The Good, the Fast, and the Hungry: Designing for real demand

It is easy to think of renewal in dining as a question of novelty: new menu items, new formats, or new finishes. But renewal can also mean seeing the same environment more clearly. People are not all using dining the same way, at the same pace, or under the same conditions. The systems that respond best do not just look refreshed. They make your dining services easier to use, easier to trust, and easier to return to.

• Açaí Goals, Apple Pie Choices – People are intentional in what they value, but lunch decisions are often made at the speed of the line. Even with goals like eating healthier or spending less, people tend to choose what is visible, available, and easy in the moment. The better approach is to design around real behavior: understand what people are trying to do, then make those options easier to notice and choose.¹ Progress shows up when intended choices appear more often on trays,² do not disappear when people are rushed,³ and keep getting chosen over time.⁴ When the environment clears the path, intention has somewhere to go.

• Seamless Surge – Variability does not have to feel variable. The issue is not just how much demand shows up, but how unevenly it lands. The better approach is to refine operations so they adjust quietly in the background instead of putting the scramble on display. Progress shows up when fewer people abandon the line,⁵ waits feel more predictable to customers,⁶ and even people with only a few minutes still have workable options.³ Those are signs the system is managing volume shifts behind the scenes, so the customer feels the service, not the strain.

• To Dash or Dwell - People do not all arrive with the same amount of time, and dining systems can feel out of step when they act as if they do.⁷ Some customers have time to sit, while some have just enough time to inhale half a sandwich in the elevator. A better approach is to make convenient options work for the amount of time people actually have.³ The proof is not just in average traffic, but in whether the five-minute customer can still get through the line without tapping out, while longer waits are not pushing the stay-and-sit crowd toward an early exit.⁵

  If the lunch rush is feeling more side quest and less fast casual, we can help make it less saga, more sandwich.  Just click below to get in touch with us.

1.  Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press.

2.  Thorndike, A. N., Sonnenberg, L., Riis, J., Barraclough, S., & Levy, D. E. (2012). A 2-phase labeling and choice architecture intervention to improve healthy food and beverage choices. American Journal of Public Health, 102(3), 527–533. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2011.300391

3. Bogard, J. R., Downs, S., Casey, E., Farrell, P., Gupta, A., Miachon, L., Naughton, S., Staromiejska, W., & Reeve, E. (2024). Convenience as a dimension of food environments: A systematic scoping review of its definition and measurement. Appetite, 193, 107198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2023.107198

4. Thorndike, A. N., Riis, J., Sonnenberg, L. M., & Levy, D. E. (2014). Traffic-light labels and choice architecture: Promoting healthy food choices. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46(2), 143–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.002

5. De Vries, J., Roy, D., & De Koster, R. (2018). Worth the wait? How restaurant waiting time influences customer behavior and revenue. Journal of Operations Management, 63, 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2018.05.001

6. Caruelle, D., Lervik-Olsen, L., & Gustafsson, A. (2023). The clock is ticking—Or is it? Customer satisfaction response to waiting shorter vs. longer than expected during a service encounter. Journal of Retailing, 99(2), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2023.03.003

7. Jabs, J., & Devine, C. M. (2006). Time scarcity and food choices: An overview. Appetite, 47(2), 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2006.02.014