There is a myth in our industry that being understaffed is the biggest challenge to sales growth, and that is the missed opportunity. But the truth is that, while we all want to have the right number of staff, the bigger enemy to service and sales is overstaffing. 

Let us take the difficult example of when you need 1.5 people on a shift FOH. Clearly you can’t have one, because they would fail, so the right answer is to have two. You might decide that you want one on the bar, one serving and one running food. Then you have three. Comfortable – and many might argue that they have the structure right, service will be great, and they can cope with any increase in sales. Good rostering, right?  

But I have seen countless examples of what actually happens on this kind of shift. One person does the work of 1.5 people, badly, and the other two people chat.  

Of course, the customer is forgiving if you have two people working hard and it is busier than expected, but equally they are unforgiving if they see two people chatting.   

We have all seen it too often. Recently, we were doing some customer training and made this point to managers. There was no argument – they all agreed. 

So, if we can all agree that overstaffing is the biggest enemy, why does it happen? 

Is it because rotas are written without thinking enough about demand? Is it that people think there is a minimum number on shift that is required and can’t see how to run their business on less? Is it fear that someone won’t turn up? Is it that they overstaff in case they are busier? Is it that the manager really wants to do nothing on the shift so rotas extra hands? 

Is it that there are a few standard shift structures that are deployed, and the staff don’t want to create any more? I think it is the combination of all of those reasons that causes overstaffing. 

But what is the cost? The problem with our industry is that the majority of shifts during the week are quiet. If we have 14 shifts a week, then it is likely that at least half of them are quiet shifts, where there is a tendency to overstaff. If say 20% of our labour occurs at these points (for one of my own it is 35%), and we could save 10% of this, then this is still a 3.5% improvement in labour. And we all need that. 

So, let’s come back to the reasons. In truth only the first and the last can be solved through systems, unless you control a manager to death and remove any level of authority – an equally dangerous approach.  

The rest are achieved through education and training. It has been great to have recently seen both managers and kitchen managers get the point in recent training sessions. But the prize is a big one. Reduced cost and increased sales are the dream ticket. So, let’s bust the myth.