Do Self-Service Kiosks Actually Increase Employment at Fast-Food Restaurants? (cnn.com) 78
Instead of eliminating jobs, self-service kiosks at McDonald's and other fast-food chains "have added extra work for kitchen staff," reports CNN — and as a bonus, "pushed customers to order more food than they do at the cash register..."
Kiosks "guarantee that the upsell opportunities" like a milkshake or fries are suggested to customers when they order, Shake Shack CEO Robert Lynch said on an earnings call last month. "Sometimes that is not always a priority for employees when you've got 40 people in line. You're trying to get through it as quick as possible." Kiosks also shift employees from behind the cash register to maintaining the dining area, delivering food to customers or working in the kitchen, he said. [Although a study from Temple University researchers found long lines at a kiosk stress customers — making them order less.]
Some McDonald's franchisees — which own and operate 95% of McDonald's in the United States — are now rolling out kiosks that can take cash and accept change. But even in these locations, McDonald's is reassigning cashiers to other roles, including new "guest experience lead" jobs that help customers use the kiosks and assist with any issues. "In theory, kiosks should help save on labor, but in reality, restaurants have added complexity due to mobile ordering and delivery, and the labor saved from kiosks is often reallocated for these efforts," said RJ Hottovy, an analyst who covers the restaurant and retail industries at data analytics firm Placer.ai....
Christopher Andrews, a sociologist at Drew University who studies the effects of technology on work, said the impacts of kiosks were similar to other self-service technology such as ATMs and self-checkout machines in supermarkets. Both technologies were predicted to cause job losses. "The introduction of ATMs did not result in massive technological unemployment for bank tellers," he said. "Instead, it freed them up from low-value tasks such as depositing and cashing checks to perform other tasks that created value." Self-checkout also has not caused retail job losses. In some cases, self-checkout backfired for chains because self-checkout leads to higher merchandise losses from customer errors and more intentional shoplifting than when human cashiers are ringing up customers.
Fast-food chains and retailers need to do a better job communicating what the potential benefits of kiosks and self-checkout are to consumers and employees, Andrews said. "What I think will be central for customers is that they see how this technology is providing them with more or better service rather than more unpaid busywork," he said. "Otherwise, the public is just likely to view it as yet another attempt to reduce labor costs via automation and self-service."
This article ends up taking both sides of the issue. For example, some befuddled kiosk users can take longer to order, the article points out — and of course, kiosks can also break down.
Restaurant analyst Hottovy told CNN "If kiosks really improved speed of service, order accuracy, and upsell, they'd be rolled out more extensively across the industry than they are today."
Some McDonald's franchisees — which own and operate 95% of McDonald's in the United States — are now rolling out kiosks that can take cash and accept change. But even in these locations, McDonald's is reassigning cashiers to other roles, including new "guest experience lead" jobs that help customers use the kiosks and assist with any issues. "In theory, kiosks should help save on labor, but in reality, restaurants have added complexity due to mobile ordering and delivery, and the labor saved from kiosks is often reallocated for these efforts," said RJ Hottovy, an analyst who covers the restaurant and retail industries at data analytics firm Placer.ai....
Christopher Andrews, a sociologist at Drew University who studies the effects of technology on work, said the impacts of kiosks were similar to other self-service technology such as ATMs and self-checkout machines in supermarkets. Both technologies were predicted to cause job losses. "The introduction of ATMs did not result in massive technological unemployment for bank tellers," he said. "Instead, it freed them up from low-value tasks such as depositing and cashing checks to perform other tasks that created value." Self-checkout also has not caused retail job losses. In some cases, self-checkout backfired for chains because self-checkout leads to higher merchandise losses from customer errors and more intentional shoplifting than when human cashiers are ringing up customers.
Fast-food chains and retailers need to do a better job communicating what the potential benefits of kiosks and self-checkout are to consumers and employees, Andrews said. "What I think will be central for customers is that they see how this technology is providing them with more or better service rather than more unpaid busywork," he said. "Otherwise, the public is just likely to view it as yet another attempt to reduce labor costs via automation and self-service."
This article ends up taking both sides of the issue. For example, some befuddled kiosk users can take longer to order, the article points out — and of course, kiosks can also break down.
Restaurant analyst Hottovy told CNN "If kiosks really improved speed of service, order accuracy, and upsell, they'd be rolled out more extensively across the industry than they are today."
Adoption Speed (Score:2)
I am curious what actually controls the deployment rate; some businesses seem to have all the necessary ingredients to make it successful, but they lag in execution. Others push them out too fast and make matters worse for the customer.
Honestly I think more energy should go into back-end automation though. I fail to grasp why Starbucks is as slow in order fulfillment as they are still
Re:Adoption Speed (Score:4, Interesting)
I am curious what actually controls the deployment rate; some businesses seem to have all the necessary ingredients to make it successful, but they lag in execution. Others push them out too fast and make matters worse for the customer.
Honestly I think more energy should go into back-end automation though. I fail to grasp why Starbucks is as slow in order fulfillment as they are still
Kiosks don't ever seem to be done right.
First of all, they are Inside, where non drive through customers of course abandon all hope ye who enter here.
The last few times I used McDonald's kiosks, they don't even print receipts. Obviating the "at least I know they took the order correctly" advantage. And hopefully you got the order number when it flashed on the screen quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It really should just be everybody sitting down at a table and doing it on their phone.
As if people aren't already staring at their phones enough nowadays. What about those people who don't have, or want, a "smart" phone? I guess they're just shit out of luck, huh?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Adoption Speed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to stop short of that, you can disable its notification access.
Re:Adoption Speed (Score:5, Interesting)
It's like the CEO said in the summary, for them it's all about the upselling opportunities.
Re:Adoption Speed (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is it's a shitty idea. I don't have the kind of brand loyalty or crippling autism where I can only eat at McDonald's, and I'm not going to install a new app for every retailer and company I do business with. (Not even for 1, really.)
Requiring people to bring extra stuff besides payment sounds like a good way to drive off business as well. McDonald's is already near the bottom of my list of fast food chains due to unnecessary tech and shenanigans. I want menus that don't move, prices that don't change, and someone (or at least something) there in-store to take my order. Why does it have to be so complicated to order a burger? Chick-Fil-A doesn't seem to be doing that, so I go there, even though it's owned by weird child abusers and doesn't have a value menu.
Re: (Score:2)
Instead they've made it into a mini-ordeal that's more time-consuming, expensive, and less good. No peanuts and no cherry on top.
It's fine, I'm not McD's best customer, I would rarely buy a whole meal there anyways. They don't need me, I don't need them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and I'm not going to install a new app for every retailer and company I do business with. (Not even for 1, really.)
If this is what is required then you're doing something wrong. COVID and the QR code world has shown everyone that apps are most definitely not required in the slightest, and that every idiot restaurant owner can setup a digital ordering system without resorting to some app.
I order from tables all the time, I order from fast food restaurants on my phone. I don't have an app installed for any of these.
Requiring people to bring extra stuff besides payment sounds like a good way to drive off business as well.
It's 2024, people are more likely to have their phone with them than their wallet. I'm guilty of this too, g
Re: (Score:2)
If there's a way to order on your phone without the app, McDonald's sure doesn't publicize it. All the employees, promo materials push the app. A few of my co-workers have installed it. Nobody's mentioned an alternative yet.
The idea that, after walking into a restaurant, I should have to start researching how to place my order instead of just placing the order is ridiculous. But I guess the tech bros have you hooked, along with the management at some of these places. Have fun with your AI waitress, I guess.
Re: Adoption Speed (Score:2)
Also, in my experience Chick-Fil-A is really, really good at drive through.
Re: (Score:2)
Often they will have someone standing outside, in the lanes, to take the order which makes it so much easier. Also no chance of getting an AI-assistant. No ambiguity with the order.
I have a baritone voice that easily gets masked by engine rumble and cut by the highpass filter in drive-thru audio systems, so that is particularly important to me, vs. someone with a more feminine or nasal voice. It's also much harder to understand accents over a drive-thru system, and half the employees here have accents. The
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I was at a McD's, it took longer for me to load the app than it did for my dad to use the kiosk. So I just ordered with dad. He wanted McD's after his medical appointment, and I'm not going to say no to that.
Ended up having to purge all saved data to get it to load up. I know how to do that. How many don't?
Re: (Score:3)
First of all, they are Inside, where non drive through customers of course abandon all hope ye who enter here.
As a rule, I avoid drive through. They take far longer to get my order than it does to walk into the store. For example, one of my local grocery stores is in a complex which has a Starbucks. The line was around 20 cars long (from what I could see). How much fuel are those people burning (assuming not electric, and most, if not all, were not electric that I could see) waiting in line rather than w
Drive-thru fumes and discrimination (Score:2, Troll)
As a rule, I avoid drive through. They take far longer to get my order than it does to walk into the store.
Native Southern Californian here. We love In-n-Out burgers! But you're so right, while the carbon footprint of the drive-thru greatly upsets me, especially for for a damn (delicious!! And so affordable!) In-n-Out double-double cheese burger. The logic confounds me. For decades already. My favorite in-n-out is in Placentia because there's no drive-thru! It's so much more civilized. I find lines of ICEs waiting in line spewing emissions incredibly foul, especially for fast food, especially because folks won't
Re: (Score:2)
As a rule, I avoid drive through. They take far longer to get my order than it does to walk into the store.
Maybe it varies by region ... where I am, McDonald's (and other fast food places) give major priority to drive through. Slow as death to walk in, hoping someone will actually notice you at the counter and help.
Re: (Score:2)
How would a kiosk at a drive through even work? They require you to get out of your car and start tapping away at menu items. The whole point of drive-through is to avoid getting out of your car.
If you want to kiosk experience for drive through, you're best ordering via the app and then having it for curbside pickup. Then at least you don't have to step outsi
Re: Adoption Speed (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The thing that always get's overlooked in these stories is that the companies try to save labor costs by outsourcing.
If you can outsource to a machine, you now have maintenance (see McDonalds Ice cream machine fiasco) to deal with, and that maintenance is an unknown quantity. But is it? Ask people who work at any "franchise" restaurant. Their computers will lock the staff out if the franchisee doesn't pay their fees.
All the self-checkout kiosks have done is move the "frustration pain point." So you need les
Re: (Score:1)
The thing that helped push them here is language, the machines all support Korean, English, japanese, and chinese.
The few starbucks I have gone to don't use them but other cafes all do. Make it easy to customize everything.
That employment increase will be short lived (Score:2)
As the kiosks themselves are refined, and people get used and learn to use them, the new "guest experience lead" jobs that help customers use the kiosks and assist with any issues will dwindle.
And as robots start to do things like flipping patties and frying (french/freedom) fries, and nuggets and stuff, and as robots take over (basic) cleaning duties, human labour in Fast Food restaurants will see a net diminish.
And you know what? That is actually a good thing, in the long term. Sorry if in the short term
Re:That employment increase will be short lived (Score:5, Insightful)
Economists have been tiredly rubbing their eyes while repeating this over and over for decades - automation might eliminate imdividual jobs, but it does NOT kill jobs overall. It changes job descriptions and allows people to be more productive.
Re:That employment increase will be short lived (Score:5, Informative)
It's in fact so common a phenomenon economists have a name for it:
In economics, the lump of labour fallacy is the misconception that there is a finite amount of work—a lump of labour—to be done within an economy which can be distributed to create more or fewer jobs. It was considered a fallacy in 1891 by economist David Frederick Schloss, who held that the amount of work is not fixed. [wikipedia.org]
Much economics ignores or assumes so much (Score:3)
In the "lump of labor fallacy" (and much other mainstream economics like the law of comparative advantage), there is an implicit assumption of infinite demand for quantity and quality of physical goods, making it ultimately a half truth (in that, yes, it is true that in general, available labor can be eventually redirected to producing more or better --- up to a point). At some point, there is a law of diminishing returns for more or better goods relative to free time to enjoy them in. And there are also su
Re: (Score:1)
for someone who writes a blog how do you know so little about formatting for humans to read
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, In some categories, yes. The world produces k]more than enough toothpaste. And paperclips. Heck, due to mechanization and modern farming, we actually make plenty of food as well. Distribution is the problem for these types of items. Productivity increases won’t much help these categories.
But there are many fields that would benefit fr
Re: (Score:2)
> where you donâ(TM)t even bother to count the orders of magnitude
>because itâ(TM)s so close to infinite thereâ(TM)s no point.
as another economist, I'll note that there would be no economics in such a world (as with the Star Trek spinoffs)
Re: (Score:2)
Even in Star Trek IV the crew being back in the 20th has to remember that "they still use money here"
Re: (Score:2)
But in the actual series, there is no shortage of reference to the currency (credits). I think there was even a reference to the price of the Enterprise once--I forgot the context; probably Kirk recklessly risking it yet again.
Re: (Score:2)
True I forget about that, it'd actually be interesting to see the slow gradual introduction of "future space utopia" in Star Trek over time. I think that might be the only time it's referenced in the films before it really became canon in TNG.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. If automation doubles the productivity of the food sector, there's no job loss because people will simply eat twice as much!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
automation might eliminate imdividual jobs, but it does NOT kill jobs overall. It changes job descriptions and allows people to be more productive.
Automation might eliminate imdividual jobs, but it does NOT kill jobs overall. It changes job descriptions and allows people to be more productive.
This is true and false. It eliminates the job for which it was designed to eliminate. For example, backhoes and bulldozers eliminated lots of dudes with shovels. The thought being now those humans can focus on more important skilled jobs. A guy with a shovel can learn to pour concrete.
Unfortunately, there is a limit to that upskilling. My housekeeper is incapable of upskilling. That's why she's a housekeeper at 50 years of age. She's never going to be a developer or robot repairman (when her job is r
Re: That employment increase will be short lived (Score:2)
i disagree strongly about your housekeeper. an employee can be upgraded to more important jobs if they are responsible and have good work ethic. your house keeper could be easily retrained to work in a parts fabrication facility. cutting, welding, and grinding robots are generally not self cleaning. surely if she can clean your bathroom she could adapt to clean those?
Re: That employment increase will be short lived (Score:2)
That doesn't sound like upskilling. Is cleaning a machine any more skilled labor than cleaning a house?
Re: (Score:2)
The problem addressing this is going to be figuring out which employees are capable and which aren't. Same thing with education and training programs. Right now entry is largely predicated on ability to pay, which isn't good, but when the number of applicants explodes, it's going to get so much worse. It would be tempting to spike the cost of education and training as an easy way to reduce the applicant pool. Probably that's already happening.
Add to that the problem of grade inflation and general lack of ri
Re: (Score:2)
This has done some things with labor. For example, in agriculture, a couple people with a truck and combine can do the work of 20-30 laborers. Similar with mining, where a robot can clear out a coal mine. This is overall good, because it gets people out of dangerous, repetitive environments, but it does reduce the amount of people working. Auto workers are tending to robotics rather than working on cars, and there are fewer of them on a production line.
Overall, it is a mixed bag. The upside is that peo
Re: (Score:2)
Kiosks have been around for at least a decade, too. McDonald's has always been a pioneer in automation, often pushing too far too fast before the technology is ready.
I recall at least ten years ago, when kiosks were new and corporate was really, really pushing franchisees to use them, one local location basically just turned theirs into cash registers. They assigned a cashier to work the kiosk, complete with a wheeled cart with drink cups. They'd even run cash over to the regular register if that's how you
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it certainly can be done right, but the store has to pay attention to the details. If they don't buy it, it's just an expensive cash register, but otherwise not different from the rest.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ATMs didn’t decrease bank employment
Among managers, perhaps not. But it did decrease the number of bank locations. I've lost count of the times my local branch has been closed and I have to drive further and further to talk to a real person.
Re: That employment increase will be short lived (Score:2)
There's a floor of what's automatable at a profitable cost. To me the new variable is that floor is significantly rising which will squeeze the low end pretty hard.
An automated McDs wasn't really economically viable 20 years ago. Today? I'd guess it's very doable at a profitable margin. The biggest road lock is probably inertia and customer aversion.
I chuckle at the supposition that reduced order takers are redeployed as 'dining area staff's or whatever marketing term they want to use. Def won't be 1
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The entire article is just a mishmash of arguments that supposedly show that "kiosks are bad."
They even imply that customers ordering more and ordering less food are both bad:
- "Instead, touchscreen kiosks have added extra work for kitchen staff and pushed customers to order more food than they do at the cash register."
- "A recent study from Temple University researchers found that, when a line forms behind customers using kiosks, they experience more stress when placing their orders and purchase less food.
Re: (Score:2)
As the kiosks themselves are refined, and people get used and learn to use them, the new "guest experience lead" jobs that help customers use the kiosks and assist with any issues will dwindle.
And yet there are places in the world where these kiosks have been around for literally years (the first ones I personally saw were in 2016). And yet these staff still exist. How many years do you consider short lived?
You're kidding me (Score:2)
Faster, more responsive service results in people coming back? You're joking.
No (Score:2)
Based on every kisok'd McDonalds I've been in, the number of cashier stations is reduced. Where there were previously four or five, there's now one front counter cashier station, and it's only staffed 'as needed' by other staff members.
There's another cashier (usually two in the busier locations) for the drive-through, but they're working on AI systems for those.
If those systems didn't reduce costs (i.e. wages) they wouldn't be going in.
Re: (Score:1)
Every kiosked McDonald's I've been in has removed _all_ cashiers. When the decision has been made to install kiosks, the same decision removes all tills. In most cases, where the bar used to be has also gone / been fundamentally altered so much that a till couldn't even be put back there should the kiosks suffer failure such as a BSOD (which is annoyingly common). It's now just a reduced length pick up point with one mobile member of staff carrying bags to it from the back and calling out numbers. No, they
Are they increasing obesity ? (Score:3)
If they push customers to order more food then, presumably, customers are eating the food and so getting fatter. This might be good for the food outlet but is it good for the national health ?
Re: (Score:2)
Health aside it pulls from other outlets. If I'm eating upsells I'm less likely to grab a taco on the way home. Then what the burger MBAs don't realize is when the taco place upsells me, I'm less likely to grab a McShake on the way home.
This isn't the first "it's okay we'll keep sending money to the bottom, we'll just have more productivity and make+sell 25% more burgers!" illusion they've chased. If a city is eating 20,000 burgers a day, "more productivity" isn't going to change that. They'll collectively
I went to a Taco Bell the other day (Score:1)
customer service (Score:2)
So, the guy is saying that actual people care about the customers in line more than the company, but kiosks don't give a damn if you have to wait longer in line as long as we can sell bigger fries.
Macdonald with kiosk 15 minutes away (Score:2)
I call BS... (Score:2)
and as a bonus, "pushed customers to order more food than they do at the cash register..."
That additional food purchasing wasn't a "bonus", it was damned well the primary goal. At least at McDonald's, the entire scheme was specifically engineered to boost sales, as this video makes abundantly clear:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKX6EhDrgqQ
To be clear, what I'm talking about isn't just "missed upsell opportunities" - it's carefully crafted misdirection and manipulation. There's an argument to be made that, morally, there's nothing wrong with that kind of manipulation. But with overall health d
By making people eat more crap? (Score:2)
Possibly. Seems to be a net loss for society though.
More about revenue/experience than savings? (Score:2)
Every couple months or so we end up at McDonald's. Not proud of it, but some times life gets in the way, and it is the convenient option for "feeding" your family inbetween various commitments. TLDR: would go there even less frequently without kiosks and/or apps with delivery to the table.
Those few visits are largely due to the kiosks, and the predictable experience they offer. It used to be going to McDonald's involved lining up to place your order, when it's your turn you stand there with your family tryi
Can McDonald's kiosks get me a real meat patty ??? (Score:2)
Revenge Effects of Technology (Score:2)
This is part of what Edward called "the revenge effects of technology". By reducing the time, difficulty, or cost of a task, technology generally does not free up time for other tasks. Rather, those tasks are done more frequently or in larger batches, or the create new, related tasks, and ultimately consume the same or more time.
(One example he gave was spreadsheets. They were done before computers, but were very tedious and thus rare, say once a month or even quarter. Now that they are faster, bosses tend
Some Kiosks are REALLY BAD (Score:1)
McDonald's UI is so bad, I will not use it. I have to make 12 selections to buy a cup of coffee, for example. AND, I have to hunt the entire display after each selection to find the next selection I need to proceed. AND, there's no shortcut to the checkout.
I keep explaining this to managers and even owners, so they can put upstream pressure on corporate to roll out a fix. In the meantime, I take my business (NOT just cup o' coffee) to Burger King.
McDonald's kiosks poor UX (Score:2)