” says Brother Zaccarelli. “All of these groups have, of course, a vested personal and/or professional interest in seeing our industry improve.” Another concept the author would like you to absorb, and it’s even more so true today than yesterday, is the prevalence of convergence and divergence within food service. For food service and beyond, it is the common denominators and differences that make the hospitality-food service industry so dynamic and vibrant. These are the winds of change presented to an educator who wants to have a positive impact on students. The author warns that the many elements involved in the food service industry conspire to erode quality of service in an industry that is also persistently expanding, and whose cornerstone principles are underpinned by service itself. “The three concerns addressed - quality, employees, and marketing - are intimately related,” Brother Zaccarelli says in stripping-down the industry to bare essentials. He defines and addresses the issues related to each with an eye toward how education can reconcile said issues.

Hotel and Restaurant Entry-Level Job Competencies: Comparisons of Management and Worker Perceptions

This article presents the findings of a central Florida study of lodging and restaurant managers as well as entry-level workers who were graduates of hospitality management programs. It provides a theoretical construct as a basis of the methodology employed. The article then reports the findings of perceptions of desired knowledge, skills and abilities, and attitudes associated with entry-level employees. It further compares desired levels of preparation for entry-level positions in the industry as reported by respondents of both groups. Finally, the authors present conclusions and implications for central Florida practitioners and educators.

"Unfair'' Restaurant Reviews:To Sue Or Not To Sue

In their discussion entitled - “Unfair” Restaurant Reviews: To Sue Or Not To Sue - by John Schroeder and Bruce Lazarus, Assistant Professors, Department of Restaurant, Hotel and Institutional Management at Purdue University, the authors initially state: “Both advantages and disadvantages exist on bringing lawsuits against restaurant critics who write “unfair” reviews. The authors, both of whom have experience with restaurant criticism, offer practical advice on what realistically can be done by the restaurateur outside of the courtroom to combat unfair criticism.” Well, this is going to be a sticky wicket no matter how you try to defend it, reviews being what they are; very subjective pieces of opinionated journalism, especially in the food industry. And, of course, unless you can prove malicious intent there really is no a basis for a libel suit. So, a restaurateur is at the mercy of written opinion and the press. “Libel is the written or published form of slander which is the statement of false remarks that may damage the reputation of others. It also includes any false and malicious publication which may damage a person's business, trade, or employment,” is the defined form of the law provided by the authors. Anecdotally, Schroeder and Lazarus offer a few of the more scathing pieces reviewers have written about particular eating establishments. And, yes, they can be a bit comical, unless you are the owner of an establishment that appears in the crosshairs of such a reviewer. A bad review can kneecap even a popular eatery. “Because of the large readership of restaurant reviews in the publication (consumer dining out habits indicate that nearly 50 percent of consumers read a review before visiting a new restaurant) your business begins a very dangerous downward tailspin,” the authors reveal, with attribution. “Many restaurant operators contend that a bad review can cost them an immediate trade loss of upward of 50 percent,” Schroeder and Lazarus warn. “The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a restaurant owner can collect damages only if he proves that the statement or statements were made with “actual malice,” even if the statements were untrue,” the authors say by way of citation. And that last portion of the statement cannot be over-emphasized. The first amendment to the U.S. Constitution does wield a heavy hammer, indeed, and it should. So, what recourse does a restaurateur have? The authors cautiously give a guarded thumbs-up to a lawsuit, but you better be prepared to prove a misstatement of fact, as opposed to the distinguishable press protected right of opinion. For the restaurateur the pitfalls are many, the rewards few and far between, Schroeder and Lazarus will have you know. “…after weighing the advantages and disadvantages of a lawsuit against a critic...the disadvantages are overwhelming,” the authors say. “Chicago restaurant critic James Ward said that someone dumped a load of manure on his yard accompanied by a note that read - Stop writing that s--t! - after he wrote a review of a local restaurant.” Such is a novel if not legally measurable tack against an un-mutual review.

Planning Buy-Sell Agreements In The Hospitality Industry

In the article - Planning Buy-Sell Agreements In The Hospitality Industry - by John M. Tarras, Assistant Professor, School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management at Michigan State University, the author initially observes: “The vast majority of hospitality firms (restaurants, hotels, etc.) would be considered closely-held corporations. As such, they have unique planning problems compared to large, publicly-traded hospitality firms. One area of special concern to the closely-held hospitality firm is the planning and adoption of a buy-sell agreement.” The above thesis statement outlines the heart of the article; the buy-sell agreement in regard to smaller [closely held, as Tarras calls them] corporations. The theory is narrow and pro-active, spanning the gap between personal-to-corporate stock manipulations. “The primary purpose of a buy-sell agreement is to contribute to the orderly transfer of a shareholder's stock in a hospitality firm upon some future incident [typically retirement, withdrawal of a shareholder, disability, or death], as Tarras defines the concept. “The hospitality firm or the other shareholders would be committed to purchase the departing shareholder's stock at an agreed upon price and method, and to ensure that ample cash will be obtainable for such an impending sale. The buy-sell agreement provides a market for the shareholder or the shareholder's estate for the sale of otherwise illiquid stock,” the author further provides as canons of buy-sell agreements. In defining the buy-sell agreement with restrictive clauses, Tarras demonstrates, “…many closely-held hospitality firms desire to limit ownership to those individuals, either family or principal corporate employees, who are essential to the well-being of the firm.” Tarras says, another element of the buy-sell agreement is to furnish the departing shareholder with liquidity. “…there typically is some form of cash down payment with the remainder denoted by an interest-bearing promissory note [usually 5 to 15 years],” he informs. “The departing shareholders may require that the hospitality firm pledge the assets of the firm and that the remaining shareholders personally guarantee the promissory note.” “…the most frequent reason for establishing buy-sell agreements is for estate planning purposes,” Tarras says. There are tax advantages and liabilities for both the seller and buyer of stock via the buy-sell agreement, and the author enumerates many of these. One, big advantage of the buy-sell agreement is that it provides for the running of the company with a minimum of disruption through the stock-cash transition process, Tarras offers.

The Food Service Industry Environment: Market Volatility Analysis

In their dialogue entitled - The Food Service Industry Environment: Market Volatility Analysis - by Alex F. De Noble, Assistant Professor of Management, San Diego State University and Michael D. Olsen, Associate Professor and Director, Division of Hotel, Restaurant & Institutional Management at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, De Noble and Olson preface the discussion by saying: “Hospitality executives, as a whole, do not believe they exist in a volatile environment and spend little time or effort in assessing how current and future activity in the environment will affect their success or failure. The authors highlight potential differences that may exist between executives' perceptions and objective indicators of environmental volatility within the hospitality industry and suggest that executives change these perceptions by incorporating the assumption of a much more dynamic environment into their future strategic planning efforts. Objective, empirical evidence of the dynamic nature of the hospitality environment is presented and compared to several studies pertaining to environmental perceptions of the industry.” That weighty thesis statement presumes that hospitality executives/managers do not fully comprehend the environment in which they operate. The authors provide a contrast, which conventional wisdom would seem to support and satisfy. “Broadly speaking, the operating environment of an organization is represented by its task domain,” say the authors. “This task domain consists of such elements as a firm's customers, suppliers, competitors, and regulatory groups.” These are dynamic actors and the underpinnings of change, say the authors by way of citation. “The most difficult aspect for management in this regard tends to be the development of a proper definition of the environment of their particular firm. Being able to precisely define who the customers, competitors, suppliers, and regulatory groups are within the environment of the firm is no easy task, yet is imperative if proper planning is to occur,” De Noble and Olson further contribute to support their thesis statement. The article is bloated, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing, with tables both survey and empirically driven, to illustrate market volatility. One such table is the Bates and Eldredge outline; Table-6 in the article. “This comprehensive outline…should prove to be useful to most executives in expanding their perception of the environment of their firm,” say De Noble and Olson. “It is, however, only a suggested outline,” they advise. “…risk should be incorporated into every investment decision, especially in a volatile environment,” say the authors. De Noble and Olson close with an intriguing formula to gauge volatility in an environment.

Bankruptcy Situation Model in Small Business: The Case of Restaurant Firms

The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the current bankruptcy prediction models. This is done in the context of pros and cons of proposed models to determine the appropriate factors of failure phenomenon in cases involving restaurants that have filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11. A sample of 11 restaurant companies that filed for bankruptcy between 1993 and 2003 were identified from the Form 8-K reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). By applying financial ratios retrieved from the annual reports which contain, income statements, balance sheets, statements of cash flows, and statements of stockholders’ equity (or deficit) to the Atlman’s mode, Springate model, and Fulmer’s model. The study found that Atlman’s model for the non-manufacturing industry provided the most accurate bankruptcy predictions.

Growth of the Food Service Industry

The food service industry has come into its own recognition as a growing segment of the total food market. The author looks at the recent expansion of the industry in volume, diversification of restaurant types, and menu variety

Senior Savvy: Mature Diner's Restaurant Service Expectations

This article is a reflection of a study conducted with active mature consumers who enjoy dining out, traveling, and patronizing the service industry in general. The goal was to discover their restaurant service expectations in order to provide restaurateurs, hoteliers, educators, and students of hospitality management programs information about this important customer segment so that future plans for improving service would include considerations of their service needs.

The Food Service Industry: Beliefs Held by Academics

In his study - The Food Service Industry: Beliefs Held by Academics - by Jack Ninemeier, Associate Professor, School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management at Michigan State University, Associate Professor Ninemeier initially describes his study this way: “Those in the academic sector exert a great deal of influence on those they are training to enter the food service industry. One author surveyed educational institutions across the country to ascertain attitudes of teachers toward various segments of the industry.” Those essential segments of the industry serve as the underpinnings of this discussion and are four-fold. They are lodging, institutional, multi-unit, and single-unit properties. For each segment the analysis addressed factors relating to Marketing, management and operating concerns: Marketing, operations, fiscal management, innovation, future of the segment Employee-related concerns: quality of work life, training/education opportunities, career opportunities The study uses a survey of academicians as a guide; they point to segments of the food service industry students might be inclined to enter, or even ignore. The survey was done via a questionnaire sent from the campus of the School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management at Michigan State University to 1850 full-time faculty members in two and four-year hospitality programs in the United States. Through the survey, Ninemeier wishes to reasonably address specific problems now confronting the food service industry. Those problems include but are not limited to: reducing employee turnover, retaining staff, increasing productivity and revenue, and attracting new staff. “Teachers in these programs are, therefore, an important plank in industry's platform designed to recruit students with appropriate background knowledge and interest in their operations,” Ninemeier says. Your author actually illustrates the survey results, in table form. The importance to an employee, of tangibles and intangibles such as morale, ego/esteem, wages, and benefits are each explored through the survey. According to the study, an interesting dichotomy exists in the institutional property element. Although, beliefs the academics hold about the institutional element suggest that it offers low job stress, attractive working conditions, and non-demanding competitive pressures, the survey and Ninemeier also observe: “Academics do not believe that many of their graduates will enter the institutional segment.” “If academic beliefs are incorrect, an educational program to educate academics about management and employee opportunities in the segment may be in order,” Ninemeier waxes philosophically.

Managing Quality in the Hospitality Industry:

In - Managing Quality In the Hospitality Industry – an observation by W. Gerald Glover, Associate Professor, Hospitality Management Program, Appalachian State University, initially Glover establishes: “Quality is a primary concern in the hospitality industry. The author sees problems in the nature of the way businesses are managed and discusses approaches to ensuring quality in corporate cultures.” As the title suggests, the author wants to point out certain discrepancies in hospitality quality control, as well as enlighten you as to how to address some of these concerns. “A discussion of quality presents some interesting dilemmas. Quality is something that almost everyone wants,” Assistant Professor Glover notes. “Service businesses will never admit that they don't provide it to their customers, and few people actually understand what it takes to make it happen,” he further maintains. Glover wants you to know that in a dynamic industry such as hospitality, quality is the common denominator. Whether it be hotel, restaurant, airline, et al., quality is the raison d’être of the industry. “Quality involves the consistent delivery of a product or service according to the expected standards,” Glover provides. Many, if not all quality deficiencies can be traced back to management, Glover declares. He bullet points some of the operational and guest service problems managers’ face on a daily basis. One important point of note is the measuring and managing of quality. “Standards management is another critical area in people and product management that is seldom effective in corporations,” says Glover. “Typically, this area involves performance documentation, performance evaluation and appraisal, coaching, discipline, and team-building.” “To be effective at managing standards, an organization must establish communication in realms where it is currently non-existent or ineffective,” Glover goes on to say. “Coaching, training, and performance appraisal are methods to manage individuals who are expected to do what's expected.” He alludes to the benefit quality circles supply as well. In addressing American organizational behavior, Glover postures, “…a realization must develop that people and product management are the primary influences on generating revenues and eventually influencing the bottom line in all American organizations.” Glover introduces the concept of pro-activity. “Most recently, quality assurance and quality management have become the means used to develop and maintain proactive corporate cultures. When prevention is the focus, quality is most consistent and expectations are usually met,” he offers. Much of the article is dedicated to, “Appendix A-Table 1-Characteristics of Corporate Cultures (Reactive and Proactive. In it, Glover measures the impact of proactive management as opposed to the reactive management intrinsic to many elements of corporate culture mentality.