Computer Manages Restaurant Workers 381
9x320 writes "The chicken restaurant chain Zaxby's has started to use computers with software by Hyperactive Technologies to direct employees what to do and when to do it, and to decide how many should come to work. The computer works through the use of sensors, analysis of historic data, and touchscreens. The article compares the software to that in a science fiction novel published only just a few years ago, except the computer, Manna, also carried a voice synthesizer."
That's great and all... (Score:1, Insightful)
Great... (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't need this kind of heavy-handed management, we need more people who can manage and work with their company's talent - just not tell them to move around, and generally act like robots.
I'd imagine that some chains WILL adopt this technology, but people will not take it well to be ordered around, hired and fired, and generally live their lives around the whims of some computer program.
Management is more than telling people what to do, and when to do it - you need to act as a leader as well as a stablizing force in the workplace. A PC running this slave-driver software does neither.
This is a wonderful idea (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the problems with managers is that they are human and thus irrational. The computer will not play solitaire and go golfing instead of developing the end-year financials. It will not continually direct the weakest employees to the most critical jobs. Hell, it will probably be smart enough not to schedule the weakest employees on the businest days, which would be a fucking miracle compared, apparently, to most fast-food managers. It wouldn't schedule people for a training shift on those days, either.
By all means, let the computer run the people in this case. The people are mostly doing jobs that computer could do better anyway. McDonalds uses french-fry making robots in its busiest locations and they knock the humans right out of the box. The only reason they don't use them everywhere is that they're expensive to install and probably to maintain whereas when part-time workers get sick or sloppy you just shitcan them and bring in another underachiever. Regardless, sooner or later the only people actually working in fast food will be truck drivers and machine repairmen.
Re:Mindless work? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:That's great and all... (Score:5, Insightful)
When I worked at a Sonic Drive In [sonicdrivein.com] in 1985-6, we teens weren't any less lazy than the ones today (despite what we tell our teens now). While flipping burgers and dropping fries, I thought about my TRS-80 Model I and my new Model 100 [club100.org], and had a brainstorm. What if the girl at the microphone had a computer terminal, and hit a key for each food item, and then -- get this -- the order would display on a screen in the kitchen! I think I got a pretty good reception for the idea, since I'd just wowed my co-workers and the 20-something manager with the voice synthesizer I'd built for the Model 100.
But nobody thought it would work:
* The heat and grease would kill the electronics.
* Where do you mount a big ol' TV monitor?
* You'll never be able to train the cooks -- they can barely figure out the french fry timer.
* You'll never be able to train the order-takers -- they can barely figure out the bank of speaker switches.
* Special orders would be impossible.
* What's wrong with the slips of paper with orders written on them (#1 HB +O -P)?
I've often wondered two things. One, shouldn't I be a freakin' gazillionaire by now? Two, what's going to be the Next Big Thing in the minimum-wage kitchen. This may -- or may not -- be it.
Re:Asimov didn't write his laws for customer servi (Score:2, Insightful)
1. The franchisee is always right.
2. The use of burgers must be done in the most efficient manner possible, so long as this does not conflict with Rule #1.
3. The customer is always right, so long as he does not conflict with Rules #1 & 2.
Really, any laws could be inserted in Rule 1 and 2, but "The customer is always right" would have to be at the bottom, lest the Asimov-esque robo-McManager happily comply with the demand for "free burgers and fries for all".
Re:Seriously (Score:5, Insightful)
For things that a computer cannot handle, such as dispute resolution or angry customers - a change in policy allowing employees a bit more latitude in handling customer complaints or a centralized number for disgruntled customers to contact would handle quite a bit. For disputes, a single trained mediator could handle disputes arising across a wide region. To keep employees from slacking off too much, random inspections (but at least once a week) could be done - someone goes into a place and spends an hour going over a checklist.
From an expense standpoint, this would also be cheaper - no manager salaries, no assistant manager salaries. From an employee standpoint, this would be a win: service employees would be able to take a more direct approach to handling customer issues, and would need to spend less time dealing with stupid dictator manager-guy at what is already a shit job.
Personally, I think this is exactly the kind of place to do this.
Re:That's great and all... (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual, the devil is in the details. Your little home computers DID have many of the problems you mentioned. They weren't built for the environment, so the environment was going to kill them. And where DO you mount that monitor? Sitting it atop a surface is a good way to get it knocked off. And how will an uneducated user manage to type fast enough to enter the order?
The people who are gazillionaires right now are the ones who found solutions to these problems. They built the ruggedized equipment, created the necessary ceiling mounts, developed the picture-based touch screens for the illiterate employees, and broke down the components of a special order to make it digestable by a computer. They then set out to prove these designs, fighting wave after wave of broken and scarred hardware. Ideas that seemed good at the time didn't work out in practice. Financial losses were heavy with the first models, but the kinks were slowly worked out.
Today, nearly every restaurant in existance uses a digital register system of some sort. All because enterprising individuals invested the hard work and the capital to make it happen.
Re:Reminds me of Manna (Score:2, Insightful)
Whoops. I guess I should read the entire summary before posting. To actually contribute something:
From wikipedia [wikipedia.org]
Manna is science fiction novel by Marshall Brain that explores several issues around transhumanism. It is meant to be a thought-provoking read rather than an entertaining novel, and shows two possible outcomes of the 'robotic revolution' in the near future: one outcome is a dystopia based around US capitalism and the other is a utopia based upon a communal and technologic society in Australia.
Some themes explored :
Re:Hey (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is a wonderful idea (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you're missing the fact that workers and customers are human and irrational, too. A manager is not just a guy who sets the work schedules. He or she is also a customer service rep (if anything goes wrong with their dining experience the customer is going to him) and a baby sitter (since minimum wage workers have a tendency to get away with whatever they can.) A computer can't make sure the employees aren't being rude to customers, that they're really washing their hands or that they're not spitting in someone's burger. A computer won't notice if the guy at the register is acting nervous because he figured out a "foolproof" way to steal from the till. A computer will always have "a system" that can be exploited and you can bet employees will quickly figure out how.
A manager is also needed for crisis management. Say someone slips and falls, or an employee accidently sticks his hand in the fryer. The manager has to figure out how to handle the situation immediately-- not just to help the injured party, but to protect the company as much as possible from lawsuits (or just bad P.R.)
What this program could do is eliminate some managerial positions (e.g., most franchises have a one to three managers and two or three times that many assistant managers; with this program they may only need one manager for several branches and one assistant per shift on site.) But there will always be a need for someone to be there, and be in charge.
Re:Seriously (Score:3, Insightful)
A meat manager can look at the hostage standoff going on a block away, and realize that he's going to need to call someone in, as hungry cops, reporters, and rubberneckers will certainly be filling the place up. The same thing applies to anything that breaks the day/week/month/year pattern. There is contruction on the other side of the street, so you get twice as much traffic because no one can get to your competition, or vice versa, there is construction on your side and you bring in a lunch rush crew and you get no customers.
Inventory is another interesting point, because who checks the food that comes in to make sure it's in good condition? Minimum wage fry cook? That's probably a bad idea.
Interesting experiment. I'll be interested to see if it does anything, and, since there are like three (slow as hell) Zaxbys in this town, I'll be able to watch it unfold. Man. And I promised myself I'd never go back there...Scientific...curiosity...wars...with...ha
Re:This is a wonderful idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Asimov didn't write his laws for customer servi (Score:2, Insightful)
The robot would have to practice self defense when the customer attacks it.
Re:Great... (Score:3, Insightful)
That doesn't surprise me at all. So many places (and I don't mean just fast food) practice "management-by-binder" that having a manager that can actually think on their feet is considered a liability to them. Its a easy leap to replace the manager/binder with a computer terminal. The trouble with this method is that the people writing the binders usually haven't ever worked in the stores and have no experience at all with their own customers or the client-facing employees. It reminds me of the beginning of Snowcrash when a fire broke out in the pizza shop. The manager was frantically flipping through the binder to find the official corporate policy and procedures for "fire".
Paging Mr. Asimov (Score:3, Insightful)
Fortunatly, it's a long way off before that level of sophistication will exist, so at least I'll be dead. Still, I do sort of wish I could watch the outcome.
Re:That's great and all... (Score:3, Insightful)
What we ended up with is people who could run different stations on the cooking line somewhat well, but not all of them very well being scheduled with people who couln't wash dishes or work hot prep, cold prep or even take the trash out effectivly. And with the sales forcasts, it would only schedule two people to work the entire kitchen on slow days os you ended up with alot of stations not being covered at all. We also ended up with people going from 30-40 hours scheduled in a week to only 20 or so and in some cases people were scheduled to work only two hours where the company policy was to pay them 4 hours minimum.
We had some managers who followed this scheduling like it was writen in stone and the result was about 80% of the customers getting pissed that weeks. We had some managers who would keep the times and change the employees so that stronger employees would be present when it recomended only two workers and all the stations could be somewhat covered. When I did the scheduling, I ran the program by default and usualy changed all but a few of thier suggestions wich got me alot of slack form the higherups. What ended up happening is that the employies got fed up with it, thier moral went down, it was hard to find some one willing to do more then they absolutly had too, They started refusing to cover other stations or even help each other out and eventualy looked for different jobs and generalt got pay raises out of the switch. Of course Chi Chi's official attitude was, trianing costs and hireing expenses were too high to keep replacing employies. But most of the management would incinutate that they get hundreds of applications a month from people wanting to do fill these vacancies. And this on top of everything else turned the employies attitude into a "i was looking for a job when I found this one.". After 3 or 4 years, they stopped using this program and eventualy closed the doors for good (unrelated matters i'm told)
I would think it would be too hard to keep employies happy or productive to use a computer program like this. I might have over dramatised the above scenario because of my close relationships with the employies but it all happened. People don't like to be pushed to the edge of thier capabilities because it means more money for someoen else. They are particularly resentful when it apears thier job security is on the line for what now apears to be an evil corperation. I'm willing to bet that program will likley result in simular if not the exact same situation. They Will probably find that even mindless kids who need constant supervision are people and people generaly need to be delt with in a humanized manor. They need reasuances in most situations, need to feel comfortable and secure in their monetary, social, and personal aspects of life. They also need positive re enforments in that what they are doing is being done corectly or meaningful in some way. The trick is juggleing this in a way that doesn't cut into profits while still being profitable.
Re:When there are no jobs (Score:2, Insightful)
Presently employed by a large corporation with ~35-40 thousand employees around the world. Been here 8 years. Before that, it was a corporation of approximately 12,000, where I was employed for 4 years. So yeah, I've worked in the cubicles plenty. And I've yet to see an instance where someone was punished for thinking creatively and solving a real problem that needed to be solved. I have seen people get their asses in a sling for pissing away their time doing nothing of value to the organization, if that's what you mean.
Almost as ridiculous as claiming that my statement that you "learn" and "grow" equates to "go get another degree." But that didn't stop you from tossing THAT red herring out. And please, give me an example of where a person was drummed out of a job because a manager didn't like their degree??
And what the hell SHOULD matter to a corporation that is in the business of making money? If you're not adding value to the company, then you're a detriment to their goal of making money. The appropriate arrangement is this: YOU make money from them by providing some value that allows THEM to make money in return. If they don't make money, you get no paycheck. A company cannot pay out more than it earns for very long.
in which you describe yourself, with the spin you wish to be interpreted with...
Okay, and here's reality back at you: You can be most of those things, and still get along with people in a corporate environment. It's called having a personality that doesn't make people describe you as a confrontational douchebag. I work with a lot of smart, talented, highly educated folks. And by and large, they are agreeable, personable, and downright fun to talk to. In my experience, it's the third-raters and the mediocre minds who are constantly concerned with their "image" in the organization, and worrying that somebody else's talent will make them look bad. Those are the people who are "disagreeable" and outspoken to the point of insubordination. You can argue respectfully. You can disagree based on technical merits. You can be blunt when you discuss the facts. And the very second your opinions devolve into a ridiculous screed against "corporate fucks" who are vats of "bubbling rhino shit", as you so eloquently put it, I have to conclude that you're one of those mediocre minds. At the very least, you don't have anything better to do with yourself than harbor some irrational hatred of anybody with the title of "manager".
Translation: "I'm one of those opinionated, acerbic, blunt, people. I like to think that the fact that I am blunt and opinionated MAKES me one of