Skip to main content

Are Customers Also Responsible for Their Dining Experience?

I recently read an interesting experiment from a famous restaurant in #NYC, where the owners compared customers' behavior of today and that of 10 years ago.  I wrote an article about it on MultiBriefs
 
Here is what was reported by the restaurant (and what I included in the article): 

July 1, 2004:

Customers walked in. 

They were seated with a menu.  Three out of 45 requested for a different seat. 

Customers spent about 8 minutes on the menu before closing it, indicating that they were ready to order. 

Servers instantly took the order. 

Appetizers were served in about 6 minutes (except for complex items). 

Two out of 45 customers sent items back. 

Servers remained attentive to customers. 

Checks were delivered when customers finished their meals. 

Customers left within 5 minutes. 

On average, it took 1 hour and 5 minutes from start to finish.

July 3, 2014:

Customers walked in. 

They were seated with a menu.  Eighteen out of 45 requested for a different seat.

Instead of opening the menu, they took their phones out. Some were taking pictures; others were just playing with their phones. 

Seven out of 45 had servers come over immediately. 

They showed something on their phone to the server and took about 5 minutes of the server’s time.  Later, the servers explained to the management team that the customers needed help with Wi-Fi connections for their phones. 

When servers approached customers for orders, most had not even opened the menu and asked the servers to wait.

Customers finally opened the menu, with their hands holding their phones on top of the menu. They were still playing with their phone. 

Servers came back to check with the customers. Customers asked for additional time. 

Customers were finally ready to order, with an average wait time of 21 minutes. 

Food began arriving in about 6 minutes (except for complex items). 

Twenty-six out of 45 customers spent about 3 minutes taking pictures of the food. 

Fourteen out of 45 customers spent an additional 4 minutes taking pictures of themselves or one another with the food in front of them. 

Nine out of 45 customers sent food back to reheat. 

Twenty-seven out of 45 customers asked servers to take a group picture for them.  On average, it took about 5 minutes of theirs and the server’s time until the customers were satisfied with the group picture. 

On average, customers spent 20 minutes more on the meal and 15 minutes more to pay and leave. 

Eight out of 45 bumped into somebody in the restaurant while they were texting and walking in/out of the restaurant. 

On average, it took 1 hour and 55 minutes from start to finish. 

I am thinking: Are customers also responsible for their dining experience?  How does technology has brought down (if it does in some way) people's dining experience?  In regarding to online reviews, what information matters most from online reviews --- The overall rating?  Service?  Quality of food? Or something else?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Luxury vs. Millennials and Their Technology: The Ritz-Carlton (By Julia Shorr)

Embodying the finest luxury experience, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, LLC has been established since 1983. In 1998, Marriott International purchased the brand offering it more opportunity for growth while being independently owned and operated. They are known for their enhanced service level as the motto states, “Ladies and Gentlemen serving Ladies and Gentlemen”. The luxury brand now carries 97 hotels and resorts internationally and is attempting to keep the aspects of luxury while keeping up with the trends of the technologically improving generations. The Varying Demographics of the Target Market The Ritz-Carlton’s typical target market includes: business executives, corporate, leisure travelers, typically middle-aged persons and elders, and families from the upper and upper-middle class section of society .   This infers a large range of types of travelers in which all are similar in that they are not opposed to spending extra for the luxurious ambiance. However, with

The challenges of SB 93 (California Senate Bill No. 93) will impose on the employers and their human resource management team (by Brittany Schaffer)

The COVID-19 pandemic started in early 2020, and it has caused massive changes within a short period of time. One of the most rememberable effects of the COVID-19 pandemic was that businesses had to come to a complete halt, forcing them to lay off employees. California's unemployment rates went up.  Now that the stay-at-home orders have lifted, people start to come out. Businesses are now reopening, looking to rehire their laid-off employees. Before the pandemic, employers had the option of recalling only a certain number of laid-off employees they would want to rehire based on employees' job performance. That option had been changed after Governor Gavin Newsome signed into law - Senate Bill 93, which went into effect on April 16th, 2021. The California Senate Bill No. 93 (SB 93) According to SB 93, companies in specific industries, mainly the hospitality industry, have the obligation to provide job opportunities in written form to qualified employees being laid off due to COVI

The complicated situation of tattoos in the workplace (by Harry Law)

Tattoos are a form of expression that convey the individuality of their owners. They can represent a multitude of things, like a tie to a family member, a favorite quote with a special meaning, or even a favorite cartoon character. Tattoos also can carry great cultural and/or religious significance. Every tattoo is unique and says something about the individual person who wears it. The problem that many companies face is when a tattoo is considered appropriate and when it should be covered.  Employees are after all the faces of a company, so the tattoos on their bodies are connected to and represent that company as well. Some workplaces have instituted rules and regulations when it comes to their employees’ tattoos, but there can be negative consequences when a company goes too far in telling their employees what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. The Disney Company has recently changed its policy on tattoos. Disney’s goal is to create a magical, fantasy experience for their