Patent Application
20180039929
The invention relates generally to restaurant management and more particularly to the scheduling of food servers.
Scheduling of restaurant wait staff is an important aspect of managing a restaurant. Restaurant management must ensure that a sufficient number of servers are present to service all diners with minimal delay. Poor service often results in a diner's first meal being their last meal at the restaurant. And if an unhappy customer shares the complaint about the service with friends, those friends are unlikely to dine at the restaurant.
Furthermore, scheduling has a major impact on a server's income. In particular, there can be a significant difference in tips as a function of day of the week (e.g. Monday versus Saturday) and time of day (e.g., lunch versus dinner). Consequently, if consistently denied a choice shift, a server suffers an economic penalty. And if a server believes that they are being treated unfairly in this regard, it is likely to impact their on-the-job performance or simply cause them to leave and seek other employment. Either way, it impacts the business.
There are various approaches in the prior art for scheduling a workforce. Most are based on employee performance; that is, a worker is rewarded with a choice shift based on superior on-the-job performance. An example of such an approach is disclosed in US Patent Publication 2012/0323626. This reference discloses a rostering module that is coupled to a POS terminal to generate information indicative of staff performance. A performance score is generated for each staff member based on sales information for the staff member and on aggregate sales information for the business. The rostering module generates a roster for scheduling staff members in scheduling slots based on each staff member's performance score.
In another approach, certain days—fairness days—on which employees might wish not to work, such as a weekend day or a holiday, are identified. An employee that works on a fairness day gets a credit for that day, and the fairness-day credit history is maintained by the system. When employees must be scheduled to work on a subsequent fairness day, the system rank orders employees by taking fairness-day credit and other information into account. US Patent Publication 2008/0300953 discloses a workforce management method that implements fairness-day processing.
In the context of a restaurant, in particular, there are further aspects to scheduling that if not given due consideration can result in unfairness to a server.
In accordance with the illustrative embodiment of the invention, a point-of-sale (“POS”) system used in a food-serving establishment includes real-time reporting of information that enables a manager (or the system itself) to allocate food-serving responsibilities among employees in a way that provides an equal opportunity to earn money (i.e., tips). The POS system is applicable for use in food-serving establishments that do not accept cash, such as is becoming increasingly common in, for example, airline terminals.
The POS system disclosed herein can be used for routine scheduling; that is, which servers work on which days and during which shifts. However, unlike most prior-art workforce management systems, embodiments of the present invention can be used, and in fact are primarily directed for us in scheduling situations that are not ordinarily scheduled in advance. As used in the disclosure and the appended claims, the term “non-routine scheduling” refers to scheduling employees to cover for routinely scheduled employees when the routinely scheduled employee takes a break or has to end their shift for a non-scheduled/unforeseen reason (e.g., health issue, emergency, etc.)
Consider, for example, the scheduling issue that arises when a first food server goes on break or has to unexpectedly end their shift. A second server will need to cover the first server's tables. If a manager has a choice among several employees as to who should provide the coverage, how is that choice made?
If the choice is intended to be “fair” to the employee, it should perhaps consider the number of tables that each of the potential covering employees have waited on recently and the amount of tips each of them has made for the day, etc. But the manager does not typically have access to that information. Consequently, the manager makes a decision that, although arbitrary, might be unfair to an employee in the sense that it deprives that employee of the opportunity to make as much money as another server in that restaurant. In a choice between two employees, for the example, the manager might inadvertently select the employee who had earned more in tips as the person to cover for the breaking server.
Or perhaps the manager must assign a first server to handle the tables in the front of the restaurant and a second server to handle those in the back. If business is slow, tables in the front of a restaurant are typically filled before those in the back of the restaurant, so that the restaurant appears to be busy. If the employee who has received less in tips for the day is assigned to handle the tables in the back of the restaurant, that employee is likely to fall even further behind for the day.
A POS system in accordance with the illustrative embodiment accumulates real-time information pertaining to: (1) which server is covering which tables; (2) the food order taken for each table; (3) how quickly tables are turning over (i.e., “order velocity”); and (4) the tip associated a particular order, among other information.
From the accumulated information, the POS system can determine: (A) how many tables each server has seen; (B) how much money in tips each server has earned; (C) tips earned as a percentage of sales for each server; and (D) where patrons are being seated, among other information.
Consequently, in making a recommendation as to who to select for serving assignment, the system can consider item (B), with the intent of increasing the earnings of a particular server. But rather than relying solely on the amount of tips earned, in providing a recommendation, the system takes into account the reason why a particular server is earning less, on given day, than other servers.
It might be a function of items (A) and/or (D), which are unlikely to be under the control of the server. For example, as previously noted, the tables in the front of a restaurant are typically seated before those in the back of the restaurant. If a server has been covering the back of the restaurant during such a time, his tips for the day are likely to have suffered. On the other hand, if one particular server's tips as a percentage of sales (item C) tend to be lower than that of other servers, it could be an indication that the server has a performance problem. As such, if the figure for item (C) is low for a particular server, that might militate against recommending that server for covering duties. Indeed, rewarding that employee with a choice assignment could result in unfairness to other employees as well as negatively affecting the revenues and business prospects of the restaurant.
The real-time information obtained by the POS system can thus be used to assign serving responsibilities in a way that is intended to be fair to all employees. If the workforce understands that duties are assigned in a way that supports this goal, this can be expected to promote employee job satisfaction. If employees are satisfied, their on-the-job performance will reflect it, which is likely to result in a positive dining experience for patrons. And the goodwill from both satisfied workers and satisfied diners accrues to the restaurant and its management. Consequently, a POS system in accordance with the present teachings is expected to provide both social and economic benefits.
An embodiment of the present invention is a point-of-sale system for scheduling servers for a non-routine scheduling assignment by processing payment information, including gratuity, for each table in an establishment using an electronic payment system, the point-of-sale system comprising, a tablet for receiving at least one food order from each table, a transceiver for receiving information about the food order from the tablet and receiving payment information, including the gratuity related to the food order, from the electronic payment system, a memory for storing the received food order information, including the gratuity, a processor that is configured to schedule servers by performing the steps of: (a) creating a rank order of servers based on a total amount of gratuities earned by each server during a relevant period of time, and (b) determining the server that has earned the least amount of gratuities over the relevant period of time and recommending the server to perform the non-routine scheduling assignment.
Another embodiment of the present invention is a computer-implemented method for selecting an employee for a non-routine scheduling assignment based on gratuities earned, the method comprising, obtaining gratuity information for each table within an establishment from an electronic payment system, comparing, by a processor, a total amount of gratuities earned by each employee to a total amount of gratuities earned by other employees in a group of employees to recommend a first employee for a non-routine scheduling assignment, by obtaining the amount of gratuities earned by each employee during a relevant period of time, rank order the group of employees based on the amount of gratuities the employees have earned, determining the first employee from the group of employees who has earned the least amount of gratuities, comparing the amount of gratuity earned by the first employee to a predetermined threshold amount, and recommending the first employee for the non-routine scheduling assignment when the amount of gratuity earned by the first employee equals or exceeds the predetermined threshold amount, and determining whether the first employee should be assigned to the non-routine scheduling assignment when the comparison recommends the first employee.
Yet another embodiment of the present invention is a non-transitory computer readable medium with computer executable instructions stored thereon executed by a processor to perform the method for scheduling employees for a non-routine scheduling assignment based on fairness processing, the method comprising, (a) accessing a database in the computer including at least, information pertaining to a food order, gratuity information associated with the food order, table information, and server information including scheduling preferences and server-table is assignments, (b) comparing, by a processor, a total amount of gratuities earned by each employee to a total amount of gratuities earned by other employees in a group of employees to recommend a first employee for a non-routine scheduling assignment, by calculating, by a statistics generation module in the computer, the total amount of gratuities earned by each employee within the group of employees during a relevant period of time, calculating, by a fairness processing module in the computer, a rank order of the group of employees based on the amount of gratuities the employees have earned during the relevant period of time, and determining the first employee from the group of employees who has earned the least amount of gratuities, comparing, by a scheduler module in the computer, the amount of gratuity earned by the first employee to a predetermined threshold amount, and recommending the first employee for the non-routine scheduling assignment when the amount of gratuity earned by the first employee equals or exceeds the predetermined threshold amount, and (c) determining whether the first employee should be assigned to the non-routine scheduling assignment when the comparison recommends the first employee.
The organization of tables 108 into such groups is for operational reasons, including an ability to readily assign servers to the groups. Because restaurants tend to fill seats at the front of the restaurant before those in the rear, tables of group 102 are more likely to be occupied than tables of group 106. This has implications for the servers assigned to these groups of tables. In particular, a server assigned to group 102 is likely to wait on more diners than a server that is assigned to group 106. Consequently, all other things being equal, the server assigned to handle group 102 is likely to earn more tips than a server assigned to group 106.
Tablets 218, which may be a conventional tablet computer, such as an Apple iPad®, Samsung Galaxy®, Google Nexus®, etc., is appropriately configured (software, etc.) for inputting a food order. In the illustrative embodiment, the order is taken by the serving staff; in some alternative embodiments, patrons themselves can input the food order. The order is wirelessly transmitted to computer 212, which, in turn, transmits the order to kitchen printer 216. The order is printed out via printer 216 for the kitchen staff. In some embodiments, electronic payment system 220 is incorporated with tablets 218.
Transceiver 322 enables computer 212 to communicate with the other devices via one or more communications protocols (e.g., Blue-tooth, WiFi, cellular, Ethernet, etc.). It will be clear to those skilled in the art, after reading this specification, how to make and use transceiver 322.
Processor 324 is a general-purpose processor that is capable of, among other tasks, executing an operating system, executing specialized application software used in conjunction with the embodiments of the invention, and populating, updating, using, and managing data in memory 326. In some alternative embodiments of the present invention, processor 324 is a special-purpose processor. It will be clear to those skilled in the art how to make and use processor 324.
Memory 326 is a non-volatile, non-transitory memory technology (e.g., RAM, ROM, EPROM, EEPROM, hard drive(s), flash drive(s) or other solid state memory technology, CD-ROM, DVD, etc.) that stores, among any other software and data, specialized application software, such as discussed in conjunction with
The term “non-transitory” is to be understood to remove only propagating transitory signals per se from claim scope and does not relinquish rights to all standard computer-readable media that are not only propagating transitory signals per se.
Table statistics database 430 includes information, on a per table basis, such as (a) the value of the order for each group of diners seated at the table over a relevant period of time (e.g., a shift, a day, etc.), and (b) the amount of the tip awarded to the server for each group of diners at the table over the relevant period of time. Database 430 also includes information concerning the number of tables handled by a particular server in a relevant period of time. The table statistics database is automatically populated via the use of POS system 210.
The information from server table assignment database 428 and table statistics database 430 is accessed by fairness engine 432. In the illustrative embodiment, fairness engine 432, which is a software, includes statistics generation module 534, fairness processing module 536, and schedule 538.
In accordance with the illustrative embodiment, statistics generation module 534 uses the information from databases 428 and 430 to determine, for relevant period of time, the number of tables handled by each server, the tips earned per server, tips earned per server as a percentage of the server's sales, and the tables at which patrons are seated.
Fairness processing module 536 uses the information generated by statistics generation module 534 to make a preliminary recommendation as to scheduling. In the illustrative embodiment, the preliminary recommendation is processed via scheduler 538 to develop a final recommendation.
At task 606, the system ranks the total amount of tips earned, over the relevant period of time, by employee i against the tips earned by other employees being considered for the serving assignment. After all employees have been considered and ranked, the system determines, at task 612, which employee has earned the least amount in tips for the relevant period.
Processing continues in scheduler module 538, wherein other factors before a server recommendation is generated. At task 614, query whether, for the lowest tip-earning server, tips earned as a percentage of sales (for a relevant period of time) exceeds a threshold figure. The period of time can be specified: a shift, a day, a week, a month, etc. The purpose for this query is to identify a poor-performing server. For example, the threshold might be set at 15%, as conservative estimate of tips earned as a percentage of the server's sales (i.e., the amount of the food bill). If the lowest tip earner is receiving gratuities averaging 5% of their sales, that indicates that there is likely to be a performance problem with that server. Fairness processing is not meant to reward someone for poor performance, but rather to compensate them if they have been assigned to less lucrative shifts.
So, if the answer to the query at 614 is “no,” that server is flagged for review, at task 618, by management and deleted at task 620, from the pool of servers to be considered for covering the shift. Processing then loops back to task 612 and the server with the next lowest rank (next lowest amount of tips earned) is identified.
Query, for the next selected server, at task 614, whether tips earned as a percentage of the employee's sales exceed the threshold. If the threshold is met, then that server becomes the preliminary recommendation from fairness processing module 536.
Processing continues in scheduler 538, wherein, at task 616, the system considers any supplementary factors that militate for or against selecting the server under consideration as the final recommendation. For example, a particular employee might have indicated a desire not to work on a particular day or time, which turns out to be the day/time under consideration.
If the serving shift in question is not acceptable for the server, processing loops back to task 620 of fairness processing module 536 to delete the server from consideration. Processing continues at task 612 with a command to select the employee having the next lowest amount of tips earned.
If the serving shift is acceptable for the server under consideration, the preliminary recommendation is the final recommendation, and the system returns a “server recommendation.”
It is to be understood that the disclosure describes a few embodiments and that many variations of the invention can easily be devised by those skilled in the art after reading this disclosure and that the scope of the present invention is to be determined by the following claims.
This case claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/372,076 filed on Aug. 8, 2016 (Attorney Docket 3094-004pr1), which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62372076 | Aug 2016 | US |
