menu analysis

The development of the study in terms of menu analysis has been studied all over the world, with practical applications in the restaurant sector, as its results have a significant impact on the profitability of the businesses. The purpose of this case study is to change the current menu of a charcoal grilled food restaurant located in western Algarve. 
This study foresees the use of quantitative variables using the menu analysis models Menu Analysis Model by Miller (1980), Menu Engineering Model by Kasavana and Smith (1982) and Cost/Margin Analysis Model by Pavesic (1985). The changes in the menu will be supported by the combined knowledge of the three authors mentioned above.
Their models will point us in the correct direction when it comes to make the referred modifications. The analysis of the results and the strategies associated to each model might suggest other approaches to improve the menu according to the classifications of each dish.
Finally, we present the quantitative analysis of the menu with the help of the results obtained through the most representative menu analysis models. We observed some minor differences in the final results according to the models we used. After considering these results, we decided to eliminate or change some items from the menu. We are able to show the manager the most profitable and popular items in the menu. The analysis also made some changes in the standardized recipes possible, in terms of portions and costs.

Günümüzde yiyecek içecek işletmelerinde yoğun bir şekilde kullanılan menüler, müşterilere karar verme aşamasında yardımcı olan araçlar olmaktan öteye geçmiştir. Artık menüler sayesinde çeşitli maliyet hesapları, gelir yönetimi ve pazarlama çalışmaları gibi aktiviteler de yürütülebilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, menü mühendisliği kapsamında Kasavana Smith Modeli (KSM) ile zaman etkenli faaliyet tabanlı maliyetleme (ZEFTM) modelinin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Konusu bakımından yöntem tasarımı, durum çalışması olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışmada, amaçlı örnekleme yönteminden yararlanılmıştır.  Veriler, Ege Bölgesi’nin turizm merkezlerinden biri olan Aydın- Kuşadası’nda faaliyet gösteren lüks bir restorandan elde edilmiştir. 2018 yaz sezonu Ağustos ayını kapsayan veriler, ilgili restoranın otomasyon sistemleri, muhasebe kayıtları ve yetkilileriyle yapılan görüşmeler sonucunda elde edilmiştir. Restoran menüsünde yer alan, 27 menü kalemi  Kasavana-Smith modeli ile analiz edildikten sonra ZEFTM modeliyle tekrar analiz edilmiştir. Analizlerin sonucunda 4 menü kaleminin kategorilerinde farklılıkların meydana geldiği tespit edilmiştir. KSM’de “düşük” kategoride yer alan 4 menü kaleminin ZEFTM modeline geçildiğinde “yüksek” kategoride yer alması, ZEFTM modelinin kapsamlı yapısının restoran işletmeleri için daha uygun olduğu sonucuna işaret etmektedir.

Concept of sustainable gastronomy whose importance has globally increased, become a tool of differentiation and competitiveness for many sectors took place in tourism industry, notably food&beverage sector in recent years. At this point, Fine-dining restaurants which provide unique and eccentrical cuisine experience are the businesses coming into one of the most apparent example of sustainable gas-tronomy through their distinctive menus. In the service literature, Fine-dining restaurants have been mostly handled within the context of consumer attitudes and behaviors; however, menu analysis regard-ing sustainable gastronomic diversity has been overlooked to the best of our knowledge. Hence, with the practical and theoretical aim, menus of 10 Fine-dining restaurants operating in Antalya, Istanbul and Izmir have been investigated in terms of sustainable gastronomy criteria. As a result, most of the restaurant claim in their menus that they mostly prefer to purchase local and fresh products with geo-graphical indication from organic public market or directly from the
326
seller such as fisher, farmer or home-made stores. In addition to pur-chasing it has been understood that the restaurants combine sustaina-bility with creative applications in preparing, cooking and presenta-tion process. The last but not the least, significant number of restau-rants are rich in diversity of wines from all over the world and even some of them have their own wine cellar.

Nowadays, menus that are used extensively are more than just tools that help customers in decision making in restaurant industry. Activities such as various cost accounts, revenue management and marketing activities can be go through with menus. Purpose of this study is compare the results of within traditional and modern approaches analysis with the context of menu engineering. In this purpose, purposeful sampling was used as sampling method in case study. The data required for the analysis from a luxurious restaurant located in Kuşadası, Aydın, which is one of the tourism centers of Aegean Region, was obtained from restaurant automation systems, accounting records and interviews with authorities of the restaurant. According to the findings of the study, when traditional and modern methods were compared, 4 of the 27 menu items analyzed were different. Thus, it is possible to say that modern approaches produce more realistic results since they are comprehensive compared to the traditional method.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Günümüzde yiyecek içecek işletmelerinde yoğun bir şekilde kullanılan menüler, müşterilere karar verme aşamasında yardımcı olan araçlar olmaktan öteye geçmiştir. Artık menüler sayesinde çeşitli maliyet hesapları, gelir yönetimi ve pazarlama çalışmaları gibi aktiviteler de yürütülebilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, menü mühendisliği kapsamında Kasavana Smith Modeli (KSM) ile zaman etkenli faaliyet tabanlı maliyetleme (ZEFTM) modelinin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Konusu bakımından yöntem tasarımı, durum çalışması olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışmada, amaçlı örnekleme yönteminden yararlanılmıştır. Veriler, Ege Bölgesi’nin turizm merkezlerinden biri olan Aydın- Kuşadası’nda faaliyet gösteren lüks bir restorandan elde edilmiştir. 2018 yaz sezonu Ağustos ayını kapsayan veriler, ilgili restoranın otomasyon sistemleri, muhasebe kayıtları ve yetkilileriyle yapılan görüşmeler sonucunda elde edilmiştir. Restoran menüsünde yer alan, 27 menü kalemi Kasavana-Smith modeli ile analiz edildikten sonra ZEFTM modeliyle tekrar analiz edilmiştir. Analizlerin sonucunda 4 menü kaleminin kategorilerinde farklılıkların meydana geldiği tespit edilmiştir. KSM’de “düşük” kategoride yer alan 4 menü kaleminin ZEFTM modeline geçildiğinde “yüksek” kategoride yer alması, ZEFTM modelinin kapsamlı yapısının restoran işletmeleri için daha uygun olduğu sonucuna işaret etmektedir.

The menu is a multi-functional tool for the food and beverage business (Atkinson & Jones, 1993; Kivela, 2003; Ninemeier, 2010). In some cases, it may get ahead of the location, staff and service quality (Baiomy et al., 2013). In this context, it is necessary to evaluate the menu effectively as far as possible in order to achieve the business success.
Menu analysis is one of the most basic agents used in the menu evaluation process (Antun & Gustafson, 2005; Annaraud, 2007). By the help of this analysis, it is possible to plan the menus finely, to set effective pricing and cost control system, to carry out in-service training, to determine the target customer groups and to develop appropriate strategies for them (Rızaoğlu, 1991; Kwong, 2005; Taylor & Brown, 2007).
A number of menu analysis approaches have been developed especially since the 1980s (Miller, 1980, Kasavana & Smith, 1982, Pavesic, 1985, Bayou & Bennett, 1992, LeBruto et al., 1995, Raab & Mayer, 2007, Taylor et al., 2009). Among them, the approach that is most prevalent in terms of academic and practice has been developed by Kasavana and Smith (1982) which is called as Menu Engineering (ME) in the literature (Morrison, 1996; Horton, 2001; Kwong, 2005, Lee & Lee, 2006; Raab & Mayer, 2007; Taylor et al., 2009). ME is a matrix-based analysis method that compares the performance of menu items over the popularity and contribution margin. In this method, the items whose popularity and contribution margin are higher than the average values are classified as the Star and the low ones are as the Dog. On the other hand, items with high contribution margin and low popularity are classified as the Puzzle and on the contrary, items with low contribution margin and high popularity are classified as the Plowhorse.
Menu development is an ongoing process. To provide a competitive advantage, menus must remain flexible. (Antun & Gustafson, 2005). For this reason, menus should be analyzed constantly and periodically, no matter how good they are. The main question that comes to mind in this context is when and how often the relevant analyzes need to be done. Because if the menu analysis is done for shorter or longer period, it can be much harmful to business. With this kind of analysis, it can be said that both business resources are not used effectively and that wrong decisions are taken depending on the analysis results. In the menu analysis literature, a single activity period as a month is usually taken into consideration and evaluations are made accordingly (Kasavana & Smith, 1982, LeBruto et al., 1995; Mifli, 2000; Raab & Mayer, 2007; Kimes et al., 2012). However, depending on a number of factors some fluctuations may occur in the performance of the foods in the menu. Therefore, analyzes made as a single period can have misleading results. For this reason, the aim of the study is to perform the menu analysis and to evaluate the obtained results entirely by considering three different periods.
It is a kind of case study research. The case study is widely used in the menu analysis literature and a single business is generally preferred (Kasavana & Smith, 1982, LeBruto et al., 1995, Raab & Mayer, 2007; Taylor et al., 2009). Likewise, in this research, Nerdek Cafe which is a food and beverage company in Alanya has been chosen as a research area by using convenience sampling method. The Research has only comprised 26 menu items located in the food menu. The data covering October-November and December 2016 were collected using face-to-face interview and document review techniques. The analysis of the data was performed with traditional ME (Kasavana and Smith, 1982) by using Microsoft Excel. In this phase, firstly the data of each month separately and then the data of the three months are considered integrally and the results obtained are evaluated comparatively. The results of ME conducted by Nerdek Cafe with relevant data in October-November-December 2016 are summarized in the table below.

Table 1. Monthly and Periodical Menu Analysis Results
Food
Items October Matrix Results November Matrix Results December Matrix Results Periodical (Three Months) Matrix Results
F1 Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse
F2 Star Star Star Star
F3 Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse
F4 Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse
F5 Plowhorse Puzzle Dog Plowhorse
F6 Plowhorse Star Star Star
F7 Plowhorse Dog Plowhorse Plowhorse
F8 Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse Plowhorse
F9 Star Puzzle Puzzle Puzzle
F10 Star Star Plowhorse Star
F11 Star Star Star Star
F12 Star Star Star Star
F13 Plowhorse Dog Plowhorse Dog
F14 Dog Dog Dog Dog
F15 Dog Dog Dog Dog
F16 Puzzle Puzzle Dog Dog
F17 Puzzle Puzzle Dog Puzzle
F18 Dog Puzzle Dog Puzzle
F19 Puzzle Puzzle Dog Puzzle
F20 Dog Dog Dog Dog
F21 Puzzle Puzzle Dog Puzzle
F22 Puzzle Puzzle Plowhorse Puzzle
F23 Puzzle Puzzle Puzzle Puzzle
F24 Puzzle Puzzle Dog Puzzle
F25 Puzzle Puzzle Plowhorse Puzzle
F26 Dog Dog Dog Dog

As seen from table, there are important differences among monthly results. The reason for these differences can be attributed to the dynamic and flexible market environment in which the company is located. As a result of three different monthly analysis, it was seen that a significant portion of the menu items, such as about %54 (14 food items) showed a change and 12 food items were in the same matrix group. The joint results obtained were also supported in the analysis of three months as a period. In this context, it is suggested that restaurant operators should be cautious about the results of the monthly menu analysis and focusing on the menu items in the joint matrix group with the periodical analysis. For example; F5 food item was identified as the Plowhorse in October, the Puzzle in November and the Dog in December. In this context, there is a greater likelihood of failure to take decisions based on the results of monthly period analysis. Based on this result, we can say that periodical analysis is more reliable. However, when important decisions such as changing, developing or removing the menu items are taken, it is recommended that the results of the monthly analysis be combined with the periodical menu analysis.






References
Annaraud, K. (2007). Restaurant menu analysis: Can we go further? Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 10(4), 25-37.
Antun, J. M. & Gustafson, C. (2005). Menu success: A menu analysis of awarded fine dining restaurants and private clubs. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 4(4), 51-66.
Atkinson, H., & Jones, P. (1993). Menu engineering: managing the foodsemice micro-marketing mix. Journal of Restaurant & Foodservice Marketing, 1(1), 37-55.
Baiomy, A. E. A. M., Jones, E., El-Din Elias, A. N., & Dinana, R. T. (2013). Menus as Marketing Tools: Developing a Resort Hotel Restaurant Menu Typology. Journal of Tourism Research &Hospitality, 2(2), 1-10.
Bayou, M. E., & Bennett, L. B. (1992). Profitability analysis for table-service restaurants. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 33(2), 49-55.
Horton, B. W. (2001). Menu analysis: The effect of labor and menu category on menu classifications. FIU Hospitality Review, 19(2), 35-46.
Kasavana, M. L., & Smith, D. I. (1982). Menu engineering. Lansing, MI: Hospitality Publishers.
Kimes, S. E., Phillips, R. & Summa, L. (2012), Pricing in the Restaurants, The Oxford Handbook of Pricing Management, ed. Özer, Özalp & Phillips, Robert. UK: Oxford University Press, 106-120.
Kivela, J. (2003). Results of a qualitative approach to menu planning using control and experimental groups. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 6(4), 43-65.
Kwong, L. Y. L. (2005). The application of menu engineering and design in Asian restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 24(1), 91-106.
LeBruto, S. M., Quain, W. J., & Ashley, R. A. (1995). Menu engineering: a model including labor. Hospitality Review, 13(1), 41–50.
Lee, E. J., & Lee, Y. S. (2006). Menu analysis using menu engineering and cost/margin analysis-French restaurant of the tourism hotel in Seoul. Journal of the Korean Society of Food Culture, 21(3), 270-279.
Mifli, M. (2000). Menu development and analysis. 4. Biennial and International Conference on Tourism and Hotel Industry in Southeast Asia & Indo-China: Development, Marketing and Sustainability (pp. 24-26).
Miller, J. E. & Pavesic, D. (1996). Menu Pricing and Strategy, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Miller, J. E. (1980). Menu Pricing and Strategy. Boston: CBI Publishing.
Morrison, P. (1996). Menu engineering in upscale restaurants. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 8(4), 17-24.
Ninemeier, J. D. (2010). Management of food and beverage operations (5. Edition), Michigan: American Hotel & Lodging Educational Institute.
Pavesic, D. V. (1985). Prime Numbers Finding Your Menu's Strengths. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 70-77.
Raab, C., & Mayer, K. (2007). Menu engineering and activity-based costing–can they work together in a restaurant? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19(1), 43-52.
Rızaoğlu, B. (1991). Bir Yönetim Aracı Olarak Menü Analizi ve Yöntemleri. Ankara: Türkiye Kalkınma Bankası Yayınları.
Taylor, J. J., & Brown, D. M. (2007). Menu analysis: A review of techniques and approaches. Hospitality Review, 25(2), 6.
Taylor, J. J., Reynolds, D., & Brown, D. M. (2009). Multi-factor menu analysis using data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(2), 213-225.

ÖZET Hizmet sektöründeki yiyecek içecek işletmelerinin dinamik yapısı ile günümüz rekabet koşulları bir araya geldiğinde işletmelerin ayakta kalabilmeleri her geçen gün zor olmaktadır. Yiyecek içecek işletmeleri menülerini belirli periyodlarda değerlendirmektedirler. Güvendikleri ancak istenilen düzeyde satışı olmayan ürünleri öne çıkarak, ihtiyaç duyulduğunda ise menü kalemini menüden çıkararak menülerini güncelleyebilmektedirler. Menü analizi, yönetime bir geri bildirim imkanı sunması açısından önemlidir. Bu nedenle işletme yöneticileri ya da şefler işletmenin, varoluş amacına göre menü analizi yöntemlerinden hangisinin kendi işletmeleri için daha doğru olduğunu düşünüyorlarsa seçimi bu doğrultuda yapacaklardır. Araştırmanın amacı literatürde yer alan menü analizi yöntemlerinin detaylı bir şekilde incelenmesi ve bu doğrultuda sektöre yönelik öneriler getirilmesidir. Bu bağlamda araştırma kapsamında menü analizine yönelik literatür taraması yapılmıştır. Menü analizi yöntemleri araştırma kapsamında matris modeller, formüllerden oluşan modeller ve çok boyutlu modeller başlıkları altında incelenmiştir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Menü analizi, Matris modeller, Karlılık analizi, Çok boyutlu modeller, Veri zarflama analizi ABSTRACT When the dynamic structure of the food and beverage enterprises in the service sector and the current competitive conditions come together, it becomes more and more difficult for the enterprises to survive. The managers of the food and beverage establishments evaluate their menus in certain periods in order to facilitate their work. They can update their menus by putting forward the products they trust but not selling at the desired level and removing the menu item from the menu when needed. Menu analysis is valuable in providing feedback to management. Therefore, business managers or chefs will make the selection according to the purpose of the existence of the menu analysis method which is more appropriate for their own business. The aim of the research is to examine the menu analysis methods in the literature in detail and to make recommendations for the sector in this direction. In this context, literature review was conducted for menu analysis. Menu analysis methods have been investigated under the title of matrix models, profitability analysis, multidimensional models.