University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Establishing multi-unit fast casual restaurant education at UNLV Hospitality College: an innovation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Establishing multi-unit fast casual restaurant education at UNLV Hospitality College: an innovation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Establishing Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Education at UNLV Hospitality College:
An Innovation Study
by
Cervantes Chih-Chieh Lee

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

August 2021

© Copyright by Cervantes Chih-Chieh Lee 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Cervantes Chih-Chieh Lee certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Stowe Shoemaker
Cathy Krop
Mark Power Robison, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would first like to acknowledge my committee chair, Dr. Mark Power Robison and
committee members, Dr. Stowe Shoemaker and Dr. Cathy Krop. Your guidance, support and
perspectives kept me on track throughout the research and writing process. I would also like to
acknowledge the tremendous support of the USC Rossier School of Education, particularly Dr.
Sabrina Chong, Dr. Ruth Chung, and Dr. Tracy Tambascia. I am very grateful to our Cohort 8
fellow classmates and in particular, Ms. Victoria Shiroma Wilson, my study partner on
countless group projects.
I would like to thank all the multi-unit fast casual restaurant industry committee
members, the UNLV faculty (led by Dean Shoemaker, Professor Joseph Lema, and Ms.
Darlene Girouard), and all restaurant leaders participating in this research (led by Mr. Phil
Stanton at The Wendy’s International, Mr. Royce Chow at Panda Restaurant Group, Mr. Todd
Kelly at Diversified Restaurant Group, and Mr. Michael Wang at Shake Shack). I also want to
express my sincere appreciation to Mr. Andrew Cherng, who granted me the first store
servicing opportunity at Panda Express in 2013.
My family provided support and strength throughout my studies. Irene, my dear wife,
showed great love taking care of our two lovely boys, Chih-Kang and Richard. I am deeply
grateful to my late Father Kuo-Yen (passed away in April 2018), Mother Yueh-O, Sister Shu-Yi,
Brother Chih-Hong, Uncle Wu-Yen, Mother-in-Law Pearl, who all encouraged me to pursue
doctoral study. You all earned this degree along with me. Let us celebrate!
Lastly, I would like to praise and thank God, the Almighty, who has provided me with
countless blessings and opportunities so that I have been finally able to complete my studies and
further advance restaurant education & practice for many years to come.

v
Table of Contents
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .............................................................................. 5
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................. 6
Description of Stakeholder Group .................................................................................... 14
Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals.......................................................................... 16
Stakeholder Group for the Study ...................................................................................... 17
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions .................................................................. 18
Conceptual and Methodological Framework .................................................................... 19
Definition .......................................................................................................................... 19
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 22
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 24
The U.S. Restaurant Industry ............................................................................................ 24
Hospitality & Tourism Studies in Higher Education ........................................................ 35
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ............................... 46
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 56
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 56
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 56
Data Collection and Instrumentation ................................................................................ 59
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 62

vi
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 63
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 64
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 65
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 67
Chapter Four: Results and Findings .............................................................................................. 70
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 72
Step One Interview Results and Findings ......................................................................... 78
Step Two Survey Results and Findings ............................................................................ 92
Step Three Interview Results and Findings .................................................................... 115
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 125
Chapter Five: Recommendations ................................................................................................ 132
Overview of Key Findings .............................................................................................. 133
Recommendations for Practice and Implementation Plan .............................................. 136
Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 163
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 164
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 166
References ................................................................................................................................... 169
Appendix A: Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee ....................................... 189
Appendix B: Proposed Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Faculty Committee ........................ 191
Appendix C: Step One– Interview .............................................................................................. 193
Appendix D: Step Two – Online Survey .................................................................................... 198
Appendix E: Step Three – Interview .......................................................................................... 209
Appendix F: Restaurant Innovation Hub Idea ............................................................................ 215
Appendix G: Career Path Plans for Multi-unit Fast Casual Restaurants .................................... 234

vii
List of Tables

Table 1 Credit Requirement of Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management at UNLV ........... 8
Table 2 Four Concentrations for B.S. Degree in Hospitality Management at UNLV .................. 10
Table 3 Potential New Courses for Multi-Unit Fast Casual Concentration ................................ 12
Table 4 Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals .................. 17
Table 5 Restaurant Industry Food and Drinks Sales, Projection for 2020 ................................... 26
Table 6 2018 Total Restaurant and Bars Sales ............................................................................. 28
Table 7 Restaurant Workforce Projection from 2020 to 2030 ...................................................... 29
Table 8 Selected Employment and Wage Estimates of Restaurants and Other Eating Places ..... 31
Table 9 Top 25 Fast Casual Restaurant Ranked by the U.S. Sales ............................................... 34
Table 10 Top 20 Most Important Course Subjects Rated by Restaurant Industry Professionals . 39
Table 11 Top 20 Most Important Course Subjects Rated by Lodging Industry Professionals ...... 40
Table 12 Hospitality Curriculum Topic Categories ...................................................................... 45
Table 13 Assumed Knowledge Influences and Types .................................................................... 49
Table 14 Assumed Motivation Influences and Types .................................................................... 52
Table 15 Assumed Organization Influence and Type .................................................................... 55
Table 16 Summary of Three-Step Mixed Method .......................................................................... 71
Table 17 Participating MFRIC Members for Step One Interview ................................................ 74
Table 18 Demographic Information of Survey Participants (N = 47) .......................................... 75
Table 19 Participating Multi-Unit Managers for Step Three Interview ....................................... 77
Table 20 Questions Following Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Framework .............. 79
Table 21 Assumed KMO Influences and Identified Themes in Step One Interview ...................... 80

viii
Table 22 Course Preference by MFRIC Member Interview ......................................................... 90
Table 23 Write-in Courses by MFRIC Member Interview ............................................................ 91
Table 24 Critical/Reflective Skills Preference by Multi-Unit Managers ...................................... 94
Table 25 Professional/Technical Skills Preference by Multi-Unit Managers ............................... 96
Table 26 Communication/Relationship Preference by Multi-Unit Managers .............................. 98
Table 27 Plasticity/Erudition Preference by Multi-Unit Managers ............................................ 100
Table 28 Proposed Draft Course Preference by Multi-Unit Managers ...................................... 102
Table 29 Write-in Courses by Multi-Unit Managers .................................................................. 103
Table 30 Course Developing Sequence by Multi-Unit Managers (N = 28) ............................... 105
Table 31 Organization Expectation of Multi-Unit Manager Online Survey (N=41) .................. 107
Table 32 Future Preference of Multi-Unit Manager Online Survey ............................................112
Table 33 Interview Questions, KMO Framework and Linking to Courses ..................................115
Table 34 Course Preference by Six Multi-Unit Managers .......................................................... 123
Table 35 Write-in Courses by Six Multi-Unit Managers ............................................................ 124
Table 36 Comparison for Course Preference and Development Sequence ................................ 126
Table 37 Comparison for Write-in Courses ................................................................................ 128
Table 38 Influences and Aligned Recommendation Practice ...................................................... 134
Table 39 Building People-centric and Technology-enhanced MFR Curriculum........................ 143
Table 40 Core Course Names and its Respective Body of Knowledge ....................................... 145
Table 41 Elective Course Names and its Respective Body of Knowledge .................................. 148
Table 42 Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 1 ........................................................................ 152
Table 43 Co-creating Restaurant Practicum with Industry Peers .............................................. 155
Table 44 Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 2 ........................................................................ 157

ix
Table 45 Diversifying Recruiting Access and Student Body Background ................................... 158
Table 46 Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 3 ........................................................................ 160

x
List of Figures

Figure 1 Turning Research into Results Process Model ............................................................... 47
Figure 2 The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) ....................... 140

xi
Abstract
The problem of practice addressed through this research is a gap in formal industry-based
education to the U.S restaurant industry. The dissertation addresses the creation of multi-unit fast
casual restaurant (MFR) concentration for B.S. degree in hospitality management at The
University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). The organization performance goal is to achieve the
first 20 student intake by September 2022. The study sought to answer the questions: What
knowledge, skills, dispositions do future managers in the MFR industry need to possess in order
to meet the academic standard and the industry expectation? And, what are the recommended
knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related to establishing this new MFR
concentration? The research took an exploratory mixed method approach through a three-step
process including interviews and surveys of industry experts. The findings indicate demand for a
five-course (15 credits) MFR curriculum that is people-centric, technology-enhanced, and
provides a co-created practicum developed with industry partners. These five courses are: (a)
Restaurant Career and Talent Development, (b) MFR Operations, (c) MFR Quantitative
Analytics, (d) MFR System Development, (e) Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies.
Recommendations from this study also include a call for UNLV to diversify its recruiting access
to culinary students, veterans, computer engineers, data scientists, and restaurant working
professionals. Lastly, the findings suggest that UNLV may benefit from launching professional
development and certificate courses (similar to Cornell Hotel School) for industry professionals
and mid-career-changers entering the restaurant industry.

Keywords: Multi-Unit Fast Casual, Restaurant Education, Innovation, Tech-enhanced Operations

xii
List of Abbreviations

ASU Arizona State University
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
COVID-19 Corona Virus Disease 2019
BSHM Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management
EIR Entrepreneur-in-Residence
F&B Food & Beverage
HR Human Resources
IRB Institutional Review Board
KSF Key Successful Factor
KMO Knowledge Motivation Organization
MFR Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
MFRIC Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee
MFRFC Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Faculty Committee
MUM Multi-Unit Manager
MUR Multi-Unit Restaurant
NRA National Restaurant Association
QSR Quick Service Restaurant
RIA Restaurant Innovation Accelerator
RIH Restaurant Innovation Hub
RRF Restaurant Revitalization Fund
SCAP Starbucks College Achievement Plan
UNLV The University of Nevada, Las Vegas

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The problem of practice addressed through this research is a gap of formal industry-based
education to serve the growing and changing restaurant sector within the hospitality industry in
the United States (U.S.). The restaurant industry includes restaurants, bars, and other food
service providers that allow customers to enter, order food, and eat on the premises, either
through commercial restaurant services, non-commercial restaurant services or military
restaurant services (National Restaurant Association, [NRA], 2020). U.S. industry-wide
restaurant sales reached US$ 863 billion in 2019 (NRA, 2019), equivalent to 4.2% of 2019 Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) of US$ 20.5 trillion (Trading Economics, 2019). The U.S. restaurant
industry employed 15.3 million people (NRA, 2019) in 2019, accounting 9.2% of the 165.7
million person labor force in 2019 (The World Bank Data, 2019). As such, the restaurant
industry is the nation’s second largest employer (Noguchi, 2020). Unfortunately, the restaurant
sector finished 2020 nearly 2.5 million jobs below its pre-coronavirus level (NRA, 2021b).
To effectively manage the growth in the restaurant industry and the complexity of
restaurant operations there is a demand for formal education related to the multi-disciplinary
restaurant education, particularly addressing the continued social distancing of COVID-19 (since
March 2020), digital infrastructure requirement of restaurant operations, and the restaurant of the
future. Each restaurant brand and operator need to quickly innovate for survival and growth.
Limited-service restaurants include quick service and fast casual restaurants (NRA, 2020). In the
context of this research, fast casual restaurants are defined in terms of service model (typically
pay before eating, similar to a quick service restaurant), atmosphere (casual ambiance; quick
service: standard décor) and price (US$ 10–12 average check per person; quick service: US$ 4–
6), as described by Canziani, Almanza, Frash, Mckeig and Sullivan-Reid (2016) research.
2

Examples of restaurants in the fast casual restaurant segment include Panera Bread, Chipotle
Mexican Grille, Panda Express, Five Guys Burgers and Fries, Wingstop, among many others
(Celentano, 2019).
This dissertation addresses the creation of a bachelor’s degree concentration focused on
the multi-unit fast casual restaurant (MFR) segment at the UNLV William F. Harrah College of
Hospitality (“the Harrah College” or “the College”). The new curriculum will be informed with
significant input from industry practitioners. These perspectives are important for UNLV
Hospitality College to ensure alignment with needs of an industry of significant scale and
continuing growth. Development of the MFR concentration would enable students to acquire the
necessary knowledge, skills and dispositions, and practical experience to succeed and lead in this
MFR industry, upon graduation from the MFR curriculum.
Background of the Problem
Fast casual is a fast-growing concept in the restaurant dining experience (Carman, 2019;
Celentano, 2019; Maze, 2019). The fast casual segment, launched in the 1990s and led by
Chipotle (Barron, 2012), came with the promise of healthy food prepared with better ingredients
than those at fast food chains. Fast casual quickly became popular in foodservice, driven in part
by the effects of the 2007–2008 Global Financial Crisis, pushing casual dining customers to
trade down, while also capturing young consumers, particularly millennials, who seek healthier,
higher-quality options (Carman, 2020; Klein, 2019b; Pittman & Oches, 2020). Consumers
observed the mostly industrial, brick and stainless-steel look at Chipotle, described as the
"Chipotle Experience” (Celentano, 2019). During the COVID-19 outbreak, the fast casual
restaurant industry showed a pressing need to practice digital infrastructure, curbside pick-up and
new delivery model. Therefore, it is imperative to develop an education framework to provide a
3

thorough multi-unit fast casual practice and training to satisfy the industry needs (Klein, 2020;
Reinstein, 2020).
As the economy shifted over time during 2010–2019, restaurant sales continuously
increased at a 4.3% Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR; NRA, 2019). However, the
restaurant industry provides one of the lowest median hourly wage of US$ 11.4 (U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics, May 2019), largely consists of very low-wage jobs with few benefits, and many
restaurant works live in poverty line, at 16.7% vs. 6.3% for workforce outside the restaurant
(Shierholz, 2014). Shierholz (2014) estimated a 43.1% live below twice the poverty line, a
threshold commonly used by researchers as a measure of what it takes for a family to make ends
meet. The restaurant industry’s 43.1% number is more than twice the 19.9% share outside the
restaurant industry.
Low educational attainment in the restaurant industry workforce may be one reason
resulting in low average salary. Educational attainment of bachelor’s degree and above for the
entire restaurant industry is relatively low at 10.0% (bachelor’s degree at 8.9% and Advanced
degree at 1.1%) versus 35.6% (bachelor’s degree at 23.1% and Advanced degree at 12.5%) for
the non-restaurant industry (Shierholz, 2014). For the major job types in the restaurant industry,
foodservice manager has the highest educational attainment of bachelor’ degree and above at
22.3%, with a breakdown of bachelor’s degree at 19.1% and advanced degree at 3.4%
(Shierholz, 2014). The foodservice manager number was estimated at 365,000 (accounting
2.35% of 15.56 million 2020 restaurant workforce, NRA, 2020). Consequently, a total of 81,395
(22.3% of 365,000) foodservice managers are estimated to possess a bachelor’s degree and
above.
4

The low educational attainment of the restaurant workforce urged me to look into the
supply of restaurant management degree programs. The latest available bachelor’s degree
graduate number of restaurant management and culinary students posted a total of 2,700
conferred graduates in 2016–2017 (Digest of Education Statistics 2019–2020) – breakdown in
864 students in restaurant management, and 1,836 students in culinary, bakery, and catering
management. However, no conferred associate degree statistics of restaurant management and
culinary programs are compiled by National Center for Education Statistics. Compared to the
number of foodservice managers with bachelor’s degree and above at 81,395, the education
institutions were seemingly unable to graduate enough of the restaurant industry-needed
management workforce in the U.S. (producing only 2,700 restaurant management bachelor’s
degrees annually). On the other hand, the restaurant workforce seems to see no need to obtain a
bachelor’s degree, let alone the supply side of restaurant management programs.
Amid the national shutdown of COVID-19 in the U.S. from mid-March 2020, NRA, on
April 20, 2020, reported a likely 8 million restaurant job loss out of an estimated 15.56 million
restaurant labor force in the U.S. (Luna, 2020). This eight million peak job loss was later
confirmed by the NRA (2021a). During the initial lockdown of the U.S. economy (due to the
social distancing and shuttered dining rooms), some limited-service restaurants, such as
Wingstop, Papa John’s Pizza, Domino’s Pizza, Dunkin' Donuts, El Pollo Loco actually reported
good sales numbers (Coley, 2020a, 2020b; Klein, 2020; Liddle, 2020; Luna, 2020b). These
strong-performing brands during the COVID-19 crisis are characterized by a heavy emphasis on
digital infrastructure, touchless payment system, online and app ordering, take-out service,
loyalty program, store locations equipped with the drive-through system, or allowed curbside
5

pickups (Beckett & Littman, 2020; Coley, 2021; Lalley, 2021; Reinstein 2020; Reinstein &
Hand, 2020; Wolfe, 2021).
Reinstein (2020) suggested COVID-19 may forever change the foodservice industry, and
a few restaurants are not ready or will not be ready to embrace the new changes. Some of the
noticeable restaurant operation changes include (a) increased use of delivery as a percent of total
foodservice sales; (b) push for greater supply chain transparency and tracking; (c) new
investment in take-out, drive-through & delivery units; (d) more efficient take-out & curbside
pick-up; (e) in-store self-ordering will be reinvented to a no-touch solution; (f) improved take-
out and delivery packaging; and (g) fast casual app-only drive-through pick-up. These suggested
changes of knowledge and skills behind the restaurant operations are actually seldom addressed
in the current restaurant management degree education in the U.S. Therefore, in order to close
industry-educational gaps, either from the pre or post COVID-19 lens, modern restaurant
management education programs should focus on fostering skills of multi-unit operation,
leadership, marketing & sales, customer service, and social distancing requirement (Baum et al.,
2020; DiPietro et al., 2007; Muller & DiPietro, 2006; Suboleski et al., 2009; Ye & Law, 2021).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The lack of a MFR educational pathway is an important problem to solve for a variety of
reasons. First, an estimated 61% of restaurant workers say they value the opportunity for career
advancement more than their current pay, and only a few large limited-service restaurant
operators are able to provide college-level sponsored programs to employees as an objective to
solve the high employment turnover crisis (Klein 2019; Sharma 2020). Those companies include
Chipotle, Starbucks, Papa John’s Pizza, Chick-fil-A, Taco Bell, McDonald’s, Pizza Hut and KFC
(Fantozzi, 2019). Secondly, the imperative need of the industry to practice digital infrastructure
6

and new delivery model during COVID-19 outbreak calls for a formal training in this area.
Industry needs operation guidance to practice the technology-enabled multi-unit restaurant
operations (Reinstein, 2020). Thirdly, the academic survey (Min et al., 2016) on restaurant
industry professionals recommends the hospitality curriculum to cover internship industry
experience, preparation for foodservice industry employment, leadership, human resources
management, hospitality management and organization, and ethics. A formal MFR curriculum
offered to students could equip students with academic rigor and relevant internship practice
opportunity. Lastly, it is important to address this problem because an MFR education program
could provide career pathway training for high school graduates as well as ensure college
graduates’ success in this career field and their ability to deal with change (Klein, 2018; Tesone
& Ricci, 2005).
Organizational Context and Mission
The Harrah College of UNLV is the No. 2 ranked hospitality program in the world,
following the Ecole hôtelière de Lausanne (QS World University Rankings, 2021). The Harrah
College enrolls 2,024 students as of Fall 2020, of whom 1,853 students are undergraduate and
171 graduate students (UNLV, 2021b). Of the undergraduate studies, there is only one major: the
Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management (BSHM). Graduate programs at the Harrah
College cover M.S. degree in hospitality management, online executive master of hospitality
administration (with hospitality track and gaming track), dual master’s degree (with M.S. in
management information system and with MBA), and Doctor of Philosophy in Hospitality
Administration.
The College plans to launch a MFR concentration by Fall 2022 under its BSHM degree
program. The current BSHM degree offers five concentrations, including Gaming Management,
7

Event Design & Management, Hospitality Beverage Management, Innovative Restaurant
Management, PGA Golf Management. The proposed MFR concentration would be its sixth
concentration. The College’s vision (UNLV Hospitality College, 2021c) is to pioneer the
advancement of global hospitality through innovative education, research, and service. Its core
values are being inclusive, driven, empowering, and adaptive. The College’s mission (UNLV
Hospitality College, 2021c) is to:
• Deliver resources and experiences that empower student, educator, and alumni success
• Engage in cutting-edge research that advances knowledge and moves industry forward
• Ensure our curriculum is responsive to the ever-changing needs of our constituents
• Be the model of exceptional service to our college, university, and community
Current Hospitality Management Degree Requirements at UNLV
The Hospitality Management Major offers a broad educational approach to a career in the
hospitality industry. Its varied course of study prepares students with both the management
theories and operational competencies necessary to enter any segment of the hospitality industry
upon graduation. In addition to the university's general education requirements, students take
classes specific to the industry including an introduction to hospitality, human resources
management, organizational behavior, facilities management, hospitality law and a course in
leadership, management, and ethics. Students can also study food sanitation, food service
operations, cost control, career development, financial and managerial accounting, hospitality
service management, and strategic management. All students must complete 1,000 hours of work
experience in the hospitality industry. Table 1 summarized the 120 total credit requirements for
Bachelor of Science degree in Hospitality Management at UNLV.
8

Table 1
Credit Requirement of Bachelor of Science in Hospitality Management at UNLV
Credit Type Credits Description
General
Education
Requirements
38
All UNLV undergraduates must fulfill the Core requirements by
successfully completing approved courses to satisfy each of the five
requirements.
Five Core Requirements (19 credits): First-Year Seminar (3
credits), English Composition (6 credits), Second-Year Seminar (3
credits), Constitutions (4 credits), Mathematics (3 credits)
Distribution requirements: 19 credits, satisfied by Major’s
requirements
- Humanities and Fine Arts (9 credits): COM 101 (Oral
Communication), One course from a different Humanities area,
One course in Fine Arts.
- Social Sciences (9 credits): One course from Analytical
Thinking, two courses from Life and Physical Sciences category;
at least one must have a lab.
Multicultural & International (6 credits): May overlap with general
education and major requirements
Major Degree
Requirement
for BS in
Hospitality
Management
67
Core Requirements Credits: 45 credits (15 courses)
- HMD 101: Foundations of Hospitality (3 credits)
- HMD 120: Introduction to the Hospitality Customer Experience
(3 credits)
- HMD 130: Fundamentals of Food & Beverage Operations (3
credits)
- HMD 200: Hospitality College Milestone (2 credits)
- HMD 205: Hospitality Human Resources Management (3
credits)
- HMD 220: Facilitating the Hospitality Customer Experience (3
credits)
- HMD 221: Hospitality Financial Accounting (3 credits)
- HMD 225: Foundations of Hospitality Leadership (3 credits)
- HMD 305: Managing Hospitality Organizational Behaviors (3
credits)
- HMD 310: Hospitality Operations and Employment Law (4
credits)
- HMD 330: Hospitality Purchasing and Cost Control (3 credits)
- HMD 340: Hospitality Financial Analysis (4 credits)
- HMD 350: Hospitality Marketing (3 credits)
- HMD 405: Hospitality Strategic Management (3 credits)
- HMD 440: Hospitality Revenue Management and Profit
Optimization (3 credits)

9

Credit Type Credits Description
Major Degree
Requirement
for BS in
Hospitality
Management
67
Culminating Experience Requirements - Credits: 6 (two courses)
- Food and Beverage Culminating Experience (FAB 410)
- Hospitality Internship Culminating Experience (HMD 400)
- Integrated Resorts Culminating Experience (HMD 410)
- Hospitality Industry Projects Culminating Experience (HMD
480)
- Meetings/Events Culminating Experience (TCA 41)
Hospitality Management Electives: 16 credits, 9 credits must be
upper division (300/400 level)
Open
Electives
15 Six credits must be upper division (300/400 level)
Total Credits 120

The Hospitality Management Major entails a required 67 credits including 16 credits of
hospitality management elective courses in Table 1. The BSHM’s wide range of hospitality
curriculum allows students to customize their educational experience based on their personal
interests through the selection of the culminating experience courses and elective courses. Table
2 shows the required courses for the four concentrations within the BSHM degree.

10

Table 2
Four Concentrations for B.S. Degree in Hospitality Management at UNLV
Gaming Management Course Code Credits
Introduction to Gaming Management GAM 225 3
Gaming Management I GAM 334 3
Casino Marketing GAM 440 3
Two Concentration Electives

6
Industry Computer Applications for Hospitality & Tourism
Hotel Administration Seminar
Protection of Casino Table Games
Gaming Device Management
Problem Gambling
Accounting for the Gaming Industry
Casino Industry Regulation
Sociology of Gambling
Quantitative Methods and Applications in Casino Gaming
Gaming Innovations
eSports Gambling Innovation Lab
Special Topics in Gaming Operations
HMD 226
HMD 455
GAM 339
GAM 340
GAM 342
GAM 426
GAM 437
GAM 442
GAM 470
GAM 480
GAM 485
GAM 495

6
Total Gaming Required Credits 15
Event Design and Management Concentration Course Code Credits
Introduction of Global Event Management TCA 210 3
The Event Proposal Process TCA 301 3
Event Sales and Marketing TCA 311 3
Food and Beverage Essentials for Event Executives TCA 371 3
One Approved Elective:
Culture and Cuisine
Global Trade Show Operations

FAB 333
TCA 476
3
Total Required Credits 15
Hospitality Beverage Management Concentration Course Code Credits
Bar Operations Management FAB 290 3
Spirits and Liqueurs of the World FAB 362 3
Wines of the World FAB 363 3
Beers of the World FAB 367 3
Approved Elective: Culture and Cuisine FAB 333 3
Total Required Credits 15

11

Innovative Restaurant Management Course Code Credits
Gastronomy Essentials FAB 230 3
Restaurant Sustainability Studies FAB 330 3
The Science of Cuisine FAB 475 3
Food & Beverage Innovation and Entrepreneurship FAB 355 3
One Approved Elective:
Culture and Cuisine
Special Topics in Food Service Management

FAB 333
FAB 366
3
Total Required Credits 15
All concentration Courses must be completed with a C or better

Note. From Hospitality Management Degree Introduction by UNLV Hospitality College,
2021a.

Although it is not required, students can elect to declare a concentration to provide an
opportunity to focus their open elective credits (15 credits) toward a specific concentration area
of study. Students can choose to enroll any of the four concentrations in Table 2. For the PGA
golf management concentration (for a total of 26 credits), it will go through a separate petition
and testing process. Sixteen months of internship at approved golf facilities and successful
completion of the PGA's player's ability test and qualifying level, Level 1, 2, and 3 examinations
are required.
In January 2020, Dean Stowe Shoemaker of UNLV Hospitality College created the first
potential new courses for the multi-unit fast casual concentration, as summarized in Table 3. Dr.
Shoemaker suggested the course portfolio and body of knowledge were intended to serve as
information background of the research. The objective of course portfolio aims at (a) Framing
the academic foundation of MFR education through a course portfolio, (b) facilitating the
formation of Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee (MFRIC), (c) identifying
the to-be-included body of knowledge that reflect the likely new fast casual restaurant operation
12

reality in the U.S., particularly after the occurrence of COVID-19 (Luna, 2020a; Reinstein,
2020), (d) serving as the MFR curriculum design basis for further modification through the
subject research, (e) inviting industry partner to sponsor the new MFR curriculum at the UNLV
Hospitality College. This course portfolio list and body of knowledge have occasionally been
expanded and revised in the past 16 months.

Table 3
Potential New Courses for Multi-Unit Fast Casual Concentration
Course Name Body of Knowledge
Supply Chain
Management
- Understanding the supply chain;
- Supply chain drivers and metrics;
- Planning and coordinating demand and supply in a supply chain;
- Demand forecasting in a supply chain;
- Planning and managing inventories in a supply chain;
- Linking product availability to profits; and
- The significance of shifting from a supply chain mentality to a value chain
mentality.
Restaurant
Marketing
- Why marketing has moved from the Four P's to the 7 P's to now the 15 C's;
- The consumer purchase cycle and how marketing tactics and strategies
move the consumer through this cycle;
- Customer segmentation;
- Developing marketing plans;
- Social media strategies and tactics; and
- The role of artificial intelligence in marketing strategy development.
New Product
Development
- Product development fundamentals;
- How to generate concepts and use consumer insight to determine which
concepts should be continued further and which should be discontinued;
- Different methods of testing new products;
- Ways to understand the impact of a new product on the whole system; and
- The how's and why's of bringing onboard supply chain partners when
considering developing new products.

13

Course Name Body of Knowledge
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
Development
and
Management
- Writing a comprehensive manual that serves as the foundation for the
organization and its training programs;
- Setting up quality control systems for maintaining brand image and quality
standards;
- How to protect intellectual property and other intangible assets; and
- Different organizational charts needed to manage the business.
Restaurant
Concept
Growth
Strategies
- Advantages and disadvantages of franchising, joint ventures, management
contracts, or sole ownership;
- Negotiating leases;
- Site location analysis; and
- Understanding how to gain access to affordable debt and equity capital.
Food Service
Equipment
and Supplies
- How menu drives equipment and supply choices;
- Matching equipment choices and their performance parameters with
operational demand requirements;
- The role of Total Cost of Ownership when selecting equipment;
- The growing role and impact of advanced technology equipment (robots,
etc.) and software in restaurant operations;
- The role that proper equipment selection and operator training have on
optimizing operational workflow; and
- The relationship between effective workflow optimization and equipment
choice.
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
Restaurant
Operations
- Designing for workflow optimization – the right systems, equipment
training, and layout;
- The role and importance of ensuring quality and product consistency;
- The growing role of technology in Multi-Unit Fast Casual establishments –
hardware and software;
- How to design and implement a culture of sustainability into the
organization; and
- The role of teamwork and training to ensure successful, long-term
operations.
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
Quantitative
Analytics
- Using statistics to determine staffing requirements;
- Examining price sensitivity of different menu items;
- Determining what items tend to be purchased with each other and how this
information can be used in a bundling strategy;
- Methods for comparing within-store data and between-store data to better
understand trends;
- Time and motion studies to improve throughput; and
- Activity-based pricing.

14

The College received a US$ 5 million gift from Panda Express co-founders Andrew and
Peggy Cherng to support new MFR management program in September 2020 (UNLV News
Center, 2020b). The gift would support (a) hiring a full-time Hospitality College faculty member
to design a comprehensive fast-casual curriculum as well as teach courses and (b) Development
and launch of a 15-credit fast-casual academic concentration offered as part of the College’s
BSHM degree. The plan also included offering a few courses in fast-casual restaurant field
during the Fall 2021 semester and to develop a full MFR curriculum concentration for Fall 2022.
Current Hospitality Management Programs in the U.S.
Currently, there are over 200 undergraduate hospitality and tourism degree programs in
the U.S. (Alexakis & Jiang, 2019) and 28 regionally accredited institution offering 4-year
foodservice-related bachelor’s degrees or minors (Harrington et al., 2005b). In the 2016–2017
education statistics, there is a total of 11,422 bachelor graduates were conferred hospitality,
tourism, meeting & event planning, resort and casino management, and a total of 2,700 students
confirmed restaurant, culinary, baking and foodservice management degrees (Digest of
Education Statistics 2019–2020).
Description of Stakeholder Group
This study focuses on three stakeholder groups: (a) MFRIC, (b) MFR Faculty Committee
(MFRFC), and (c) recruiting team.
Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee
The MFRIC, the advisory team of the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum,
was formed in September 2020 with an objective to provide the practical industry knowledge to
the MFR concentration program. MFRIC was established with industry participants, scholars,
and Dean’s global advisory board members (UNLV Hospitality College, 2021b). MFRIC is a
15

representative group to the broader restaurant industry participants, comprised of a total of 12
members, and chaired by Ms. Kathleen Wood. She currently serves as CEO of Kathleen Wood
Enterprises (KWP), and she is former President of Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers.
Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Faculty Committee
The MFRFC, the execution team of the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum,
will be formed by September 2021. The MFRFC will be established with core faculty and career
office of the College to implement the MFR program for the first student intake in September
2022. The MFRFC will likely be comprised of 6–7 faculty members (may include one new hire
of tenure-based restaurant management professor and two industry-based lecturers), and one
from Boughner Career Center of the College. MFRFC will be chaired by Dean of UNLV
Hospitality College. Upon MFRFC’s installment by September 2021, MFRFC will be working
with MFRIC and recruiting team to formally drive the full MFR curriculum implementation to
meet the first student intake timeline by September 2022. The student intake may come from the
current BSHM degree students to claim MFR concentration, transfer students from other
UNLV’s colleges, transfer-in students from other universities of various majors (hospitality,
computer science, business administration, etc.), or newly admitted UNLV undergraduate
students.
Recruiting Team
The recruiting team refers to the marketing and recruiting taskforce team at UNLV
Hospitality College. This group plays an important role to achieve the goal of establishing the
MFR concentration program. The recruiting team will be working with various organizations to
recruit both traditional and non-traditional students to attend the College. Two additional hires of
industry-based lecturers for MFRFC could also help the recruiting effort reaching out to various
16

culinary school programs, community colleges, and business analytics community. The main
responsibility of recruiting team will include (a) Plan, execute and administer all MFR
curriculum’s recruiting activities, (b) Serve as the fast casual restaurant industry liaison to
understanding the corporate training and hiring needs with and from UNLV Hospitality College,
(c) Maintain relationships with department heads, alumni and administrative staff and provide
interface with all candidate students, (d) Attending college career fairs and industry trade shows,
interacting with students, and promoting the MFR curriculum brand to employers and high
schools, (e) Screening resumes, conducting interviews and performing skills assessment tests for
the student internships.
Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals
Table 4 presents the organizational mission, organizational performance goal, and
stakeholder performance goals that guides this study.

17

Table 4
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission of UNLV Hospitality College
The mission is to pioneer the advancement of global hospitality through innovative education,
research and service for students, educators and industry partners around the world.
Organizational Performance Goal
By September 2022, UNLV Hospitality College will establish the Multi-unit Fast Casual
Restaurant concentration program with an incoming class of 20 students.
MFR Industry Committee
(MFRIC)
In September 2020, MFRIC was
established with industry
participants, industry scholars,
and Dean’s global advisory board
members of UNLV Hospitality
College to provide the practical
industry knowledge to the MFR
concentration program.
MFR Faculty Committee
(MFRFC)
By September 2021, the
MFRFC will be established
with core faculty and career
office to plan and implement
the program for the first
cohort of students in
September 2022.
Recruiting Team
By July 2022, 20 high-
qualified students will have
been recruited and the
concentration to populate
the new MFR program.

Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the joint efforts of all stakeholders shall contribute to the achievement of the
overall UNLV Hospitality College’s organizational goal, it is important to understand the
industry demand of such curriculum lies in a rapidly changing restaurant operation field. MFR
Industry Committee (MFRIC) is the main stakeholder of this research. The research process
focused on MFRIC’s contribution of practical industry knowledge. Through interviews with
MFRIC members and human resources leaders, this study has identified the current and future
shifts in theory and practice that need to be reflected in a modern MFR curriculum. The proposed
course portfolio was reviewed by MFRIC first, and through the industry human resources online
survey and interviews, such curriculum course and the respective body of knowledge of each
18

course have be further polished and reconciled among a broader base of industry practitioners,
faculty and administration staff.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this study is two-fold: (a) to conduct the industry survey for knowledge,
skills and dispositions that a future MFR manager needs to possess, and (b) to recommend
knowledge, motivation, and organizational solution necessary to reach the organizational
performance goal that UNLV Hospitality College will successfully launch the MFR
concentration program with an incoming class of 20 students by September 2022.
The analysis begun by interviewing MFRIC members to learn the knowledge, skills and
dispositions of a future MFR manager, and by obtaining their individual feedback toward the
proposed course portfolio of MFR curriculum. The study then moved to survey and interview the
industry human resources managers of their opinions that a future MFR manager shall possess.
Lastly, the research adopted Clark and Estes’s (2008) framework and focused MFRIC as the
analysis stakeholder unit to develop knowledge, motivation ,organization (KMO)
recommendation for UNLV Hospitality College. As such, the questions that guided this research
are the following:
1. What knowledge, skills, and dispositions do future managers in the Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant (MFR) industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard
and the industry expectation?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related
to establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College?
19

Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The gap analysis of Clark and Estes (2008), a systematic analytical method, was
undertaken to clarify organizational goals and to identify the knowledge, motivation, and
organization barriers in order to establishing the MFR curriculum. Assumed knowledge,
motivation and organizational needs were generated based on personal knowledge and related
literature. The methodological framework is an exploratory mixed method. These needs were
validated by using MFRIC member interviews, human resources manager surveys and
interviews, literature review and content analysis. Research-based solutions were recommended
and evaluated in a comprehensive manner.
Definition
• Casual Dining: A casual dining restaurant is a full-service restaurant with a fun,
comfortable, laid-back atmosphere and affordably priced menu. TGI Fridays, Chili’s and
Applebee’s are leading household casual dining brands in the U.S (Celentano, 2019).
Casual dining restaurants had an ACPP (Average Per-Person Check) between US$ 15–24
per meal (Dixon et al., 2018). These restaurants offered full service, including waiter or
waitress table service and offer liquor, beer, and wine.
Typical characteristics of a casual dining restaurant includes (a) Price point is
$15–24 per meal on average, (b) more extensive menu, with additional chicken, fish, and
beef dishes to choose from, (c) normally serve alcohol with a bar in house, (d) Ambiance
tends to be more “upscale” than a QSR or fast casual location, (e) over-sized booths
combined with tables and chairs made of similar upscale materials, (f) offers more
comfortable seating with booth and table options, paired with dimmer lighting.
20

• Fast Casual Restaurants: Fast casual restaurant, such as Chipotle Mexican Grill and
Panera Bread, is a blending of the fast food and casual dining experiences. Fast-casual
chains emerged just more than decade ago with the promise of higher-quality food in a
limited-service format (Maze, 2019). These restaurants prepared food to order with fresh
(or perceived as fresh) ingredients; units serve innovative food suited to more
sophisticated tastes, in an upscale interior design (Canziani et al., 2016). These
establishments mostly offered innovative ethnic-based foods and did not offer table
service (Dixon et al., 2018). Fast casual restaurant growth and popularity had far
surpassed any other segment in the past 10 years (Canziani et al., 2016). The industry
trend is making QSR brand more “softer” and upgrade it to fast casual concept.
Typical characteristics of a fast-casual restaurant include (a) Average Per-Person
Check (ACPP) US$ 5–10 per meal (Dixon et al., 2018), (b) utilize locally sourced
produce and other artisan ingredients, (c) prepare food on-site in front of the guest, (d)
guests place order at the counter then wait in the assembly area, (e) offer healthier
options, including gluten free and vegetarian dishes, (f) usually does not offer table
service - guests place order at the counter then wait in the assembly area, (g) usually no
drive-through.
• Industry Practitioners: Refers to the human resources managers as the research proxy
(Goss-Turner, 1999) at the MFR companies, such as Chipotle, Panera Bread, Panda
Express, and Wingstop.
• Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant (MFR): Fast casual restaurants operating in the chain
restaurant format.
21

• Multi-Unit Manager (MUM): Defined the position as a first-line corporate management
level immediately above the single-unit operator manager and may carry the title of area
manager or regional manager, placed between single-unit manager and senior executive
responsibility (Goss-Turner, 1999).
• Multi-Unit Restaurant (MUR): Defined as an organization competing in the food service
industry with more than one unit of a like concept of theme restaurant (Goss-Turner,
1999).
• Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee (MFRIC): The advisory team of
the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum, was formed in September 2020 with
an objective to provide the practical industry knowledge to the MFR concentration
program. MFRIC was established with industry participants, industry scholars, and
Dean’s global advisory board members of UNLV Hospitality College. MFRIC is a
representative group to the broader restaurant industry participants.
• Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Faculty Committee (MFRFC): The execution team of
the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum, will be formed by September 2021.
MFRFC will be established with core faculty and career office of UNLV Hospitality
College to implement the MFR program for the first student intake in September 2022.
• QSR (Fast Food): A quick service restaurant (QSR), also known as a fast food restaurant
within the industry. The name brand QSR includes McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy’s,
and Domino’s Pizza. The QSR is a specific type of restaurant that serves fast food cuisine
and has minimal table service. Fast food restaurants are typically part of a restaurant
chain or franchise operation that provides standardized ingredients and/or partially
prepared foods and supplies then to each restaurant through controlled supply channels.
22

The term "fast food" was recognized in a dictionary by Merriam–Webster in 1951. These
restaurants had a per-person check average under US$ 6 (Dixon et al., 2018) and may
have some dollar value meal (Dixon et al., 2018).
Typical characteristics of a QSR restaurant include (a) price point usually ranges
from US$ 4–6 per meal (Canziani et al., 2016),(b) limited menus which usually consist of
handheld sandwiches/burgers, wraps, and a limited selection of salads (which are pre-
packaged), (c) offer plastic seating, tabletops, table service rarely provided, (d) food is
most often taken to-go, and (e) suburban stores usually have drive-through.
• UNLV Hospitality College: The Harrah College of Hospitality at the University of Nevada,
Las Vegas (“UNLV Hospitality College” or “the College”) has consistently been ranked
as one top two hospitality program in the world (QS World University Rankings 2018–
2021).
Organization of the Study
Five chapters are used to organize this study. This chapter provides the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about growth and trends in MFR
industry and MFR education. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders as well as the
initial concepts of gap analysis are introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current
literature surrounding the scope of the study. Three topics are addressed: (a) the U.S. restaurant
industry, (b) hospitality and tourism studies in higher education, (c) stakeholder knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences toward UNLV Hospitality College. Chapter Three
takes an exploratory mixed method approach to learn the industry needs of the MFR curriculum
and then to reconcile the industry needs of the proposed MFR curriculum. In Chapter Four, the
data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter Five provides solutions, based on data and
23

literature, to address the needs, to close the performance gap, to establish this new concentration
program, and to recommend an implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

24

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
A review of literature related to this innovation case study yields a clear overview of the
trends and demands within the restaurant industry. It also provides insight and guidance to
understand the reasons behind the need for MFR curriculum. To close the industry-education skill
gaps, it is essential to first understand hospitality and foodservice industry trends and its recent
transformation of fast casual restaurant segments, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic
(since March 2020) in the U.S. In an exploration of the current industry needs for multi-unit fast
casual education, it is vital to define skills competencies and to identify key successful factors of
MUMs.
There are three sections in Chapter Two. The first section covers the U.S. restaurant
industry. In this section, the industry analysis covers (a) restaurant industry food and drinks sales,
(b) restaurant segmentation, (c) restaurant workforce projection and employment wage, (d) fast
casual restaurant sales. The second section examines the hospitality and tourism studies in higher
education. In this section, the literature review covers five aspects as related to the research
questions and research method design: (a) hospitality and tourism curriculum, (b) food and
beverage education, (c) multi-unit restaurant, (d) fast casual restaurant, (e) skills and knowledge
competencies. The third section addresses stakeholder knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences.
The U.S. Restaurant Industry
The U.S. restaurant industry was projected at US$ 899 billion in sales for 2020 by the
NRA, the main trade association for the industry in the U.S. The restaurant industry employs
15.56 million people in 2020 and projects to grow to 17.20 million by the end of 2030, a 10.5%
increase (NRA, 2020). The effect of the 2020 coronavirus epidemic and safer at home orders
25

started in mid-March 2020, and it was projected to be a US$ 240 billion in losses through the end
of 2020 (Luna, 2020a). In terms of the industry sizing of the U.S. restaurant industry, the
research stays with the pre-COVID numbers, because the on-going COVID impact makes the
quantification of sales number difficult at this moment. As of May 2021, the whole country (the
U.S.) is still underway the vaccination and reopening of the economics (West, 2021).
Restaurant Industry Food and Drinks Sales
Table 5 illustrated the food and drinks sales venue breakdown (NRA, 2020). 2019 sales
of limited-service restaurants were estimated at US$ 249.8 billion, accounting 28.9% of 2019 all
Food and Drink sales at US$ 864.3 billion. In 2021 “State of Restaurant Industry” report, NRA
provided a guidance of 2020 actual sales at US$ 659.0 billion (NRA, 2021c), a $240 billion drop
(26.7% decrease) from the 2020 guidance (pre COVID-19) at US$ 898.9 billion. 2021 sales are
forecasted at US$ 731.5 billion, a 11.0% increase from the 2020 actual sales.
Technomic, a foodservice research company, reported on April 2, 2021 that 2020
restaurant sales at the Top 500 Chain fell 8% with the breakdown of Top 50 chain of 0.8%
decline and Top 51–500 chain of 19.4% drop (Maze, 2021) vs. the NRA’s national sales decline
of 26.7% in 2020 (NRA, 2021c). These 2020 sales figures seem to suggest “Restaurant Sales
Divide” among larger chains, smaller chains and independent restaurants, given various
restaurant company levels of IT investment (as a percentage of sales) and digital readiness
preparation work prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. 2021 top sales increase performers were
attributed to take-out (Maze, 2021), as evidenced by Wingstop (21% sales increase in 2020),
Domino’s (17.6%), Chick-fil-A (13.0%), Chipotle (6.5%), Wendy’s (4.8%), McDonald’s (0.3%)
and Taco Bell (0%).
26

Table 5
Restaurant Industry Food and Drinks Sales, Projection for 2020
Food and Drinks Sales Venue
2018
sales
(billions)
2019
sales
(billions)
2020
sales
(billions)
%
Change
2019
%
Change
2020
Commercial Restaurant Services
(1)
$767.8 $796.9 $828.8 3.8% 4.0%
Total eating-and-drinking places $592.0 $615.9 $640.3 4.0% 4.0%
Eating places $570.8 $593.9 $617.5 4.0% 4.0%
Full-service restaurants
(2)
$274.8 $285.0 $295.3 3.7% 3.6%
Limited-service restaurants
(3)
$239.1 $249.8 $260.8 4.5% 4.4%
Cafeterias, grill-buffets and buffets
(4)

$6.1 $6.0 $5.9 -1.6% -1.7%
Snack and nonalcoholic beverage
bars
$41.8 $43.7 $45.8 4.5% 4.8%
Social caterers $9.0 $9.4 $9.8 4.4% 4.3%
Bars and taverns (with Alcohol) $21.2 $22.0 $22.8 3.8% 3.6%
Other
(5)
$175.8 $181.0 $188.7 3.0% 4.3%
Noncommercial Restaurant Services
(6)

$62.5 $64.5 $66.9 3.2% 3.7%
Military Restaurant Services
(7)
$2.8 $2.9 $3.0 3.6% 3.4%
TOTAL $833.1 $864.3 $898.9 3.7% 4.0%
Footnote:
(1).
Data are given only for establishments with payroll.
(2).
Waiter/waitress service is provided, and the order is taken while the patron is seated.
Patrons pay after they eat.
(3).
Patrons generally order at a cash register/kiosk or select items from a food bar and pay
before they eat.
(4).
Formerly commercial cafeterias.
(5).
Consists of the following categories: managed services, lodging, retail-host restaurants
(health-and-personal-care-store restaurants, general-merchandise-store restaurants, variety-
store restaurants, food-store restaurants and grocery-store restaurants, gasoline-service-
station restaurants and miscellaneous retailers); recreation and sports (includes movies,
bowling lanes, recreation and sport centers); mobile catering; vending and non-store
retailers (includes sales of hot food, sandwiches, pastries, coffee and other hot beverages).
(6).
Business, educational, governmental or institutional organizations that operate their own
restaurant services.
(7).
Continental United States only.
Note. From State of the Industry by National Restaurant Association, 2019, and State of the
Industry, by National Restaurant Association, 2020.
27

Restaurant Segmentation
The restaurant industry comprises many fragmented units ranging from QSR to fine
dining restaurants (Dixon et al., 2018). The industry continued to be independently operated and
owned by many business owners. Dixon et al. (2018) provided the restaurant segmentation into
five respective categories, which is similar to the restaurant segment definition by the NRA.
1. Quick service restaurants (fast food) – The name brand QSR includes McDonalds, Burger
King, Wendy’s, KFC, Pizza Hut. The QSR is a specific type of restaurant that serves fast
food cuisine and has minimal table service. Fast food restaurants are typically part of a
restaurant chain or franchise operation that provides standardized ingredients and/or
partially prepared foods and supplies then to each restaurant through controlled supply
channels. These restaurants had a per-person check average under US$ 6 (Dixon et al.,
2018).
2. Fast casual restaurants – The name brand fast casual restaurant includes Chipotle, Panda
Express, Five Guys Burgers and Panera Bread. The fast-casual restaurant is a healthier
and fresher menu than the fast food restaurants with an upscale interior (Canziani et al.,
2016; DiPietro, 2017). These establishments offered innovative ethnic-based foods and
did not offer table service (Dixon et al., 2018). Fast casual restaurant growth and
popularity had far surpassed any other segment in the past ten years (Canziani et al.,
2016). The industry trend is making QSR brand more “softer” and upgrade it to fast
casual concept. These restaurants had a per-person check average under US$ 5–10
(Dixon et al., 2018).
3. Family dining restaurants or diners – The name brand family dining restaurant includes
Perkins, Denny’s, Village Inn, and popular independently owned or operated family
28

diners. These restaurants offered full service, including waiter or waitress table service.
These restaurants had a per-person check average under US$ 8–14 (Dixon et al., 2018).
4. Casual dining restaurants – The name brand family dining restaurant includes Outback
Steakhouse, Carraba’s Italian Grille, Chili’s, and Applebee’s. These restaurants offered
full service, including waiter or waitress table service and offer liquor, beer, and wine.
These restaurants had a per-person check average under US$ 15–24 (Dixon et al., 2018).
5. Fine dining restaurants – The name brand fine dining restaurant includes Capital Grille,
Ruth’s Chris Steak House, and Roy’s Hawaiian Fusion. Generally defined as tablecloth
establishments, these restaurants were full service, offered waiter or waitress table service
and offered liquor, beer, and wine. These restaurants had a per-person check average
exceeding US$ 25 (Dixon et al., 2018).
Table 6
2018 Total Restaurant and Bars Sales
Segment 2018 Sales (Billions) Percentage of Share
Limited-service restaurants $289.6 48.0%
Fast Food $234.3 38.9%
Fast Casual $55.4 9.2%
Full-Service Restaurant $266.7 44.2%
Midscale $47.2 7.8%
Casual Dining $191.9 31.8%
Fine Dining $27.6 4.6%
Bars and Taverns (with Alcohol) $46.6 7.7%
Total Restaurant and Bars Sales $602.9 100.0%

Source: Wells Fargo Bank/Technomic, 2019 State of the Restaurant Industry.
In Table 6, Technomic provided the breakdown of 2018 sales breakdown between Fast
Food (US$ 234.3 billion) and Fast Casual (US$ 55.4 billion), taking limited-service restaurant
29

sales at US$ 289.6 billion, a 21.1% higher than NRA’s at US$ 239.1 billion as shown in Table 5.
However, NRA’s data in Table 5 did not provide the sales breakdown of limited-service
restaurant into “Fast Food” and “Fast Casual.”
Restaurant Workforce Projection and Employment Wage
According to the NRA (2020) data in Table 7, the restaurant workforce projection from
2020 to 2030 is estimated to increase from 15.56 million to 17.20 million, of which foodservice
manager is projected to increase from 365,000 to 405,000 in a 10-year time horizon. The food
service manager position only accounts 2.34% of the of the total restaurant workforce of 15.56
million in 2020, of which group has the highest educational attainment of bachelor’ degree and
above at 22.3% in the restaurant industry.

Table 7
Restaurant Workforce Projection from 2020 to 2030
Occupation Note 2020 2030
Number
of Job
Increase
Total %
Change
Total Restaurant Industry
Employment
(A) =
B+C+H
15,560,000 17,200,000 1,640,000 10.5%
Foodservice Managers (B) 365,000 405,000 40,000 11.0%
Food Preparation and Serving-
Related Occupations
(C) =
D+E+F
+G
14,110,000 15,650,000 1,540,000 10.9%
Supervisors, food preparation
and serving workers
(D) 1,169,000 1,304,000 135,000 11.5%

30

Occupation Note 2020 2030
Number
of Job
Increase
Total %
Change
Chefs and head cooks 144,000 161,000 17,000 11.8%
First-line Supervisors /
managers of food preparation
and serving workers
1,025,000 1,143,000 118,000 11.5%
Cooks and food preparation
workers
(E) 3,458,000 3,777,000 319,000 9.2%
Cooks

2,588,000 2,827,000 239,000 9.2%
Cooks, fast food

492,000 500,000 8,000 1.6%
Cooks, institution and
cafeteria

425,000 470,000 45,000 10.6%
Cooks, private household

38,000 39,000 1,000 2.6%
Cooks, restaurant

1,450,000 1,630,000 180,000 12.4%
Cooks, short order

160,000 163,000 3,000 1.9%
Cooks, all other

23,000 25,000 2,000 8.7%
Food preparation workers

870,000 950,000 80,000 9.2%
Food and beverage serving
workers
(F) 7,996,000 8,979,000 983,000 12.3%
Bartenders

658,000 718,000 60,000 9.1%
Fast food and counter
workers

4,364,000 4,970,000 606,000 13.9%
Combined food preparation
and serving workers, including
fast food

3,874,00
0
4,450,000 576,000 14.9%
Counter attendants,
cafeteria, food concession, and
coffee shop

490,000 520,000 30,000 6.1%
Waiters and waitresses

2,694,000 2,977,000 283,000 10.5%
Food servers, non-restaurant

280,000 314,000 34,000 12.1%
Other food preparation and
serving-related workers
(G) 1,487,000 1,590,000 103,000 6.9%
Dining room and cafeteria
attendants and bartender helpers

475,000 515,000 40,000 8.4%
Dishwashers

520,000 542,000 22,000 4.2%
Hosts and hostesses,
restaurant, and coffee shop

434,000 470,000 36,000 8.3%

31

Occupation Note 2020 2030
Number
of Job
Increase
Total %
Change
All other food preparation
and serving-related workers

58,000 63,000 5,000 8.6%
Other Eating-and-Drinking-
Place Occupations (Note)
(H) 1,085,000 1,145,000 60,000 5.5%

Note. Includes operational, business, financial, entertainment, sales, administrative and
transportation occupations. From State of the Industry by National Restaurant Association,
2020.

According to the latest available hourly wage information from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics (May 2019), the national annual mean wage of 10.82 million restaurant employees
stands at US$ 26,600, shown in Table 8 (NAICS 722500). It is worthwhile to note the 2019
restaurant workforce number difference between the U.S. Bureau of Labor’s at 10.82 million and
NRA’s at 15.30 million.

Table 8
Selected Employment and Wage Estimates of Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Occupation
Code
Occupation Title
Employ-
ment
% of Total
Employ-
ment
Median
Hourly
Wage
Mean
Hourly
Wage
Annual
Mean
Wage
11-3021
Computer and
Information Systems
Managers
30 <0.05% $61.1 $66.3 $137,910
11-3031 Financial Managers 520 <0.05% $60.7 $63.6 $132,240
11-3121
Human Resources
Managers
350 <0.05% $60.2 $54.4 $113,170
11-1000 Top Executives 76,830 0.7% $29.5 $38.5 $80,070
11-1021
General and
Operations Managers
75,760 0.7% $29.3 $38.1 $79,240
32

Occupation
Code
Occupation Title
Employ-
ment
% of Total
Employ-
ment
Median
Hourly
Wage
Mean
Hourly
Wage
Annual
Mean
Wage
11-0000
Management
Occupations
252,000 2.3% $26.4 $31.0 $64,550
13-1070
Human Resources
Workers
2,510 0.02% $26.2 $27.6 $57,350
11-9000
Other Management
Occupations
172,240 1.6% $25.4 $27.4 $56,980
11-9051
Food Service
Managers
171,040 1.6% $25.4 $27.4 $56,880
35-1011
Chefs and Head
Cooks
66,790 0.6% $23.1 $25.8 $53,570
35-1010
Supervisors of Food
Prep. and Serving
Workers
823,920 7.6% $15.7 $17.8 $37,110
51-3011 Bakers 39,100 0.4% $12.5 $13.3 $27,750
00-0000 All Occupations 10,816,680 100.0% $11.4 $12.8 $26,600
35-2000
Cooks and Food
Preparation Workers
2,239,960 20.7% $12.2 $12.7 $26,370
35-2021
Food Preparation
Workers
439,240 4.1% $11.6 $11.9 $24,660
35-0000
Food Preparation and
Serving-Related
Occupations
9,728,540 89.9% $11.4 $12.5 $25,910
35-9021 Dishwashers 382,640 3.5% $11.4 $11.5 $23,920
35-2011 Cooks, Fast Food 509,540 4.7% $11.3 $11.3 $23,500
35-3000
Food and Beverage
Serving Workers
5,567,510 51.5% $10.7 $11.8 $24,440
35-3023
Fast Food and
Counter Workers
3,150,590 29.1% $10.6 $10.9 $22,670

Note. From May 2019 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates, NAICS 722500, Restaurants and Other Eating Places by U.S. Bureau of Labor, 2019.

In Table 8, the restaurant industry provides one of the lowest median hourly wage of US$
11.4 and median hourly wage at US$ 12.8 in the U.S. The three highest-wage positions of a total
33

of 900 employment count in the restaurant industry are computer & information system
managers (US$ 137,910, for a total of 30 headcounts), followed by financial managers (US$
132,240, for a total of 520) and human resources managers (US$ 113,170, for a total of 350).
The number of 20 computer and information systems managers (abbreviated as “IT manager”) in
the restaurant industry suggested one IT manager per 30,000 restaurants (an estimated total of
600,000 restaurants in the U.S.; NRA, 2021b), further showing the scarcity of IT managers in the
restaurant industry. IT manager was making 2.42x of the foodservice managers, who posted an
annual mean wage at US$ 56,880 in 2019. The foodservice manager earning power was 2.14x
multiples of annual mean wage of all restaurant workforce (US$ 26,600) in the U.S.
Fast Casual Restaurant Sales
In 2009, there were about 17,300 fast-casual units in the U.S. with sales of US$ 19.0
billion, according to the market research firm Technomic (Carman, 2020). By 2019, the latest
statistics available, fast-casuals had nearly tripled their locations (48,666 units) and sales (US$
55.4 billion), which translated a CAGR of 12.6% over the 10-year period (Technomic, 2019).
The lines between fast food and fast casual are increasingly blurred, especially in the age of
advanced ordering technology, delivery services, fancier dine-in booths, and marketing that
focuses on fresh ingredients (Thompson & Alexander, 2020).
Top 25 Fast Casual Restaurant Ranked by the U.S. Sales is provided in Table 9, by
Technomic, the latest available. Even within Top 25 fast casual chain, annual sales per unit also
varies from US$ 0.70 million per unit (Firehouse Subs) to US$ 6.69 million per unit, depending
on its operating hours per day and dayparts, food concepts, and store footprint size.
FastCasual.com has long history of coverage on the news, events, trend and people in the fast
casual restaurant industry segment. “2021 Fast Casual Top 100 Movers & Shakers” report
34

(FastCasual.com, 2021) offers a good latest industry trend but does not offer sales statistics
information of each fast casual restaurant company.

Table 9
Top 25 Fast Casual Restaurant Ranked by the U.S. Sales
No. Restaurant
2018 Sales
($'000)
2018
# of Units
2018 Sales
Per
Unit ($ Mn)
2018
Sales
Change %
2018 Unit
Change
%
1 Panera Bread 5,760,000 2,074 $2.78 4.7% 1.5%
2
Chipotle Mexican
Grill
4,805,000 2,482 $1.94 8.7% 3.7%
3 Panda Express 3,523,719 2,105 $1.67 13.4% 4.7%
4
Jimmy John's
Gourmet Sandwiches
2,168,000 2,840 $0.76 0.7% 3.1%
5 Zaxby's 1,849,000 906 $2.04 7.4% 3.3%
6 Five Guys 1,615,837 1,358 $1.19 12.5% 2.8%
7 Wingstop 1,207,000 1,124 $1.07 15.3% 9.4%
8
Raising Cane's
Chicken Fingers
1,183,488 400 $2.96 22.5% 13.6%
9 Jersey Mike's Subs 1,148,487 1,494 $0.77 17.5% 11.2%
10 Qdoba Mexican Eats 835,000 743 $1.12 1.6% 2.3%
11 Firehouse Subs 794,366 1,133 $0.70 11.0% 4.1%
12 Moe's Southwest Grill 739,100 727 $1.02 3.2% 3.1%
13 Jason's Deli 721,582 281 $2.57 11.6% 2.9%
14 McAlister's Deli 704,500 430 $1.64 7.3% 5.1%
15 Boston Market 557,774 454 $1.23 -1.3% -1.5%
16
Noodles World
Kitchen
525,671 459 $1.15 -0.2% -4.0%
17 Einstein Bros. Bagels 516,000 690 $0.75 -3.2% -1.1%
18
Freddy's Frozen
Custard &
Steakburgers
474,703 328 $1.45 15.5% 16.7%
19 Shake Shack 459,310 136 $3.38 28.0% 36.0%
20
The Habit Burger
Grill
436,610 247 $1.77 23.1% 18.2%

35

No. Restaurant
2018 Sales
($'000)
2018
# of Units
2018 Sales
Per
Unit ($ Mn)
2018
Sales
Change %
2018 Unit
Change
%
21 Dickey’s Barbecue Pit 401,000 526 $0.76 -7.4% -6.7%
22 MOD Pizza 397,743 404 $0.98 44.8% 33.8%
23 Portillo’s 381,500 57 $6.69 12.7% 9.6%
24 Pollo Tropical 379,881 145 $2.62 0.8% -4.6%
25 Zoes Kitchen 372,400 260 $1.43 17.0% 7.0%

Note. From Top 250 Fast Casual Chain Restaurant Report by Technomic Inc., 2019.

Hospitality & Tourism Studies in Higher Education
Hospitality and tourism studies relating in higher education setting was reviewed as it
relates to the food service and restaurant component of hospitality and tourism curriculum, food
and beverage education, multi-unit restaurant, fast casual segment, and specific skills and
knowledge competencies of restaurant education. The focus of this section was to examine the
literature that relates to MFR and some course lists to be added to the foodservice and restaurant
component of hospitality programs.
Hospitality and Tourism Curriculum
The beginning of hospitality higher education dates back to 1893 when the first dedicated
hotel college, Ecole Hôtelière de Lausanne (EHL), was established in Switzerland (Airey, 2015;
Ann et al., 2020; Hsu et al., 2017). EHL continues to be ranked No. 1 on the global hospitality
education (2021 QS World University Rankings). The hospitality education in the U.S. is
formally started with Cornell University launching the first baccalaureate degree program in
hospitality management in 1922. It was the world's first four-year intercollegiate school devoted
to hospitality management. In 2016, Cornell Hotel School merged into Cornell Business School
36

and prided itself to be the only AACSB-accredited hospitality program in Ivy League (Foderaro,
2016).
One of the key roles of hospitality education is to support the professionalism by ensuring
the development of a strong knowledge skills through higher education (Baum, 2002; Min et al.,
2016; Szende, Catalfamo & Upneja, 2019; Tesone & Ricci, 2005). Many scholars called for a
balance in curricula between vocation and academic requirements (Gross & Manoharan, 2016;
Hegarty, 2011; Tribe, 2002). One school of thought held that hospitality education is more
vocational in nature, similar to nursing, real estate, architect and film degree program, of which
aiming at preparing students for a particular on-site vocational job and work nature (Gustafson et
al., 2005; Hsu et al., 2017; Weeks & Finch, 2003;). This vocational nature called an
institutionalization process at both 2-year and 4-year U.S. foodservice and culinary programs,
and has made culinary programs gradually been accepted at colleges (Harrington et al., 2005a,
2005b; Hertzman, 2008; Hertzman & Ackerman, 2010; Hertzman & Maas, 2012; Hertzman &
Stefanelli, 2008; Traud et al., 2017).
The other school of thought put more value on the liberal arts, and view the
characteristic of a 4-year undergraduate university system more interested in the development of
critical thinking skills, than it is to develop work-ready vocational skills (Alexander, 2007;
Gursoy & Swanger, 2004; Harkison et al., 2011; Mayburry & Swanger, 2011; Min et al., 2016).
This school of thought further proposed hospitality management should be a part of AACSB-
accredited (The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) curriculum offering
(Scott et al., 2008), as one solution to address the long identity crisis due to the diversity of
academic homes and the lack of a widely recognized common body of knowledge of hospitality
management education (Hsu et al., 2017).
37

The hospitality and tourism curriculum model consisted of three main areas: (a) business
core requirements, (b) hospitality core requirements, and (c) hospitality electives, to be housed in
accredited colleges of business (Gursoy & Swanger, 2004). However, Mayburry and Swanger
(2011) suggested, “there is no agreed upon curriculum model today and nor in the near future
(Page 34).” It also depicted the nature of hospitality in the various times of needs, services and
delivery medium, which Robinson et al. (2010) described as “temporal variation” of hospitality
school setting. Furthermore, there is still some skillsets requirement divide between hospitality
graduates and industry managers (Harkison et al., 2011).
Food & Beverage Education
Food and Beverage (F&B) experience has traditionally been viewed as a career pathway
to a variety of senior-level management position within the hospitality industry (Ladkin, 2000),
or at least a department where the managers are expected to have operational experience
(Garavan et al., 2006). Moreover, there is a considerable support for the convention that the
graduates of hospitality management program required to develop communications skills,
customer service, people skills and management skills, rather than some of the trade-base
vocational skills sets (Mayburry & Swanger, 2011). Indeed, F&B education captures widely
debate in hospitality education regarding the balance of a vocational or non-vocational focus, as
was discussed in the U.S. (Gustafson et al., 2005), in Australia (Breakey & Craig-Smith, 2007),
in Taiwan (Horng, 2004), in Indonesia (Oktadiana & Chon, 2017) and in Vietnam (Le et al.,
2018).
On the other side of scholarly debate, food and beverage education posted disagreement
within the hospitality college setting. Riley (2005) defended the case for food and beverage
training within hospitality management courses, and suggested food, beverage and restaurant
38

practices could be considered a separate education field. Riley (2005) described, “Managing food
and beverage is more complex than managing rooms and it demands a greater range of
knowledge and a degree of creativity, which room management does not. It is for this reason that
traditionally the career paths of hotel managers have been strewn with food and beverage
experience.” Riley (2005) concluded as “In education, food and beverage training sits very
uncomfortably at the intersections between generic and vocational, education and on-job training
and public and private funding.” Robinson et al. (2010) took the national survey of Australian
hospitality degree program and concluded that the overall food and beverage curricula was
provided in the hospitality school, but there was high level of inconsistency and several potential
gaps in relation to F&B program content.
Table 10 and Table 11 summarized the “Top 20 Most Important Course Subject,” ranked
by both lodging industry professionals and restaurant industry professionals, respectively.

39

Table 10
Top 20 Most Important Course Subjects Rated by Restaurant Industry Professionals
Rank Course Mean
Standard
Deviation
1 Food and Beverage Management 4.29 0.69
2 Foodservice Operations and Controls 4.18 0.73
3 Internships/Industry Experience 4.18 1.07
4 Hospitality Operations Analysis 4.12 0.78
5 Leadership 4.00 1.06
6 Ethics 3.88 0.93
7 Preparation for Industry Employment 3.88 1.11
8 Food Safety and Sanitation 3.82 0.88
9 Service Management 3.82 0.88
10 Hospitality Management and Organization 3.82 1.07
11 Human resources Management 3.71 0.92
12 Hospitality Marketing Strategy 3.59 1.00
13 Computer/Information Technology 3.59 0.94
14 Overview of the Hospitality Industry 3.59 0.87
15 Strategic Management 3.56 0.96
16 Beverage Management-Production, Sales, Service 3.47 1.01
17 Principals of Marketing 3.47 0.94
18 Lodging Operations 3.47 0.72
19 Social Media Management 3.44 1.21
20 Finance 3.41 1.00

Note. From A longitudinal investigation of the importance of course subjects in the hospitality
curriculum: an industry perspective by H. Min, N. Swanger, D. Gursoy, 2016, Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Education, 28(1), 10–20.
(https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2015.1127168)

40

“Food and Beverage Management” (#1 on the list) and “Foodservice Operations and
Controls” (#2 on the list) – have consistently been ranked Top 2 most important courses by
restaurant industry professional (Min et al., 2016).

Table 11
Top 20 Most Important Course Subjects Rated by Lodging Industry Professionals
Rank Course Mean
Standard
Deviation
1 Internships/Industry Experience 4.42 0.87
2 Leadership 4.41 0.76
3 Preparation for Industry Employment 4.40 0.70
4 Hospitality Management and Organization 4.21 0.74
5 Overview of the Hospitality Industry 4.19 0.91
6 Ethics 4.19 0.83
7 Lodging Operations 4.10 0.75
8 Hospitality Operations Analysis 4.09 0.85
9 Revenue/Asset Management 4.04 0.88
10 Strategic Management 3.92 0.90
11 Service Management 3.88 0.83
12 Finance 3.87 0.94
13 Foodservice Operations and Controls 3.86 0.84
14 Sales/Sales Management 3.86 0.86
15 Food and Beverage Management 3.78 0.80
16 Computer/Information Technology 3.77 0.94
17 Social Media Management 3.69 0.94
18 Statistics for Management Decision Making 3.65 0.89
19 Human Resources Management 3.64 0.87
20 Hospitality Marketing Strategy 3.60 0.90

Note. From “A Longitudinal Investigation of the Importance of Course Subjects in the
Hospitality Curriculum: An Industry Perspective” by H. Min, N. Swanger, D. Gursoy, 2016,
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 28(1), 10–20.
(https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2015.1127168)
41

Two relevant food education courses were rated by lodging industry professionals in the
Top 20 courses, including “foodservice operations and controls” (#13 on the list) and “food and
beverage management” (#15 on the list). This suggested foodservice management courses were
not considered as a top preferred hospitality management curriculum by lodging professionals.
Multi-Unit Restaurants
Among the F&B education literature, there is little coverage extended into multi-unit
F&B education. Therefore, in this section, “multi-unit restaurant operation and training”
literature is brought in. Research has been conducted on some characteristics of multi-unit
restaurant (MUR) and the role of multi-unit managers (MUMs) in the food service industry in
the past 20 years. Umbreit (1989), Mone and Umbreit (1989), Umbreit and Smith (1990), Goss-
Turner (1999), Jones (1999), Goss-Turner and Jones (2000), Muller and DiPietro (2006),
Suboleski et al. (2009) have researched and written broadly about the business operation nature
of MUR, and job characteristics, responsibilities and training of MUMs. A MUR can be defined
as an organization competing in the food service industry with more than one unit of a like
concept of theme restaurant (Goss-Turner, 1999). Goss-Turner (1999) defined the MUM position
as a first-line corporate management level immediately above the single-unit operator manager
and may carry the title of area manager or regional manager, placed between single-unit manager
and senior executive responsibility. Umbreit (1989) provided a clear job description of multi-unit
management in fast food companies, and training needs for MUMs, which covered the human
resources management, marketing and promotions, financial management, facilities and safety,
and restaurant operations. The exploratory study of MUM training (Suboleski et al., 2009)
contributed the training content mapping for MUM industry and further research ideas on MUM
training, MUM development, MUM responsibilities, and MUM assessment.
42

The segmentation of MURs had been expanded by the NRA into five categories,
including quick service (fast food), fast casual, midscale, casual dining, upscale/fine dining
(Canziani et al., 2016). Canziani et al. (2016) held the standardization in the restaurant
classification terminology would aid the managerial decision making and both industry-level and
single-unit operation and reporting. Indeed, the improved segmentation measures of restaurant
type and activities would assist both restaurant researchers and practitioners reacting to specific
research questions (DiPietro, 2017).
The restaurant management scholars (Muller & DiPietro, 2006; DiPietro et al., 2007;
Suboleski et al., 2009) further explored the key successful factors (KSFs) of MUMs and skillsets
that MUMs needed to possess. DiPietro et al. (2007) developed eight KSFs of MUMs at casual
dining operation setting, which exhibited the skills and knowledge needed to perform in the
MUR operation. These KSFs emerged from casual dining multi-unit operations shall provide all
segments in the restaurant industry (DiPietro et al., 2007), given job nature of MUM being multi-
unit operations.
In this study, I based on these eight KSFs (DiPietro et al., 2007) to develop the relevant
course curriculum. These eight KSFs are (a) unit operations, (b) standard operating procedures
(c), multi-unit strategic planning, (d) interpersonal social duties, (e) unit follow-up, (f) human
resources, (g) effective leadership, (h) unit finances. DiPietro et al. (2007) stated Factor 1 of
“unit operations” is the single most important KSF of a MUM (17% of variance factor), while
Factors 4, 6, 7 are all related to human resources development with a combined variance factor
of 24%. These KSFs continued coinciding with Umbreit (1989), one pioneer MUM scholar, that
human resources management aspect was one largest required skills of MUR operations.
43

Fast Casual Restaurants
Academic research on fast casual restaurant “education” is a relatively new endeavor, at
best on the “business management” side. The initial research has focused on the business case
study on Casual Dining vs. Fast Casual (Dixon et al., 2018), Wagamama: Creation of a Fast
Casual Restaurant (Dedeke, 2015) and Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.: Strategy with a higher
mission or farmed and dangerous? (Simpson, 2015), restaurant industry classification ushering
in fast casual segment (Barrows & Vieira, 2013; Canziani et al., 2016), new servicescape model
of fast casual dining (Hanks & Line, 2018; Line & Hanks, 2020) and employee turnover
(DiPietro & Bufquin, 2018). Single-store operation side of the fast casual restaurant segment has
not been reviewed by the literature.
On the MUR operation skillsets and organization culture, a few research has been carried
to address multi-unit QSR and multi-unit casual dining segments (DiPietro et al., 2007; Goss-
Turner, 1999; Muller & DiPietro, 2006; Øgaard et al., 2005; Ottenbacher & Harrington,
2009Suboleski et al., 2009), but the multi-unit fast casual segment was not brought in or
addressed. In the past 12 years, consumer behavior literature on consumers' decision making in
the fast casual restaurant segment had been introduced, covering the overall “quick-casual” (i.e.,
“fast-casual”) restaurant image, physical environment, perceived value, customer satisfaction,
and the pricing of the service (Han & Ryu, 2009; Lee et al., 2020; Mathur & Gupta, 2019; Ryu &
Han, 2010; Ryu et al., 2008; Ryu et al., 2010).
Skills and Knowledge Competencies
The literature is rich with studies conducted to evaluate the skills and knowledge
competencies related to the hospitality industry. Such studies have supported the human
resources management (Enz, 2004), leadership and internship experience (Gursoy & Swanger,
44

2004), soft skills (Mayburry & Swanger, 2011), personality and initiatives (Harkison et al.,
2011), business degree courses (Scott et al., 2008), critical feedback (Teng, 2013). Gross and
Manoharan (2016) surveyed Le Cordon Bleu hospitality degree graduates to address the study
aim of the perceived value balance. The findings indicated a primary vocational orientation
among the study respondents. Three themes also emerged from the analysis: food and beverage
orientation, the relevance of skills acquisition, and human nature and experience.
Alexakis and Jiang (2019) developed an industry competency model of skills and
knowledge needed for hospitality students: (a) critical/reflective, (b) professional/technical, (c)
communication/relational and (d) plasticity/erudition. Alexakis and Jiang (2019) also
summarized the investigated 20 hospitality programs over 388 hospitality courses into two
categories (professional/technical, and communication/relational) in Table 12. The reason why the
other two competencies (critical/reflective, and plasticity/erudition) were not used is because they
were mostly embedded into every course at the undergraduate level. The study adopted the
competency model of Alexakis and Jiang (2019) to develop the interview questions and online
survey to the research participants in relating to the knowledge and skills.

45

Table 12
Hospitality Curriculum Topic Categories
Topic Category # of Courses %
Professional/Technical
Management Fundamentals 11 2.8%
Industry Overview 40 10.3%
Finance and Revenue Management 69 17.8%
Sales & Marketing 24 6.2%
Human Resources and Organization
Behavior
31 8.0%
Legal Issues 19 4.9%
Operation 87 22.4%
Information Technology 12 3.1%
Facility 11 2.8%
Total 304 78.4%
Communication/Relational
Professional Development 47 12.1%
Writing and Communication 15 3.9%
Research Project 22 5.7%
Total 84 21.6%
Overall 388 100.0%

Note. From “Industry Competencies and the Optimal Hospitality Management Curriculum: An
Empirical Study” by G. Alexakis & L. Jiang, 2019, Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education,
31(4), 210–220. (https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2019.1575748)

46

In the section of “Hospitality and Tourism Studies in Higher Education,” five aspects
(hospitality and tourism curriculum, food and beverage education, MUR, fast casual restaurant,
skills and knowledge competencies) were reviewed and further narrowed down to some of the
restaurant education curriculum, and skill and knowledge competencies toward food and
beverage education. In next section, the focus lies in the analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational issues toward UNV Hospitality College of its establishment of multi-unit fast casual
curriculum by September 2022.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
The focus of this study is an analysis of the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that serves as organizational performance goal by adopting Clark and Estes (2008) gap
analysis framework. The gap analysis model is a systematic analytical model that clarifies
organization goals and identifies the gap between the actual performance level and preferred
performance level within an organization. To determine the potential recommendations for
establishing the MFR concentration, the gap analysis framework begins with an overarching goal
that was compared to the current progress toward the goal by dissecting the identified root causes
into three categories: Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational influences.
47

Figure 1
Turning Research into Results Process Model

Note. From Turning Research Into Results: A Guide to Selecting the Right Performance
Solutions by R. Clark and F. Estes, 2008, p. 22. Information Age.

Knowledge Influences
Knowledge-related influences relevant to establishing MFR education at UNLV
Hospitality College are important to examine. The stakeholder’s goal is that MFRIC provides the
practical industry knowledge to the MFR concentration program. MFRIC is comprised of a total
Step 1
Identify Key
Business Goals
Step 2
Identify Individual
Performance Goals
Step 3
Determine
Performance Gaps
Step 4
Analyze Gaps to
Determine Clauses
Step 5A
Identify
Knowledge/Skill
Solutions, and
Implement
Step 5B
Identify Motivation
Solutions, and
Implement
Step 5C
Identify
Organizational
Process, and
Material Solutions,
and Implement
Step 6
Evaluate Results,
Tune System, and
Revise Goals
48

of 12 industry participants, industry scholars, and Dean’s global advisory board members of
UNLV Hospitality College.
Krathwohl (2002) identified four major types of knowledge: factual, conceptual,
procedure and metacognitive knowledge. This study explored the future MFR managers’
assumed knowledge influences in two areas through the inquiry with MFRIC members. The first
is the declarative knowledge that future MFR managers should demonstrate the ability to utilize
their knowledge of key leadership skills in a MFR setting. The second is the procedural
knowledge referring to future MFR managers should demonstrate the ability to utilize their
knowledge of key leadership skills in a MFR setting.
Future MFR Managers Should Understand All Key Facets of the MFR Industry and Relevant
Principles of Accounting, Finance, Management, and Marketing
Development of the MFR curriculum would enable future MFR managers to acquire all
the necessary skills and experience to succeed and lead in the MFR field. Future MFR managers
need to possess conceptual knowledge of the principles of MFR curriculum courses as a context
for why it is important to respond to the knowledge, skills and disposition for the MFR industry.
Future MFR managers should have a good knowledge of the entire skillsets of running MUR
operations.
The MFRIC members represent the industry knowledge for the MFRs and shall provide a
great inquiry venue to future MFR managers. Some of the MFRIC member companies have
served the hosting companies fulfilling the 1,000-hour internship for the students at UNLV
Hospitality College, as part of the BSHM’s degree requirement. The industry internship
experience course has long been a core integrated course requirement for hospitality education
49

curriculum. The industry leaders (and some MFRIC members) have had chance working with
UNLV Hospitality College to modify the internship programs for years.
Future MFR Managers Should Demonstrate the Ability to Utilize Their Knowledge of Key
Leadership Skills in a Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Setting
Procedural knowledge related to the “how to” knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002), similar to
“training” defined by Clark and Estes (2008, p. 58). The training refers to a situation where a
learner obtains the “how to” knowledge and skills and has opportunities for guided practice and
expert feedback. The MFR curriculum is designed to prepare future MFR managers for a specific
restaurant workplace. It is important that MFRIC can facilitate the creation of a learning model
to train future MFR managers how to acquire such “how to” knowledge and skills. This
knowledge capacity will assist future MFR managers in handling novel and future challenges in
the MFR field. To meet the stakeholder goal, future MFR managers will be trained and should
demonstrate the ability to utilize their knowledge of key leadership skills in a MFR setting.

Table 13
Assumed Knowledge Influences and Types
Assumed Knowledge Influences Knowledge Types
Future MFR managers should understand all key facets of the
multi-unit fast casual restaurant industry and relevant principles
of accounting, finance, management, and marketing.
Declarative
Future MFR managers should demonstrate the ability to utilize
their knowledge of key leadership skills in a multi-unit fast
casual restaurant setting.
Procedural

50

Motivation-Related Influences
Motivation, along with knowledge, is important to examine for education institution with
a globally recognized presence in hospitality education, such as UNLV Hospitality College.
Motivation is influenced by the degree to which an individual develops beliefs to carry out the
task effectively with a reasonable goals and sufficient resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). Clark and
Estes (2008) suggested the common indicators of motivation are active choice, persistence, and
mental effort. These can be manifested at either the individual or the team level. Individual
makes an active choice to engage in one task over the other, and to demonstrate persistence in
the face of distractions (Rueda, 2011). Another indication of one’s level of motivation is
exercising mental effort to work smarter and to develop novel solutions in order to achieve a
specific goal (Rueda, 2011). Increased motivation combined with effective knowledge, skills and
work processes will increase the likelihood of goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Motivations can be impacted by a variety of internal and external factors (Rueda, 2011).
In this section, two critical motivation factors are discussed as impacting future MFR managers
in achieving its stakeholder goal. First, the individual must believe he/she can achieve the goal.
Self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) refers to an individual's belief in his or her capacity to execute
behaviors necessary to produce specific performance attainments. Second, the individual needs
to understand the value of specific task. Utility value refers to how useful one believes a task or
activity is in achieving some future goal (Rueda, 2011). Future MFR managers’ motivation will
be influenced by the degree to which the future MFR managers, upon completing MFR
curriculum, will be able to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and disposition required in the
MFR industry.
51

With regard to the team’s motivation, Clark and Estes (2008) introduced team confidence
builder concept. One most critical factor is to clearly describe the skills required to achieve the
team’s performance goals and point out that each team member has different but required skills
to master. Each team member needs to have confidence in each other as well as in themselves.
The team also needs to stay alert and quickly correct any unnecessary intra-team coordination
problems and discourage unhealthy competition among members. The gap analytic approach
conceptualized by Clark and Estes (2008) is designed to diagnose whether the individual or the
team has the motivation to meet their performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). The study
examines future MFR managers’ self-efficacy and utility value in relation to the comprehensive
MFR curriculum immersion informed by both academic standards and industry needs. Upon
MFR curriculum completion, future MFR managers will be ready to take on the challenges of
many years to come in the multi-unit fast casual industry.
Future MFR Managers’ Utility Value
Future MFR managers need to value their studies and their intended career path in the
MFR industry. Utility value focuses on the benefits of finishing the task, rather than the
enjoyment of the task itself (Clark & Estes, 2008). If future MFR managers do not believe in the
reasons to pursue a career in the MFR industry, they may not actively choose to take on and
complete the MFR curriculum that can train them to serve the future fast casual restaurant
leaders. UNLV Hospitality College, one leading global hospitality educator, should also see the
value in collaboration with MFRIC to create an industry-needed MFR curriculum, designed for
future MFR managers.
52

Future MFR Managers’ Self-Efficacy
Future MFR managers should have confidence in their ability to succeed in the MFR
industry, upon completing MFR curriculum and training. Self-efficacy is important for future
MFR managers to successfully complete such curriculum study task. Future MFR managers’
self-efficacy belief is critical in taking action to engage with the task, persist at it and invest the
necessary level of mental effort to complete their MFR curriculum study. The failure of future
MFR managers’ belief to their ability to succeed in the MFR industry can harm the UNLV
Hospitality College’s vision in pioneering the advancement of global hospitality through
innovative education, research, and service. This research explores the degree to which future
MFR managers are confident in their ability to accomplish their study goal of MFR curriculum at
UNLV Hospitality College.

Table 14
Assumed Motivation Influences and Types
Assumed Motivation Influences Motivation Types
Future MFR managers should value their studies and their
intended career path in the multi-unit fast casual restaurant
industry.
Utility Value
Future MFR managers should have confidence in their ability
to succeed in the MFR industry.
Self-Efficacy

53

Organization-Related Influences
The organization influences relevant to establishing MFR curriculum are important to
examine because organization performance may be negatively affected due to ineffective work
processes and insufficient organization resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). Rueda (2011) stated the
roots of organization performance gap could be attributed to the areas of culture, structure,
policies, and practices, which were further concretized by two notions, culture model and
cultural setting. Culture model is the shared mental schema, normative understanding of an
organization, and is often invisible and automated (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda,
2011). Cultural setting is more visible, customary, and concrete routines within an organization
of the everyday life (Rueda, 2011). Rueda (2011) further presented the reciprocal relationship of
the culture model and cultural setting, and such relationship is dynamic and interactional. This
study have examined organizational influences within UNLV Hospitality College’s cultural
setting to determine whether any gap exists.
The Culture Setting influence examined here was that UNLV Hospitality College must
provide resources for future MFR managers to pursue careers in the industry upon graduation.
Organization needs to provide the necessary resources, such as innovative MFR curriculum and
F&B facility, to future MFR managers to perform the study tasks. Required resource for
successfully establishing MFR curriculum may include consultation expenses paid to MFRIC
members, recruitment cost for faculty and staff, time and money allocated to conduct restaurant
education research, attendance cost for industry conferences, and kitchen equipment and supplies
costs. The College also needs to develop new courses, including non-degree programs and
training modules that lead to professional development certificates for those working in the
restaurant industry who would like to improve their skillsets.
54

The education need arises with the modern MFR’s operation complexity involving with
menu development, food nutrition, kitchen technology, online order, pick-up and delivery, and
analytic data-enhanced operations. This is a particularly imperative when the NRA confirmed
over 8 million restaurant job loss at the peak of COVID-19 outbreak and shutdown (NRA,
2021a). The restaurant industry sees an accelerated migration from the on-premise to the off-
premise services, and some fast casual restaurant companies may implement “app-only drive-
through pick-up,” as the goal of "no-touch-convenience" (Brown, 2020; Reinstein, 2020; Maze
& Lalley, 2020; McCarthy, 2020; Reinstein & Hand 2020). Recognizing the new needs of both
industry and its future professionals is important for the College to launch the adaptive and
innovative MFR curriculum to address the need of future MFR managers.
In addition, the College needs to dedicate its resources working with various
organizations to recruit both traditional and non-traditional students to attend UNLV Hospitality
College. The recruiting team can partnership with the organizations such as ProStart (a
component of the NRA, a nationwide, 2-year high school program that reaches nearly 150,000
students in more than 1,900 high schools in the U.S.) and DECA (an organization preparing
emerging leaders and entrepreneurs in marketing, finance, hospitality and management in high
schools and colleges) to recruit students. The College can also tap into non-traditional
organizations, such as the Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program of the U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs, to educate some non-traditional students to enter the multi-unit fast casual
segment. Working with some international culinary high schools, such as Kai Ping Culinary
School in Taiwan, may be one important route to recruit new international students. The College
must provide sufficient resources to future MFR managers so that they can complete the MFR
curriculum study meeting the academic rigor and industry practicality.
55

Table 15
Assumed Organization Influence and Type
Assumed Organizational Influence Organizational Type
UNLV Hospitality College must provide resources for
future MFR managers to pursue careers in the industry
upon graduation.
Cultural Setting Influence:
Resources

Chapter Two conducted the literature review to this innovation study in three sections of
work: restaurant industry analysis, hospitality and tourism study in the higher education setting,
and review of stakeholder knowledge, motivation and organizational influences toward the
organizational goal. Chapter Three will discuss the research methodology and adopt Clark and
Estes (2008) gap analysis framework to identify knowledge, motivation and organization
influences in further detail. The research will take an exploratory mixed method approach to
learn the industry needs of the MFR curriculum and then to reconcile the industry needs of the
proposed MFR curriculum.

56

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to aid in establishing the MFR education at UNLV
Hospitality College by addressing the knowledge, skills and dispositions needed for workforce
development of MFR industry. Adopting Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis framework as a
guide, the study identified knowledge, motivation and organization influences that UNLV
Hospitality College may address in order to achieve research-based recommendation to the
performance goals. The study took an exploratory mixed method approach to learn the industry
needs of the MFR curriculum and then to reconcile the industry needs of the proposed MFR
curriculum.
Research Questions
The research questions that guided this research were:
1. What knowledge, skills, dispositions do future managers in the Multi-unit Fast Casual
Restaurant (MFR) industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard and
the industry expectation?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related
to establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College?
Participating Stakeholders
The purpose of this study was to explore knowledge, motivation and organizational
influences related to the successful launching of MFR concentration program by September
2022. The primary stakeholder of focus for this research is MFRIC members. The secondary
stakeholder of focus is the human resources leaders of each participating MFR company.
57

Sampling Strategy
By September 2022, UNLV Hospitality College will establish the MFR concentration
program with an incoming class of 20 students. This goal is referred to as the stakeholder
performance goal throughout the study. Given the MFR curriculum objective of being informed
by the industry practitioners, the research introduced “human resources leaders” of each
participating MFR company as a proxy of “industry practitioners” (Goss-Turner, 1999). Goss-
Turner (1999) argued that a MUR company grew consummated with its company’s human
resources strategy, capacity and policies, regarding recruitment, selection, training and
development. Consequently, the research process involved two stakeholders in the sampling and
recruiting task. The first one was UNLV’s MFRIC, followed by the second group: human
resources leaders of each participating MFR company.
The human resources managers must serve in that capacity in a MFR setting operating
over five (5) units, either in the corporate-owned brand (such as Chipotle and Panda Express) or
franchise system operator (such as Wingstop). The minimum unit count requirement of five
ensures that respondents’ experience reflects a comprehensive human resources function
covering recruiting, training, and human capital planning within the organization. At some fast-
casual restaurant chains, the lead human resources function may be incorporated into the role of
MUMs, regional director of operations, vice president of operations, chief administration officer,
chief operating officer, president or chief executive officer. Consequently, for the operation
purpose of the human resources manager in the research, those other titles also suffice. For the
operating purpose of the research sampling, human resources managers in the QSR setting were
also included, given the blurred lines between quick service restaurants and fast casual
58

restaurants, particularly during COVID-19 pandemic era, while the in-store dining room area
were majorly shut down during April 2020 - December 2020 in the U.S.
MFRIC is established with industry participants, industry scholars, and Dean’s global
advisory board members of UNLV Hospitality College. MFRIC is a representative group to the
broader restaurant industry participants. MFRIC is comprised of a total of 12 members. I
interviewed all MFRIC members. The interview protocol covered six open-ended questions
following KMO framework in a semi-structured interview during November 5 - December 28,
2020 and were conducted by online Zoom video. Thereafter, the MFR human resources
managers were surveyed.
Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The criteria below will be used to recruit participants.
Criteria for Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee
Must be a current member of the MFRIC with the industry background of operators,
researchers and practitioners. The proposed committee taskforce format is critical that every
committee member abides by the timeline of each milestone, or task to be completed.
Criteria for Human Resources Leaders of Each Participating MFR Company
Must serve as the human resources leader as full-time job function in a MFR setting
operating over five units, either in the corporate-owned brand or franchise system operator.
These human resources managers were selected to include individuals possessing direct multi-
unit management experience within the organization and those who have detailed knowledge or
influence on training policies and procedures for their organization. All human resources
function managers, titles varying from HR managers, MUMs, regional director of operations, in
59

the limited-service restaurants (including quick service and fast casual) were invited to
participate in this online survey.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The study gathered data via three approaches: interviews, surveys, and document
analysis. The method was to collect data to validate assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs of future MFR concentration from industry professionals beginning with
the MFRIC members. Permission to perform research activities is required from the University
of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB approval was obtained on
September 25, 2020. Data collection method included open-ended questions, Likert-type
questions, and semi-structured video interviews and online survey. The online survey was
administered through the software Qualtrics, and the data was analyzed using the report
functions available in the software package. The respective interview was carried through online
Zoom video and each was recorded, upon granted the permission from the interviewees.
The research took the exploratory mixed method of three-step process. Step One is an
initial qualitative phase of interview data collection and analysis through all MFRIC members.
Step Two is a phase of quantitative data collection and analysis through online surveying human
resources managers. Step Three is a phase of selected human resources manager interview, data
collection and analysis.
Step One: Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee Interview
I interviewed all MFRIC members right after receiving USC’s IRB approval in an in-
depth interview about the knowledge, skills and dispositions they see as important for the future
MFR managers. The goal of these in-depth interviews was to determine whether the survey used
in Step Two and the interview protocol used in Step Three frame the right questions for MFR
60

human resources managers. The interview protocol used in Step One included six open-ended
questions in a semi-structured format. These interviews occurred during November 5 - December
28, 2020. The open-ended questions were designed to maximum the potential inquiries regarding
the MFR curriculum of the UNLV Hospitality College. Each interview was carried through
online Zoom video and was recorded upon obtaining permission granted by each interviewee. I
used the audio transcript function on Zoom’s Cloud Recording, and each video with audio
transcription and caption was sent to each interviewee within 24-48 hours so they can assess
whether the capture was accurate.
Step Two: Online Surveys of Human Resources Manager
I sent online surveys to a total of 47 human resources managers and MUMs among four
participating restaurant companies (Panda Express, Shake Shack, Diversified Restaurant Group
and Wendy's International) on December 29, 2020. Data collection for the online survey
occurred over a 10-day period of January 1-10, 2021. The human resources manager and MUM
contacts were obtained at the assistance of Dean of UNLV Hospitality College and four MFRIC
members:
1. Mr. Phil Stanton, Vice President of Operations, The Wendy’s International
2. Mr. Royce Chow, Vice President of Operations, Panda Restaurant Group
3. Mr. Todd Kelly, SVP of Operations, Diversified Restaurant Group (Franchise of Taco
Bell)
4. Mr. Michael Wang, Regional Vice President Operations, Shake Shack
The HR manager’s online survey included five sections: (a) demographics, (b) attributes
of future graduates of a multi-unit fast casual concentration in a Likert-type question format, and
(c) Likert-type opinion questions on the proposed course portfolio. This section also allowed
61

write-in course names from HR manager participants, (d) Likert-type opinion questions
regarding store managers with hospitality college degrees, and (e) Likert-type opinion questions
toward MFR training certificate or formal degree.
Step Three: Human Resources Manager Interview
Upon preliminary analysis of the online HR manager survey result and feedback, I
solicited a small subset of HR managers for in-depth interviews, who actually recorded
respondents’ willingness to be interviewed in the Step Two’s online survey. I interviewed a total
of six HR managers on January 21 - Febuary 8, 2021 by online Zoom video. I limited the human
resources interview counts to be six, because I purposefully sought maximum variation in the
HR manager in-depth interview selection to allow for a greater range of applications of the
findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Documents and Artifacts
Limited document analysis was conducted during data collection period. Dean of UNLV
Hospitality College shared the preliminary list of “Potential New Courses for Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Concentration” in January 2020. I reviewed UNLV Hospitality College’s public
information regarding its student enrollment number (UNLV, 2021b), latest available curriculum
of Fall 2020, the College’s mission statement, and webpages during the literature review period
and dissertation write-up period in February - May 2021. I also followed through a few industry
development news, pivotal stories of fast casual restaurant industry during COVID-19 pandemic
period, and the latest Restaurant Revitalization Fund (RRF) information. I also spoke with
representatives at the U.S. Small Business Administration and NRA in April 2021 to learn the
implementation detail of RRF and encouraged a few restaurant operators to apply for the RRF
funding in May 2021.
62

Data Analysis
The goal of data analysis is the dynamic and recursive process of making sense out of
data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). For the study, I undertook both qualitative data analysis of
interviews, and quantitative data analysis of the online survey. Among the survey questions, I
adopted one conceptual framework by incorporating the industry competency model of skill and
knowledge needed for hospitality student (Alexakis & Jiang, 2019) and “Top 20 Most Important
Course Subject,” ranked by both lodging industry professionals and restaurant industry
professionals (Min et al., 2016). For online survey responses, I calculated descriptive statistics,
frequencies and percentages for questions with a multiple choice selection or a Likert scale
response format, and the mean and standard deviation by utilizing the embedded reporting
function of Qualtrics survey software.
The qualitative data was analyzed using a data set based on the MFRIC members and
human resources manager’s responses to the proposed multi-unit fast casual curriculum courses
and some other opinion and preference toward the MFR education. For the purpose of data
analysis of interview data, verbatim transcription though Zoom’s video transcript function was
used as one effective method to me. Upon obtaining the automatic Zoom video transcription
after each interview (likely in 3-8 hours after the interview), I re-read my notes, watched the
recorded video, wrote analytic feedback to capture themes and emergent observations. By doing
so, I had a process to reflect my data collection and analysis to the research questions and
conceptual framework. I also sent the interview video recordings (with transcription) to each
interviewee for their review comment. I further analyzed the similarities and differences among
each MFRIC’s and MUM’s opinion & preference toward each MFR courses. Based on my
conceptual framework and research questions, I continued identifying patterns and themes to
63

guide the full data analysis. The results and findings from data analysis directly led to the
findings and assertions in Chapter Four.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
With any research study, it is important to address the trustworthy and rigor, of which the
research findings can match reality (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015). Patton (2015) held
that the credibility of the researcher and rigorous method are essential components to ensure the
credibility of qualitative research. Maxwell (2013) defined validity as the correctness or
credibility of a description, conclusion, explanation, interpretation, or other sort of account, and
the validity is generally acknowledged to be a key issue in research design and shall be explicitly
addressed. The concept of “validity threat” is a way the researcher might be wrong (Maxwell,
2013). Maxwell (2013) brought about two specific validity threats to be (a) Researcher bias and
(b) Reactivity. Researcher bias (Maxwell, 2013) referred to how a particular researcher’s value
and expectations may have influenced the conduct and conclusions of the study. Reactivity (or
reflexibility) was how the researcher influences the settings or individuals studied (Maxwell,
2013). Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggested ensuring validity and reliability in qualitative
research is actually an ethical manner.
The strategies used in this research need to ensure that there is credibility and
trustworthiness. As the primary investigator of the data collection process, I worked to ensure
that there is rich data by taking detailed notes in Zoom video interviews, recording the interview,
after permitted by the interviewee, and fully transcribing the interview through Zoom’s video
transcript function. I also took the tentative findings back to the people from whom they were
derived and asking if they were plausible as member checking (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) in Step
One, Step Two and Step Three of data collection. I documented the audit trail of a detailed
64

account of the methods, procedures, and decision points in carrying out the study (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). I took the exploratory mixed methods of three steps – more than one data
collection method, multiple sources of data, multiple theories – shall be a powerful triangulation
strategy for increasing the credibility (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 245). The strategy of taking
detailed notes, recording and transcribing the interviews, respondent validations, audit trail,
maximum variation and triangulation shall allow me to ensure credibility and trustworthy.
Validity and Reliability
Validity and reliability are two important considerations for the research study. Validity
in quantitative research refers to that the researcher can draw meaningful and useful inferences
from the scores of the instruments (Creswell, 2018). Creswell (2018) introduced three traditional
forms of validity testing, including content validity, predictive or concurrent validity, and
construct validity.
For the purpose of this research study, it is important that there is content validity. I
worked to ensure the interview questions aligned with the research questions, and checked that
what was intended to be measured was actually measured, by closely following the interview
question lists in Step One and Step Three. The online quantitative survey in Step Two was
reviewed by subject matter experts prior to the submission of IRB, and pilot tested by several
human resources managers in the MFR managers to ensure the content was complete and that the
questions to be asked were clear and concise – a test on content validity.
Reliability refers to the consistency of the measurement tool (Creswell, 2018; Salkind,
2017) and it is also an important consideration in a quantitative research study. There are four
types of reliability: test-retest reliability, parallel forms of reliability, internal consistency
reliability, and interrater reliability (Salkind, 2017). Reliability examines the internal consistency
65

of the study results and whether there is consistency in how the interview is administered and
scored (Creswell, 2018).
For the purpose of this study, it is important that there is internal consistency reliability.
Step Two’s data collection has the online survey instrument comprising some Likert-type
questions. I worked to achieve a strong response rate among MUMs by sending a reminder email
halfway through the 10-day survey window and thanked again for their participation in the
interim. When the online survey window closed, I wrote a thank-you email to the MUMs and
reported the status of the research.
I administered all the online survey by Qualtrics survey software. The data was analyzed
using Qualtrics’ report functions available in the software package in order to minimum human
errors, and to ensure internal consistency reliability. Lastly, I used the information from the
online survey to triangulate the data obtained in the Step Three’s interviews. In this way, I
utilized the online survey data (Step Two) in conjunction with the data from the interviews (Step
One and Step Three) to validate the desire of the multi-unit fast casual curriculum and the course
preference among the industry peers.
Ethics
Ethical concerns should be applied to every aspect of the research, including research
method, research goals, research questions, validity issues, and the critical assessment of the
conceptual framework (Maxwell, 2013). Patton (2015) created 12 ethical issue checklists while
engaging in qualitative research, which went, (a) Explaining the purpose of the inquiry and
method to be used, (b) reciprocity (what is in it for the interviewee and issues of the
compensation), (c) promises, (d) risk assessment, (e) confidentiality, (f) informed consent, (g)
data access and ownership, (h) interviewer mental health, (i) ethical advice (who will be your
66

counselor on ethical matters), (j) data collection boundaries, (k) ethical and methodological
choice, (l) and ethical versus legal. As a researcher, carrying out the maximum ethical manner is
one way to create trustworthiness and credibility of the research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
I had no power or authority over the faculty or administration at UNLV Hospitality
College in general nor the participants of this study. I involved the research activities as an
innovation study to assist in establishing the MFR education at UNLV Hospitality College. The
College’s operation involves many stakeholders on a daily basis. I worked with some
stakeholders of the UNLV Hospitality College and industry participants due to the interview,
questionnaire, and surveys. I followed all the ethical obligations during pre-planning of the
research, data collection, data analyzing, and post-findings. For example, during the pre-planning
of the research, I obtained a research approval through USC’s IRB and the academic affair’s
protocol at UNLV Hospitality College, and to map out the detailed steps of the research process
and feedback loop involving with stakeholders. I also kept in close communications with Dean
Shoemaker and his office, in order to learn their guidance in the research process.
During the data collection and data analyzing stage, I obtained informed consent and
ensured all the participants were volunteers, meaning take the interview and survey without
having been coerced and deceived. I protected the confidentiality of the participants’ specific
critiques, and provided the right of participants to withdraw, as a practical component of research
ethics. At the interview time, I thought about what data was recorded, how that data was to be
stored, and whether research participants knew how their data would be used. I also asked for
participant consent to record. This is an important part of gaining informed consent. For the
online human resources manager survey distribution, I worked to ensure the sampling size was
not under-sized (unable to answer the research questions robustly) or over-sized (potentially
67

exposes an excessive number of people). For each survey response from human resources
participants, the system was not able to link to the name of each individual. During the post-
findings stage, I followed all the protocols about the data collection confidentiality and research
publication of USC Rossier School of Education and UNLV Hospitality College. Indeed, ethics
should be built into the whole dissertation process.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations of a dissertation are potential weaknesses in the research that are mostly out
of the researcher’s control, given limited funding, choice of research design, statistical model
constraints, or other factors. Delimitations are the boundary that the researcher sets, where the
researcher can make choice of the research questions, research method and data collection. In
this study, the first limitation is the small sampling population size of the multi-unit fast casual
human resources managers of 47 from four participating MFR companies and each company
contributing 10-15 MUMs. Alternatively, the interview protocol might be expanded by surveying
a larger number of MUMs in each participating MFR company, or reaching out to a larger
number of MFR companies and each contributing a small number of MUMs.
The other limitation is the online Zoom interview format, due to the research restriction
during COVID-19 pandemic period, which could not accommodate some relationship build-up
through the in-person meeting. For this research study, limiting the scope of stakeholder
participants to the entire MFRIC members of 12, and a selective six human resources manager
interviews was a choice I made. This decision was made based upon the in-depth interview
consideration with each MFRIC member and a purposeful seeking maximum variation of human
resources managers to produce a greater range of applications of the findings.
68

The last limitation is my relationship with fast casual restaurant industry and prior
relationship with UNLV Hospitality College, which may color the analysis and conclusions, and
produce bias toward the fast casual restaurant education and training. I disclosed my prior
restaurant experience in the dissertation proposal in July 2020, “I served at Panda Restaurant
Group as investment officer, ran Lollicup Fresh as Head of Operations at Los Angeles, started a
fast casual Open Oven Pizza restaurant at UCLA Westwood area, and performed a few site
selection task for the café restaurants and bakery clients in California and Las Vegas markets.”
The founder couple of Cherngs at Panda Restaurant Group gifted $5.0 million for the
establishment of MFR education in September 2020 (UNLV News Center, 2020b). I avoided
direct communications with Cherng family in 2019-2021. I also introduced UNLV Hospitality
College to execute a partnership framework agreement with Shanghai University’s School of
Management in August 2019 in Shanghai, China.
The first delimitation of this research is by adopting the KMO framework of Clark and
Estes (2008) and to focus MFRIC as the analysis stakeholder unit to develop KMO
recommendation for UNLV Hospitality College. Alternatively, this research could be a
straightforward hospitality curriculum design of “multi-unit fast casual” concentration, or KSFs
(or attributes) of multi-unit fast casual operation and education, particularly post Covid-19 era.
The second delimitation of this research is to take an exploratory mixed method approach to
learn the industry needs of the MFR curriculum and then to reconcile the industry needs in three
steps with the proposed MFR curriculum portfolio by UNLV Hospitality College. The original
research idea was to “measure the industry demand” of such multi-unit fast casual curriculum
and perhaps the research can go direct “measuring the industry demand” and “creating a
69

whitepaper or business plan” for the multi-unit fast casual curriculum program at UNLV
Hospitality College.
Chapter Three discussed in detail with regard to the research methodology, participating
stakeholders, data collection & instrument, data analysis method, credibility and trustworthiness,
validity and reliability, ethic challenge, and limitations & delimitation of the research. The
objective of research method was to collect data to validate assumed knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs of future MFR concentration from industry professionals, and then to
reconcile the industry needs of the proposed MFR curriculum.
Chapter Four will report the results and findings of data collection in respect to two
research questions by adopting exploratory mixed method approach of a three-step process. The
results will be compared with the assumed influences of the knowledge and skills, motivation
and organizational influences. Chapter Four will conclude the finding of the proposed five
required courses and four elective courses of multi-unit fast casual curriculum for BSHM degree
at UNLV Hospitality College.

70

Chapter Four: Results and Findings
The purpose of this chapter is to report the results and findings of data collection in
respect to the two research questions below:
1. What knowledge, skills, dispositions do future managers in the Multi-unit Fast Casual
Restaurant (MFR) industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard and
the industry expectation?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related
to establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College?
The exploratory mixed method employed a three-step process. Table 16 summarized the
three steps and each respective sequence contribution. Step One was an initial qualitative phase
of interview data collection and analysis through all 12 MFRIC members by following the KMO
framework. The collected information was used to build up and revise Step Two’s online
questionnaires. Step Two was a phase of quantitative data collection and analysis through online
surveying MUM and human resources (HR) managers of a total number of 47 participants. Step
Two also adopted Clark and Estes (2008) problem-solving framework to learn more about the
attributes of knowledge and skills, organization expectations and future preferences of the MFR
education needs. Rich survey data was collected and reviewed to fine-tune the final interview
questions for Step Three. Step Three was a phase of six selected interviews, data collection and
analysis. The interview questions also followed Clark and Estes’s framework. The contribution
of Step Three covered in three ways: (a) continued modifying body of knowledge for each
course, (b) obtained rich conversational insight into the field training & development, (c)
obtained additional training needs of MUMs themselves. The training needs of MUMs presented
an emergent theme that was not planned in the three steps research method.
71

Table 16
Summary of Three-Step Mixed Method
Step One Step Two Step Three
Participants
All MFRIC interviews
(12 persons)
47 MUM/HR Manager
survey from four
restaurants
6 MUM/HR manager
interviews
Format Zoom Interview
Online Survey by
Qualtrics
Zoom Interview
Time
November 5 - December
28, 2020
January 1 - 10, 2021
January 21 - Febuary 8,
2021
KMO
Framework
Five open-ended
interview questions
- Attributes of
Knowledge and skills
- Organization
expectations
- Future preferences
Six open-ended
interview questions
Proposed
Course
Opinion
- Survey the course
opinion
- Development “Body of
Knowledge” for each
course
Survey the course
opinion and
development sequence
- Survey the course
opinion
- Review “Body of
Knowledge” for each
course
Other
Survey
Items
Write-in course Demographics Write-in Course
Sequence
Contribution
- Clarified the KMO
framework of the
research
- Modified “Body of
Knowledge” for each
course
- Added “Restaurant
career & talent
development” course
in Step Two and Step
Three.
- Obtained rich survey
data and helped fine-
tune the interview
questions in Step
Three.
- Continued modifying
“Body of Knowledge”
for each course
- Obtained rich
conversational insight
into the field training
and development.
- Obtained additional
training needs of
current MUMs.

72

Qualitative data were collected through two rounds of interviews (Step One and Step
Three) and document analysis. Data was coded, analyzed, and triangulated to understand the
preference of nine proposed course for MFR curriculum at UNLV Hospitality College.
Quantitative data were reviewed, analyzed, triangulated to address the knowledge, skills,
dispositions do future managers in the MFR industry need to possess in order to meet the
academic standard and the industry expectation.
The results were then compared with the assumed influences of the knowledge and skills,
motivation and organizational influences articulated in Chapter Three, to determine validity or
invalidity. Validation was determined if participant responses via interviews or documents talked
about trends and how many of the participants touched on each theme regarding the assumed
influences proposed. Recommendations are provided for validated points of the multi-unit fast
casual curriculum in Chapter Five.
Participating Stakeholders
Given the purpose of this study was to explore knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to the successful launching of MFR concentration program by September
2022, the primary stakeholder of focus for this research is MFRIC members. The secondary
stakeholder of focus is the MUM or HR manager leaders of each participating MFR company.
The four multi-unit fast casual participating restaurant companies were Panda Express
(representing a corporate chain), Shake Shack (a corporate chain), Diversified Restaurant Group
(representing a franchise for Taco Bell) and The Wendy's International (representing a franchise
for Wendy’s). All participating restaurant companies operate fast casual restaurants or QSR
brands in the U.S.
73

Interview Participants of Step One
Participating MFRIC members’ information for Step One interview is summarized in
Table 17. The MFRIC, the advisory team of the multi-unit fast casual concentration was formed
in September 2020 with an objective to provide the practical industry knowledge to the MFR
concentration program. MFRIC is a representative group inclusive of broader restaurant industry
participants. MFRIC is comprised of a total of 12 members.

74

Table 17
Participating MFRIC Members for Step One Interview
No. Name Current Work Participant Type
1
Ms. Kathleen
Wood
Founder CEO of Kathleen Wood
Enterprises (KWP), former President of
Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers
Industry participant
2
Mr. Douglas
Fryett
President at Fryett Consulting Group
Dean’s global advisory
board Member of
UNLV Hospitality
3 Mr. Phil Stanton
Vice President of Operations at The
Wendy’s International
Industry participant
4 Mr. Royce Chow
Vice President of Operations at Panda
Restaurant Group
Industry participant
5
Mr. Scott
Boatwright
Chief Restaurant Officer at Chipotle
Mexican Grill
Industry participant
6
Mr. Darren
Tristano
CEO at Foodservice Results, Former
President of Technomic, Inc.
Industry participant
7
Professor Robin
DiPietro
Director for International Institute for
Foodservice Research and Education, at
University of Southern Carolina
Outside Restaurant
Management
Professor
8
Mr. Lincoln
Spoor
CEO at Feel Good Brands, LLC,
Franchise of Krispy Kreme
Industry participant
9 Mr. Todd Kelly
SVP at Diversified Restaurant Group,
Franchise of Taco Bell
Industry participant
10
Mr. James
Lessnick
CEO at Courthouse Caps LLC,
Franchise of Capriotti’s Sandwich Shop
Industry participant
11 Mr. Toby Malbec
Managing Director at ConStrata
Technology Consulting
Industry participant
12
Mr. Michael
Wang
Regional Vice President Operations at
Shake Shack
Industry participant

75

Survey Participants of Step Two
The survey data for this study were collected from a total of 47 responses (n = 47) to an
online survey distributed to a total number of 47 (response rate = 100%) MUMs or HR Managers
among four participating restaurant companies. Data collection for the survey occurred over a
10-day period of January 1-10, 2021. Descriptive statistics of survey participants (n = 47) by a
total of seven demographic variables are listed in Table 18.
As a group, the majority of the survey participants shared the following characteristics:
About 66% of the survey participants were above 40 years old, 68.1% had over 20 years working
experience in MFR industry, 68.1% worked in the franchise system, 95.6% carried the titles of
area coach of operations/MUM or regional director/district manager titles, 66% managed 1-30
stores, and 70.2% had high school or certificate diplomas. Those with a bachelor’s degree and
above included 29.8% of the survey participants.

Table 18
Demographic Information of Survey Participants (N = 47)
Demographic Variables Percentage
Age (N=47)
Below 30 years old 4.3%
30–39 29.8%
40–49 36.2%
50 years old and above 29.8%
Years of Working
Experience in worked in
the Multi-unit Fast
Casual Restaurant (N =
47)
Less than 5 years 0.00%
5 - 10 years 2.1%
10 - 15 years 12.8%
15 - 20 years 17.0%
20 years and more 68.1%

76

Demographic Variables Percentage
Multi-unit restaurant a
corporate-owned chain
or a franchise system?
(N=47)
All corporate-owned chain (such as Chipotle and
Panda Express)
27.7%
All franchisee system (such as Subway, Wendy’s,
and Taco Bell)
68.1%
Combination of all the above 4.2%
Are you a HR manager
position in your multi-
unit restaurant
company? (N=46)
Yes, I am a human resources manager/director 6.5%
No, I am not a human resources manager/director 93.5%
If you are Not an HR
manager/director, what
is your main job
responsibility in your
restaurant company?
(N=45)
Multi-unit manager / area coach of operation 55.6%
Regional director / district manager 40.0%
District/Zone vice president 2.2%
Other 2.2%
Do you supervise store
managers, both direct
report and indirect
report ? If yes, how
many? (N=47)

None 2.1%
1–10 managers 27.7%
11–30 managers 38.3%
31–100 managers 23.4%
101–300 managers 4.3%
Larger than 300 managers 4.3%
What is your highest
post high school
diploma earned? (N=47)
High School 51.1%
Certification 19.1%
Bachelor 23.4%
Master/MBA 6.4%
Doctor/PhD 0.0%

Interview Participants of Step Three
Upon preliminary analysis of the online MUM and HR manager survey results and
feedback obtained in Step Two, I solicited a small subset of MUMs and HR managers for in-
depth interviews. A total of six interviews were conducted during January 21- Febuary 8, 2021.
77

The participating MUM names, among four participating restaurant companies, were provided in
the Table 19.

Table 19
Participating Multi-Unit Managers for Step Three Interview
No. Name Multi-unit Restaurant Chain Role & Title
1 Mr. Laurent Moulin
Diversified Restaurant Group
(Taco Bell franchise)
Area Coach of
Operations
2 Ms. Lisa Sluder Shake Shack
Area Coach of
Operations
3 Mr. Anthony Morales Shake Shack
Area Coach of
Operations
4 Ms. Lissa Hamilton Shake Shack
Area Coach of
Operations
5 Ms. Stacey Celaya Panda Restaurant Group
Area Coach of
Operations
6 Ms. Alice Tomlin
The Wendy’s International
(Wendy’s franchise)
Human Resource
Director

78

Step One Interview Results and Findings
Industry Committee Interview Findings
Step One interview of 12 MFRIC members’ open-ended question interviews following
KMO framework and preference of the proposed draft course was conducted during November 5
- December 28, 2020. The research started with the MFRIC members because of their industry
expertise and connections to UNLV. Getting their initial guidance was vital to ensure that the
subsequent steps were built around the right questions. Zoom interview transcription was
completed, and course preference was summarized in the excel format. The sequence
contribution included developing “Body of Knowledge” for each course, clarifying KMO
framework of the research, and adding “Restaurant career & talent development” course in Step
Two and Step Three. Six open-ended interview questions following knowledge, motivation, and
organization framework is provided in Table 20.

79

Table 20
Questions Following Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Framework
KMO
Construct
KMO Influence Interview Question
K-Declarative
Future MFR managers should
understand all key facets of the
multi-unit fast casual
restaurant industry and
relevant principles of
accounting, finance,
management, and marketing.
What knowledge, skills, and
dispositions should a future MFR
manager possess?
K-Procedural
Future MFR managers should
demonstrate the ability to
utilize their knowledge of key
leadership skills in a multi-unit
fast casual restaurant setting.
How would you expect the future
MFR managers to demonstrate
his/her leadership and management
skills?
M-Utility
Value
Future MFR managers should
value their studies and their
intended career path in the
multi-unit fast casual
restaurant industry
What reasons should future MFR
managers hold for pursuing a career
in the restaurant industry?
M-Self-
Efficacy
Future MFR managers should
have confidence in their ability
to succeed in the MFR
industry.
To what extent should the future
MFR managers exhibit confidence
in their skills and ability to succeed
in the restaurant industry?
O-Cultural
Setting
Influence:
Resources
UNLV Hospitality College must
provide resources for future
MFR managers to pursue
careers in the industry upon
graduation.
What kinds of hand-on, practical
experience will the future MFR
manager need to obtain with the
assistance of the College?

The assumed KMO influence and identified themes in Step One interview toward each
KMO construct is summarized in Table 21.

80

Table 21
Assumed KMO Influences and Identified Themes in Step One Interview
Assumed Influences Identified Themes in Step One Interview
K-Declarative
Future MFR managers
should understand all key
facets of the multi-unit
fast casual restaurant
industry and relevant
principles of accounting,
finance, management,
and marketing.
- Future MFR manager has a career path that fits his/her
personal values, interests, personality, and skills.
- Future MFR manager is a great team builder.
- Future MFR manager understands both people skills and hard
skills (operation, process, marketing, and technology) required
to making a great MFR leader.
- Future MFR manager recognizes the technology-enhanced
operation gaining momentum during COVID-19 period in
2020.
- Future MFR manager embraces the industry trend of “future
restaurant.”
K-Procedural
Future MFR managers
should demonstrate the
ability to utilize their
knowledge of key
leadership skills in a
multi-unit fast casual
restaurant setting.
- Future MFR manager can take internship and practicum credit
courses while at school.
- Future MFR manager takes initiative in solving the operation
challenge in the restaurant.
- Future MFR manager is able to learn field operation and
support center function skills, such as supply chain, menu
development, site selection and restaurant technologies.
- Future MFR manager is capable of adding all types of digital
services to the restaurant operation.
- Future MFR manager, while at school, can balance his/her
schoolwork and work semi-full-time in the restaurant.
M-Utility Value
Future MFR managers
should value their studies
and their intended career
path in the multi-unit fast
casual restaurant
industry.
- Future MFR manager understands career success requiring
patience, hardworking and persistence in restaurant business.
- Future MFR manager values their career investment in the
industry.
- Future MFR manager is a people and technology enthusiast.
- Future MFR manager values the technology-enhanced
operation during COVID-19 and post pandemic.
M-Self-Efficacy
Future MFR managers
should have confidence
in their ability to succeed
in the MFR industry.
- Future MFR manager builds confidence through MFR
curriculum immersion and field operation.
- Future MFR manager gains confidence by developing his/her
staff.
- Future MFR manager is a master operator within four walls of
restaurant store plus marketing, multi-unit stores and all digital
operations.
- Future MFR manager has confidence in mastering soft skills
and hard skills, and in delivering a successful technology-
enhanced restaurant operation.

81

Assumed Influences Identified Themes in Step One Interview
O-Cultural Setting
Influence: Resources
UNLV Hospitality College
must provide resources
for future MFR managers
to pursue careers in the
industry upon graduation.
- Future MFR manager receives resource support on innovative
MFR curriculum, food and beverage facility, structured
industry internship program, entrepreneurship curriculum, and
restaurant career services.
- Future MFR manager acquires “future-looking” restaurant
training on all types of digital marketing and services.
- Future MFR manager takes structured industry internship to
pay off partial of his/her school tuition and housing cost.
- Future MFR manager puts the academic learning into practice
in every opportunity while at school.

K-Declarative: Future MFR Managers Should Understand All Key Facets of the Multi-Unit
Fast Casual Restaurant Industry and Relevant Principles of Accounting, Finance,
Management, and Marketing
All interview participants highlighted a range of knowledge, skills and dispositions in
serving as a successful MFR manager. The most commonly quoted skill was, “The restaurant
business is a people business, and surely the most desired skill in people business is people
skill.” A good MFR manager must have “designed a career path that fits his/her personal values,
interests, personality, and skills” in the restaurant industry so that he/she could serve as a role
model for his/her team members. A good MFR manager needs to be an amazing team builder.
S/he needs to be an expert on staffing, people development, and employment law practice. A
good MFR manager shall also know all facets of restaurant operation, from “cleaning the toilet,
mop the floor, fry the beef burger, and wok the wok.” Those operations skills cover back-of-the-
house, front-of-the-house, people development and coaching, marketing, competitive analysis of
local trade area, and financial management skill. One interview participant suggested, “Financial
management skills usually separate from one good single-store manager to a good MUM
82

candidate.” Financial and business acumen is how a MFR manager applies the critical thinking
and makes the timely decision wisely.
There are a few skillsets that some interview participants were worried that MFR
managers felt these were not their jobs, quoted as “somebody in headquarters should deal for
them!,” such as “restaurant marketing,” “ new product development”, “foodservice equipment
and technology.” The fact “very few store managers could deal with local in-person marketing,”
is a concern to some MFRIC members. In addition, “If our Gen Y and Gen Z staff are all tech-
savvy and on the smart phone all the time, why our store managers and MUMs could say no to
technology in the workspace?”, one interviewee mentioned, “scheduling the work shift through
smart phone application is one example.” The other interviewee said, “Restaurant is a super data-
rich industry, from customer order, menu pricing, labor scheduling, traffic patronage etc. and it’s
a pity that MUMs and restaurant corporates are not collecting these data for the business
analytics and insights.”
Most interview participants suggested that during COVID-19 pandemic a good MFR
manager needs to have a basic technology evaluation skills. He/she can recognize the
technology-enhanced restaurant operation and be adept at social media marketing, drive-through
operation, curbside pick-up, third party delivery, online ordering systems, and various guest
payment methods. One interviewee said,
This (technology-enhanced operations) skill will stand out a good MFR manager from the
crowd post COVID-19. We are training the future MFR leaders, and we need to embrace
the technology wholeheartedly. Look at McDonald’s, Starbucks, Domino's Pizza, and
everyone would agree they are both technology and restaurant companies today, and they
are even described as FinTech company by the media.
83

The quote above confirmed that a good MFR manager has knowledge to serve as a great
people developer and technology-enhanced restaurant operator going forward. In summary,
while at school, future MFR managers (students) should understand all key facets of skills
(people, operation, process and technology) of the MFR industry, and have a good industry trend
understanding of “future restaurants.”
K-Procedural: Future MFR Managers Should Demonstrate the Ability to Utilize Their
Knowledge of Key Leadership Skills in a Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Setting
The fact that the multi-unit fast casual leadership skills is earned during the restaurant
operations was validated. Interview participants all agreed that future MFR managers while in
school should take the “structured” internship practicum class and acknowledge the importance
of communication and people development nature in operating the restaurants. Other than the
daily field restaurant operations, the students should also take initiative solving the operation
challenge during the field restaurant internship. Case study shall be used in various classroom
setting to allow students to practice scenario choice decision and take the consequences of some
particular decision making.
Future MFR managers while taking the operation internship should also be assigned to
serve both as mentor and mentee roles, so that the students can quickly adapt the various role-
playing as a team member in the restaurant operation setting. Starting from the second year in the
MFR curriculum, some interview participants suggested 50% of the course time should be in the
field so that students can experience various restaurant operation settings, such as rotating roles
in a fast casual restaurant or similar roles in various types of restaurants and foodservices. These
rotations will all be eventually leaning toward to the assistant general manager position in the
restaurant, after three-to-six months of field training.
84

Interview participants also reported that the new MFR curriculum should reflect the
future of restaurant operations. The focus should be equally important in the field operation and
in the support center operations (such as supply chain management, restaurant equipment,
restaurant & social media marketing, real estate site selection, new product development, and
restaurant technologies), where most single-store manager, MUM candidate or MUM colleague
needs continuing working on it before they are further moving up to regional director of
operations position. One interview participant said,
If these support center function courses were not taught or disregarded in the restaurant
curriculum, where could our restaurant colleagues go and acquire such operation
knowledge & skills from? UNLV Hospitality College actually can provide supply chain
or restaurant technology courses to mid-career changers into the restaurant industry.
Restaurant industry needs to call for new diversified human capital.
The other interview participant said, “Taking the competent-based exams is just to train
an okay students. Future MFR managers need to take the challenge, while at school, to work on
the real problem in the field, such as how to adopt the digital order, how to do marketing through
the restaurant app, and how to handle the third party delivery.” Two interview participants
suggested a student could work three-to-four days per week (over 25–30 hours per week) and the
restaurant company would pay the student’s tuition and provide stipend to the student. In this
scenario, such student would actually have two roles while at school – one as a full-time student
and one as a full-time shift leader or assistant general manager in the restaurant. Therefore,
future MFR managers, while at school, need to have procedural knowledge to demonstrate
his/her full field immersion and practice his/her knowledge into key leadership skills in a MFR
setting.
85

M-Utility Value: Future MFR Managers Should Value Their Studies and Their Intended
Career Path in the Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry
Interview participants highlighted future MFR managers’ utility value shall focus on the
benefit of finishing the MFR studies at UNLV Hospitality College, rather than the enjoyment of
the study itself. Most interview participants suggested future MFR manager shall understand the
success of the enduring career requires patience, great people interaction skills (with staff and
guests all the time), hardworking and persistence in the fast-paced MFR industry. Working in the
fast casual restaurant industry is not an easier career path and does look “very low entry barrier”
in the beginning, as most interviewees suggested. However, very few people could continue
polishing skills and making the good impact of the fast casual restaurant operations. Future MFR
manager needs to have firm belief that MFR industry is worth their career investment. One
interview participant noted that,
Mindsets of willingness to serve, working long hours, trying out in the field before you
know you may love the industry, and competing on the long-term vision are all the
prerequisite understanding for each future MFR managers. A success rate moving up
from entry-level staff to the regional director of operations is below 1 over 1,000. A
regional director of operation is at least a manager for over 1,000 employees and
manages $30–60 million annual sales operation.
The majority of the interview participants worried that the low starting salary, low
barriers to entry in the field, and high employee turnover (usually over 100–150% per year) may
discourage the young future MFR manages to invest themselves in the field. The other barrier is
technology-enabled restaurant operations, which is actually not commonly taught at the
restaurant management program in the U.S. One interview participant mentioned,
86

All the future thriving business, post COVID-19 era must be a technology-enhanced
restaurant business – hard to have exception at the reasonable scale of restaurant
operations. Nobody would not deny Wingstop and Chipotle, during the COVID-19
period, are a hybrid of technology and restaurant company. They did deliver amazing
result in that period, escalated their workforce, and transformed their organization. If you
ask a MUM to review the job description of their tech team openings for the support
center (headquarter office), most MUMs will have difficulty in understanding what
his/her tech colleagues are working on.”
The new future MFR manager will need to be both people and technology enthusiast.
Lack of technology-enhanced operation training was a key barrier most interview participants
identified for the continued growth outside a single-store operation. At this moment, no
hospitality college in the U.S. is adopting this technology-enhanced restaurant operation
curriculum. One interviewee was particularly worried that the current specialty restaurant job
hires (such as supply chain, kitchen equipment, business analytics, data science, software
development, and digital marketing) are actually hiring new people from outside the restaurant
industry. This exhibited a huge skill gaps for technology-enhanced operations within the
restaurant industry. In summary, while at school, the future MFR managers (students) should
value their studies in restaurant operation and technology field, and build a broader and stronger
career foundation in the MFR industry.
M-Self-Efficacy: Future MFR Managers Should Have Confidence in Their Ability to Succeed
in the MFR Industry
Most interview participants agreed that future MFR manager will gradually build up their
confidence through the MFR curriculum immersion, and field operation experience while at
87

school. At school, the students will have numerous activity experience of self-assessment, career
discovery, career exploration and development of his/her personal growth restaurant career plan.
The students understand the best learning lies in operating the successful restaurants and they
will also gain confidence by developing his/her staff and by delivering the restaurant operation
goals – both within the four walls of restaurant real estate and digital operations (marketing,
online order, third party delivery and curbside pick-up). “Operation within four walls of
restaurant store,” one interview said, is one traditional concept of restaurant operation, which
today should add “marketing, multi-unit stores, and all digital operations” to the capability
requirements of a successful MFR manager. One interview participant suggested the self-
efficacy is built upon by continuing leading the technology-enhanced operations, solving the
business problems, and solicit the feedback from the team members and guests. The other
interview participant noted,
The confidence lies in the ability to lead and willingness to lead, enhanced by the hard
skills, and being able to work on every position (must include marketing). He/she gains
confidence in managing the employees and give credit to the team members when
showing success. The good manager will also focus on the employee retention.
Therefore, other than the store management skill, soft skill (that include communication
skills, social skills, and broad-base humanity & empathy) is of equal importance for the future
MFR managers to build confidence. One interview participant observed the consistent delivery
of restaurant operation for a period of six months is more or less the time required for future
MFR manager to build and decide the restaurant industry is his/her career goal. In conclusion,
future MFR manager will build his/her self-efficacy and confidence level by delivering
88

consistent technology-enhanced restaurant operation and people development practice in the
MFR industry.
O-Cultural Setting Influence, Resources: UNLV Hospitality College Must Provide Resources
for Future MFR Managers to Pursue Careers in the Industry Upon Graduation
Every interview participants agreed that UNLV Hospitality College needs to provide the
necessary resources, such as innovative MFR curriculum, food and beverage facility, structured
industry internship program, entrepreneurship curriculum, and restaurant career services to future
MFR managers at school. In reflection of COVID-19’s disruption and acceleration for the
restaurant industry, most interview participants agreed the “future-looking” innovative
curriculum must cover digital restaurant operation and digital footprint growth, such as
restaurant technology, digital marketing, restaurant entrepreneurship, food delivery and
packaging, virtual kitchen operation and restaurant business analytics. These courses actually
could be at “undergraduate, master level, and professional development curriculum.”
In terms of the internship program, one interview participant suggested,
We could really implement innovative industry partnership for the students to earn
stipend and full tuition scholarship from the sponsoring restaurant company. He/she can
start building up his restaurant industry resume from the first-year summer at UNLV
Hospitality College. The student would start the full apprenticeship relationship with one
specific restaurant company. Within three years sponsorship while at college, the student
may start the first day outside school as the area coach or franchise field manager for the
MFR company.
One other participant suggested,
89

The school needs to offer practical curriculum or internship for students, and to
encourage students to think like the restaurant owner. The students need to be able to
review operation analytics, financial report, and performance review; the students can
work with accounting firm, the lawyer, the lender on behalf of the restaurant owner, and
can also look at the store buildout, site selection and work on the future growth plan,
either physical store expansion or through digital footprint services. Building the
transparency between restaurant owner and general manager is a new restaurant operation
practice.
“Taking the ownership mindset” is one important practice area that UNLV Hospitality
College could set up the learning culture within all MRF curriculum design. The College could
also encourage the students to explore restaurant entrepreneurial route to take bigger challenge in
starting up a new concept, acquiring an existing restaurant company or creating a technology
startup solving the operation challenge in the restaurant industry.
In conclusion, through the interviews with all industry participants, future MFR managers
shall receive all resource support from UNLV Hospitality College. The new MFR curriculum
will reflect “future-looking” nature at least for 5–10 years for the MFR industry, and confirm the
digital acceleration reality of COVID-19 and future human capital development.
Proposed Draft Courses
The MFRIC members were asked to indicate the extent to which course/subject material
listed below should be included in the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum, on the
scale of 1–7. Table 22 sets forth the preference toward eight course subject with mean, standard
deviation and frequency of responses presented.

Table 22
Course Preference by MFRIC Member Interview
Course Subject
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant
Operations
83.3% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.17 3.73
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Quantitative
Analytics
50.0% 41.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 1.83 2.63
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
41.7% 33.3% 0.0% 16.7% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.17 2.06
Restaurant
Marketing
25.0% 58.3% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 2.25 2.56
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
25.0% 33.3% 25.0% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 2.50 1.70
Supply Chain
Management
41.7% 8.3% 8.3% 25.0% 8.3% 8.3% 0.0% 2.75 1.70
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
0.0% 25.0% 16.7% 41.7% 8.3% 8.3% 0.0% 3.58 1.80
New Product
Development
0.0% 33.3% 8.3% 25.0% 8.3% 16.7% 8.3% 3.92 1.38

90
91

The survey results indicated that MFRIC members’ top three recommended course were
MFR operations, multi-unit fast casual quantitative analytics, and multi-unit fast casual system
development. The least two recommended courses were restaurant concept growth strategies,
and new product development.
Write-In Course by MFRIC Members
The MFRIC members were asked to indicate any other suggested courses (up to four
courses) during each interview. A total of 25 course counts were recorded by the MFRIC
members. Table 23 displays the write-in courses by the MFRIC member interview.

Table 23
Write-in Courses by MFRIC Member Interview
#
Course
Grouping
Course Write-in (Number of Counts) Count Total
1 Communication - Dealing with Unexpected (1) 1 4%
2
Human
Resource
- Human Resources & Talent Management (11)
- People Manpower & Technology (1)
- Leadership Skills Development (2)
- Recruiting, Assessment, Relationship Building (1)
- Self-Development & Career Planning (1)
16 64%
3
General
Management
- Financial Management (1)
- Franchise Development (1)
- Restaurant Entrepreneurship (1)
- Finance, Accounting and QuickBooks (1)
- Unit Economics & Decision Making (1)
5 20%
4 Technologies
- Restaurant Technologies & Social Media (1)
- Restaurant Technology 101 (1)
2 8%
5 Internship - Structured Internship (1) 1 4%
25 100%

92

A total of 11 out of the 12 committee members suggested HR and talent management
should be included in the MFR curriculum and ranked it the most important course among the
other eight evaluated courses. A total of 16 of the suggested 25 courses relate to HR.
Consequently, the “Restaurant Career & Talent Management” course was added to Step Two’s
online survey and Step Three’s MUM interview.
Step Two Survey Results and Findings
Step Two entailed an online survey of 47 industry MUM and HR manager from four
participating companies. The content of Step Two’s survey reflected guidance from the MFRIC
members in Step One and sought input from these seasoned industry practitioners. The online
survey was administered through the software Qualtrics and the data was analyzed using the
report functions available in the software package. In this section, Step Two online survey results
and findings are presented in the following four subsections: (a) attributes of future graduates of
a multi-unit fast casual concentration, (b) proposed draft courses, (c) organization expectations,
and (d) future preferences. The sequence contribution included obtaining rich survey data and
assistance in fine-tuning the interview questions in Step Three.
Attributes of Future Graduates of a Multi-Unit Fast Casual Concentration
MUMs were asked what knowledge and skills are believed that the future managers of
MFR should possess. This attributes were pre-determined into four categories, covering (a)
Critical/Reflective Skills, (b) Professional/Technical Skills (similar to the curriculum course
names), (c) Communicational/Relationship, (d) Plasticity/Erudition (Broad-based knowledge).
These four categories followed Alexakis and Jiang (2019) competency model, as was discussed in
“Skills and Knowledge Competencies” literature review.
93

Critical/Reflective Skills
The MUMs were asked to show preference about with the types of skills they seek in
employees on a Likert-type scale of 1–7 relating the critical/reflective skills of MUMs (1 =
Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). The critical/reflective skills were broken into a
total of four type of skills. Table 24 displays the preference toward four types of skills with
mean, standard deviation and frequency of responses.

Table 24
Critical/Reflective Skills Preference by Multi-Unit Managers
Type of Skills
Strongly
Agree
(1)
Agree
(2)
Mildly
Agree
(3)
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
(4)
Mildly
Disagree
(5)
Disagree
(6)
Strongly
Disagree
(7)
Mean Std. D
Problem-solving
skills (N=45)
84.4% 15.6% 0.00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.16 0.36
Critical thinking
skills (N=45)
73.3% 24.4% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.29 0.50
The skills to
implement
change (N=46)
73.9% 21.7% 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.30 0.55
The skills to
provide creative
solutions (N=46)
52.2% 41.3% 6.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.54 0.62

94
95

“N” in above table represents the number of recorded respondents in a particular survey
item. The survey results indicated that participants’ preference toward MUM among
critical/reflective skills were problem-solving skills, then critical thinking skills, skills to
implement change and followed by the skills to provide creative solutions. All four
critical/reflective skills were all highly valued by the MUMs and HR managers.
Professional/Technical Skills
The MUMs were asked to show their preferences in terms of skillset they seek in
employees using a Likert-type scale of 1–7 relating the professional/technical skills of MUMs (1
= Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). The professional/technical skills were broken
into a total of 11 types of skills carrying some of the proposed curriculum course names. Table
25 shows the preference toward 11 types of skills with mean, standard deviation and frequency
of responses.

Table 25
Professional/Technical Skills Preference by Multi-Unit Managers
Skill Type
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
Career & talent
development (N=46)
89.1% 8.7% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.13 0.40
Restaurant operations
(N=45)
86.7% 11.1% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.16 0.42
Financial and
accounting skills (N=45)
57.8% 37.8% 4.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.47 0.58
Quantitative analytics
Skills (N=46)
37.0% 47.8% 13.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.80 0.74
Supply chain
management (N=46)
23.9% 34.8% 28.2% 10.9% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 2.35 1.09
Restaurant marketing
(N=46)
19.6% 37.0% 32.6% 6.5% 0.0% 4.4% 0.0% 2.43 1.14
Foodservice equipment
and technology (N=46)
17.4% 34.8% 30.4% 13.0% 2.2% 0.0% 2.2% 2.57 1.19
Company system
development (N=46)
17.4% 30.4% 26.1% 15.2% 2.2% 4.4% 4.4% 2.85 1.52
Store site selection
(N=45)
15.6% 28.9% 26.7% 11.1% 6.7% 4.4% 6.7% 3.04 1.66
Franchise development
(N=46)
8.7% 23.9% 13.0% 30.4% 4.4% 8.7% 10.9% 3.67 1.77
New product
development (N=46)
8.7% 19.6% 23.9% 19.6% 6.5% 15.2% 6.5% 3.67 1.72
96
97

The survey results indicated that participants’ top three preference toward MUM’s
professional/technical skills were career & talent development, restaurant operations, and
financial & accounting skills. The least two expected professional/technical skills of a MUM
were franchise development and new product development.
Communicational/Relationship
The MUMs were asked about their preferences in terms of teamwork and
communications skills using a Likert-type scale of 1–7 relating the communication/relationship
skills of MUMs (1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor
Disagree, 5 = Mildly Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). The communication and
relationship skills included a total of four types of skills. Table 26 presents the preference toward
four types of skills with mean, standard deviation and frequency of responses presented.

Table 26
Communication/Relationship Preference by Multi-Unit Managers
Skill Type
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
Teamwork skills
(N=46)
93.5% 6.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.07 0.25
Oral
communication
skills (N=45)
84.4% 15.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.16 0.36
Interpersonal skills
(N=45)
77.8% 20.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.27 0.57
Written
communication
skills (N=46)
69.6% 28.3% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.33 0.51
98
99

The survey results indicated that participants’ preference toward MUM’s
communication/relationship skills were all highly valued and following the order of teamwork
skills, oral communication skills, interpersonal skills and written communication skills.
Plasticity/Erudition (Broad-Based Knowledge)
The MUMs were asked to show their preferences in terms of openness to change using a
Likert-type scale of 1–7 relating the plasticity/erudition (broad-based knowledge) of MUMs (1 =
Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). The plasticity and erudition skills were broken
into a total of two types. Table 27 shows the preference toward two types of skills with mean,
standard deviation and frequency of responses presented.

Table 27
Plasticity/Erudition Preference by Multi-Unit Managers
Category
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
Flexibility and
adaptability
(N=46)
87.0% 10.9% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.15 0.42
Willingness to learn
(N=46)
84.8% 13.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.17 0.43

100
101

The survey results indicated that participants’ preference toward MUM’s
plasticity/erudition skills were both highly valued and sharing the similar preference level for
both “flexibility and adaptability” and “willingness to learn.”
Proposed Draft Courses
The MUMs were asked to indicate the extent to which each course (nine courses in total)
listed below reflected the learning needs of a multi-unit fast casual concentration manager on a
Likert-type scale of 1–7 (1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree
nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). Table 28 exhibits the
preference toward 9 courses with mean, standard deviation and frequency of responses.

Table 28
Proposed Draft Course Preference by Multi-Unit Managers
Course Subject
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
Restaurant Career &
Talent Development
(N=43)
79.1% 16.3% 2.3% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.28 0.62
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Restaurant Operations
(N=44)
75.0% 18.2% 2.3% 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.36 0.74
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Quantitative Analytics
(N=42)
50.0% 40.5% 7.1% 2.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.62 0.72
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
(N=45)
26.7% 46.7% 13.3% 8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 4.4% 2.27 1.34
Food Service Equipment
and Technology (N=42)
19.1% 45.2% 21.4% 9.5% 2.4% 0.0% 2.4% 2.40 1.20
Restaurant Marketing
(N=44)
15.9% 45.5% 29.6% 2.3% 2.3% 4.6% 0.0% 2.43 1.14
Supply Chain
Management (N=44)
15.9% 38.6% 29.6% 9.1% 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.59 1.27
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
System Development
(N=43)
23.3% 34.9% 20.9% 11.6% 0.0% 4.7% 4.7% 2.63 1.56
New Product
Development (N=45)
8.9% 26.7% 28.9% 8.9% 4.4% 13.3% 8.9% 3.49 1.81
102
103

The survey results indicated that MUMs’ top three preferred courses were restaurant
career & talent development, MFR operations, and multi-unit fast casual quantitative analytics.
The least two preferrable courses were multi-unit fast casual system development and new
product development.
Write-in Course by MUMs
While the MUMs were asked to indicate the extent to which courses (nine courses in
total) are most preferrable, each MUM was also allowed to write-in up to four courses in the end
at the online survey. Table 29 summarizes the write-in course by MUM and the research
categorized them into four group types – communications, HR, general management, and
hospitality-related law.

Table 29
Write-in Courses by Multi-Unit Managers
Course Group Type Course Write-in Count Total
Communication
- Constructive Conflict Skills (1)
- Communication Case Study (1)
- Interpersonal Communications (1)
- Emotional intelligence (1)
- Coaching Skills (1)
- Delegating (1)
6 31.6%
Human Resource
- Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (1)
- Human Resources Practice (1)
- Career and Talent Management (1)
- Performance Management Skills (1)
- Talent Selection & Retention (1)
- Inclusion (1)
6

31.6%

104

Course Group Type Course Write-in Count Total
General
Management
- Financial Management & P&L Analytics (1)
- Basic Accounting (1)
- Restaurant Store Operations (1)
- Six Sigma & Lean Principals (1)
- Organizing and Planning (1)
5 26.3%
Law
- Hospitality Law (1)
- HR & Law Compliance (1)
2 10.5%
19 100%

The write-in results indicated that six MUMs’ additional desired courses focused on the
communication skills, general HR, talent development and retention, some general management
skills, and restaurant business law.
Course Developing Sequence
Twenty-eight MUM responds were recorded to rank order of the developing sequence for
the multi-unit fast casual curriculum ranking the nine evaluated courses in order of importance.
Table 30 presents the preferrable developing sequence of the first to the ninth toward nine
proposed draft courses with mean, standard deviation and frequency of responses presented.

Table 30
Course Developing Sequence by Multi-Unit Managers (N = 28)
#
Course Developing
Sequence Ranking
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mean Std. D
1
Restaurant Career &
Talent Development
50.0% 17.9% 14.3% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 14.3% 2.71 2.64
2
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Restaurant Operations
32.1% 39.3% 3.6% 0.0% 3.6% 3.6% 10.7% 3.6% 3.6% 2.96 2.46
3
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
System Development
3.6% 7.1% 10.7% 28.6% 17.9% 10.7% 14.3% 7.1% 0.0% 4.75 1.79
4
Restaurant
Marketing
7.1% 7.1% 3.6% 25.0% 14.3% 21.4% 7.1% 10.7% 3.6% 5.00 2.05
5
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
0.0% 3.6% 21.4% 14.3% 21.4% 17.9% 10.7% 7.1% 3.6% 5.07 1.77
6
Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Quantitative Analytics
0.0% 14.3% 17.9% 17.9% 7.1% 7.1% 3.6% 14.3% 17.9% 5.32 2.54
7
Supply Chain
Management
3.6% 7.1% 14.3% 0.0% 7.1% 10.7% 14.3% 25.0% 17.9% 6.21 2.47
8
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.7% 17.9% 25.0% 21.4% 14.3% 10.7% 6.43 1.47
9
New Product
Development
3.6% 3.6% 14.3% 3.6% 7.1% 3.6% 17.9% 14.3% 32.1% 6.54 2.51
105
106

The survey results indicated that MUMs’ suggested course developing sequence was to
start with restaurant career & talent development, followed by MFR operations, and multi-unit
fast casual system development. The last two preferrable courses to be developed were food
service equipment & technology, and new product development.
Organization Expectations
The MUMs were asked to show preference about with the eight statements below on the
Likert scale of 1–7 relating the organization expectation of MFRs (1 = Strongly Agree, 2 =
Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7
= Strongly Disagree). Eight statements were all evaluated independently of each MUM surveyed.
Table 31 exhibits the preference toward eight statements with mean, standard deviation and
frequency of responses.

Table 31
Organization Expectation of Multi-Unit Manager Online Survey (N=41)
Evaluation Statement
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
R1: Having a hospitality college
degree increases the chances of
getting hired as a store manager
7.3% 24.4% 31.7% 19.5% 4.9% 9.8% 2.4% 3.29 1.44
R2: Store managers with a
hospitality college degree can
expedite the management
learning curve more effectively.
14.6% 19.5% 31.7% 22.0% 4.9% 7.3% 0.0% 3.08 1.34
R3: If all candidates were equally
qualified, you would hire the
individual with a hospitality
college degree.
14.6% 24.4% 26.8% 19.5% 2.4% 7.3% 4.9% 3.12 1.58
R4: Store managers with a
hospitality college degree are
more likely to be promoted to
higher level management
positions
12.2% 24.4% 22.0% 24.4% 7.3% 7.3% 2.4% 3.22 1.49
R5: The overall turnover rates for
managers who have a hospitality
college degree are lower than the
turnover rates for managers who
do not have a hospitality degree.
4.9% 0.0% 14.6% 51.2% 12.2% 7.3% 9.8% 4.27 1.42
R6: Store managers with a
hospitality college degree are
more reliable in the workplace
2.4% 14.6% 14.6% 46.3% 9.8% 7.3% 4.9% 3.88 1.31

Evaluation Statement
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
R7: Store managers with a
hospitality college degree are
better managers of employee
productivity
2.4% 2.4% 24.4% 46.3% 14.6% 7.3% 2.4% 4.00 1.09
R8: Store managers with a
hospitality college degree are
better asset managers than those
without a hospitality college
degree
7.3% 2.4% 39.0% 36.6% 4.9% 2.4% 7.3% 3.00 1.35
107 108
109

R1: Having a Hospitality College Degree Increases the Chances of Getting Hired as a Store
Manager
About 63.4% MUMs agreed that a hospitality college degree increases the chances of
getting hired as a store manager, whereas 19.5% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed, and 17.1%
MUMs disagreed.
R2: Store Managers With A Hospitality College Degree Can Expedite the Management
Learning Curve More Effectively
Approximately 65.8% MUM agreed managers with a hospitality college degree can
expedite the management learning curve, whereas 22.0% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed,
and 12.2% MUM disagree.
R3: If all Candidates Were Equally Qualified, You Would Hire the Individual With a
Hospitality College Degree
An estimated 65.8% of MUMs were more likely to hire individuals with a hospitality
college degree, whereas 19.5% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed, and 14.6% MUMs disagree.
R4: Store Managers With a Hospitality College Degree Are More Likely to be Promoted to
Higher Level Management Positions
Around 58.6% MUMs agreed store managers with a hospitality college degree are more
likely to be promoted to higher level management positions, whereas 24.4% MUMs neither
agreed nor disagreed, and 17% MUMs disagreed.
R5: The Overall Turnover Rates for Managers Who Have a Hospitality College Degree Are
Lower Than the Turnover Rates for Managers Who Do Not Have a Hospitality College Degree
Only 19.5% MUMs believed a store manager with a hospitality degree would stay longer
with the position. About 51.2% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed that a store manager with a
110

hospitality degree will stay longer with the position. Estimated 29.3% MUMs held the view that
a store manager with a hospitality degree would be less stable with the job. This suggested the
MUMs did perceive a higher turnover rate for store managers with a hospitality college degree.
R6: Store Managers With a Hospitality College Degree Are Better Managers of Employee
Productivity
Only 31.6% MUMs believed a store with a hospitality college degree would be more
reliable in the workplace. About 46.3% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed that a store manager
with a hospitality degree would be reliable in the workplace. Around 22.0% MUMs held the
views store manager with a hospitality degree were not reliable in the workplace. This suggested
the MUMs did not see value in store managers with a hospitality college degree.
R7: Store Managers With a Hospitality College Degree Are Better Managers of Employee
Productivity
Nearly half (46.3%) of MUMs were unsure whether a store manager with a hospitality
degree would be a better manager of employee productivity. About 24.3% MUMs held the views
store manager with a hospitality degree was a poor manager of employee productivity. This
suggested the MUMs did not see better employee productivity for store managers with a
hospitality college degree.
R8: Store Managers With a Hospitality College Degree Are Better Asset Managers Than
Those Without a Hospitality College Degree
Almost half (48.7%) of MUMs agreed that a store manager with a hospitality college
degreed such a person would be a better asset manager. About 36.3% MUMs neither agreed nor
disagreed, and 14.6% MUMs disagreed. A total of 50.9% MUMs did not believe a store manager
with hospitality college degree could serve as a better asset manager. This suggested a store
111

manager with hospitality college degree was not perceived with the skillset advantage over those
without such degree.
These finding suggested that, from the perspective of the MUMs, a store manager with a
hospitality college would be a fast learner. A MUM would be more likely to hire a candidate
with a hospitality with hospitality college degree and develops them into a higher management
position. However, the majority of MUMs suggested a store manager with a hospitality degree
actually harms the restaurant organization in terms of store manager’s high turnover rate,
workplace reliability, employee’s productivity, and the asset management performance. This
organization expectations of MUM survey toward a store manager with a hospitality college
degree is somewhat daunting and worth further investigation.
Future Preferences
The MUMs were asked to indicate their future interest in the proposed program on the
scale of 1–7 (1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree,
5 = Mildly Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree). Four statements were evaluated
independently of each MUM surveyed. Table 32 presents the preference toward four statements
with mean, standard deviation and frequency of responses.

Table 32
Future Preference of Multi-Unit Manager Online Survey
Evaluation Items
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Mean Std. D
S1: I am willing to learn more
about the multi-unit fast
casual restaurant curriculum.
(N=41)
51.2% 29.3% 4.9% 9.8% 2.4% 2.4% 0.0% 1.90 1.23
S2: For the training needs, I
will consider sending my
store managers for the
professional development at
a hospitality college. (N=40)
22.5% 30.0% 22.5% 17.5% 5.0% 2.5% 0.0% 2.60 1.27
S3: I am willing to hire
candidates with multi-unit
fast casual restaurant
training certificate or
degree. (N=41)
29.3% 48.8% 12.2% 9.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.02 0.89
S4: I will recommend my store
managers for the
professional development
courses/ certificates at
UNLV Hospitality College,
either for the online course
or in-person session. (N=39)
23.1% 33.3% 23.1% 17.9% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.44 1.15
112
113

S1: I Am Willing to Learn More About the Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Curriculum
About 85.4% MUMs agreed to learn more about MFR curriculum, whereas 9.7% MUMs
neither agreed nor disagreed, and 4.8% disagreed to learn more about such curriculum.
S2: For the Training Needs, I Will Consider Sending My Store Managers for the Professional
Development at a Hospitality College
Approximate 75.0% MUMs agreed to send his/her store managers for the professional
development at a hospitality college. Around 17.5% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed, and
7.5% MUMs disagreed to send his/her store managers for the professional development at a
hospitality college.
S3: I Am Willing to Hire Candidates With Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Training
Certificate or Degree.
An overwhelming 90.2% of MUMs agreed to hire candidates with MFR certificate
training or degree, whereas only 9.8% MUMs neither agreed nor disagreed. No MUMs disagreed
with hiring candidates with a MFR certificate training or degree.
S4: I Will Recommend My Store Managers for the Professional Development
Courses/Certificates at UNLV Hospitality College, Either for the Online Course or In-Person
Session
About 79.5% MUMs agreed to recommend his/her store managers for the professional
development courses/certificates at UNLV Hospitality College. Around 17.9% MUMs neither
agreed nor disagreed, and 2.6% MUMs disagreed to give such recommendation.
The finding suggested the MUMs were willing to learn about the MFR curriculum, to
consider store manager’s professional development at a hospitality college, to hire staff with
MFR curriculum certificate, and to send store managers training at UNLV Hospitality College.
114

Summary of Survey Result
In this section, survey results and findings of the Step Two online survey of 47 industry
practitioners of MUM were presented in four subsections: (a) attributes of future graduates of a
multi-unit fast casual concentration, (b) proposed draft courses, (c) organization expectations,
and (d) future preferences. In the first attributes subsection, three skillset categories
(critical/reflective skills, communicational/relationship skills, and plasticity/erudition skills)
showed a generally high percentage of agreement to be anticipated for future MFR leaders.
However, in terms of each specific professional/technical skill, the finding suggested a high
discrepancy among various professional/technical skills would be expected from the future MFR
leaders. The MUMs’ top three preferred courses were restaurant career & talent development,
MFR operations, and multi-unit fast casual quantitative analytics. The least two preferrable
courses were multi-unit fast casual system development and new product development.
In terms of the proposed draft courses, the findings indicated the course development
sequence should begin with restaurant career & talent development, followed by MFR
operations, and multi-unit fast casual system development. The last two courses to be developed
were food service equipment & technology, and new product development. As for the
organization expectations, the finding suggested a store manager with a hospitality degree could
actually harm the restaurant organization in terms of store manager’s high turnover rate,
workplace reliability, employee’s productivity, and the asset performance. Regarding future
preferences of surveyed MUMs, the findings suggested positive feedback that MUMs would be
happy to learn about the MFR curriculum, to consider store manager’s professional development
at a hospitality college, to hire staff with MFR curriculum training certificate, and to send store
managers training at UNLV Hospitality College.
115

Step Three Interview Results and Findings
Open-Ended Questions
A total of six open-ended questions were asked among six MUMs who have completed
Step Two’s online survey. The Zoom interviews were conducted during January 21 - Febuary 8,
2021. Step Three returned to interviews as the final step. These interviews allowed me to get a
deeper understanding of the guidance from the survey respondents in Step Two and the interview
questions informed by the MFRIC members from Step One. Table 33 exhibits the interview
themes generated by following KMO framework and providing linkage to the nine MFR
curriculum courses. The sequence contribution includes continued modifying “Body of
Knowledge” for each course, access to rich conversational insight into the field training and
development, and additional training needs of current MUMs.

Table 33
Interview Questions, KMO Framework and Linking to Courses
Interview Questions
KMO
Framework
Linking to Courses
Q1: How many stores in your
firm is a multi-unit manager
responsible for?
Knowledge
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
Operations
Q2: What are the attributes you
would like to see in a multi-unit
manager candidate?
Motivation - Restaurant Career & Talent Management
Q3: How do you train your store
manager before they are
promoted to be a multi-unit
manager candidate?
Knowledge
Motivation
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
Operations
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative
Analytics
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual System
Development
- Restaurant Marketing
116

Q4: What attributes would you
like to see in a recent graduate
from a multi-unit fast causal
restaurant curriculum?
Knowledge
Motivation
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
Operations
- Internship Course
- Restaurant Career & Talent Management
- Food Service Equipment and
Technology
- Supply Chain Management
- Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
Q5: What specific competencies
are required to be promoted as
multi-unit manager candidate?
Prompt with the following, if
required.
Knowledge
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
Operations
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative
Analytics
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual System
Development
- Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
Q6: What value do you see in a
multi-unit fast causal restaurant
certificate or degree?
Knowledge
Motivation
Organization

- Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant
Operations
- Internship Course
- Professional Development Certificate in
Summer for “Multi-Unit Manager”
- BSHM in Restaurant Business Analytics
Concentration
- M.S. in Multi-unit Restaurant
Management
- M.S. in Restaurant Business Analytics
- Master-level Courses (such as Restaurant
Technologies)
- Restaurant Entrepreneurship Course
- Restaurant Venture Acceleration
Services
- Restaurant Career Services & Alumni
Network

Q1: How Many Stores in Your Firm Is a Multi-Unit Manager Responsible For?
Most interview participants mentioned a MUM may manage 4–17 stores. Usually the
larger per store footprint, the smaller number of store management count per MUM. MUMs
might carry different names per each restaurant system, such as area coach (AC) or District
manager (DM). The MUM/AC/DM might report to a director of area operation (DAO) or a
117

regional director of operation (RDO), who usually had three-to-six direct reports of
MUM/AC/DMs, covering a total of 60–100 store portfolio. A DAO/RDO might report into vice
president or chief operating officer, depending on the company’s total restaurant counts and
organization structure.
The interviewed MUMs’ store coverage was usually dispersed within two or three
metropolitan areas and could across state borders. Most MUMs’ store coverage was not within
one day driving distance. Area coach/MUM usually did not have an office space and usually
worked from home, from a hotel or from a car. Pre COVID-19 period, a MUM usually planned
to visit two or three store general manager (GM) per day and a round-trip store visit for all
managed stores usually took two weeks. During COVID-19 period, MUMs mostly managed
stores remotely most of the time and only might visit store on a needed basis. For a large
geographic coverage, the MUM might delegate a senior store manager to help manage 2–3 stores
in that particular city within 30–50 miles radius coverage. Usually, those senior GMs were the
MUM candidate within their restaurant system that had been recommended by the AC to his/her
reporting boss.
Q2: What Are the Attributes You Would Like to See in a Multi-Unit Manager Candidate?
Most interview participants stated they would like to see a MUM candidate with good
communication and interpersonal skills, high emotional intelligence, staffing skills (servicing as
a great coach to the team members), and high accountability for the stores profit & loss and
people operations. One MUM would like to see the MUM candidate being the “Brand
Ambassador” with impeccable operation disciplines of the stores (referring to the business
acumen and financial skills) and empathy for the team development. One MUM wanted to see
the MUM candidate a good problem solver. Most MUM candidates were identified and
118

promoted from the roles of GM or senior GM position. In the case of hiring MUM candidate
from outside the restaurant system, the MUM mentioned those “probational MUM candidate”
must have over five years MUM experience managing 5–10 stores plus the bachelor degree.
He/she would star from a three-month probation period as a single-store manager to test the
“new MUM-Company” cultural and organization fit. Decision to hire a store manager with prior
MUM experience in another restaurant system was usually made by MUM’s direct boss, not by
MUM himself/herself.
Q3: How Do You Train Your Store Manager Before They Are Promoted to Be a Multi-Unit
Manager Candidate?
Most interview participants mentioned about setting goals and master action plan for the
MUM candidate. Before COVID-19 time, the MUM candidate would be asked to cover
additional two or three store operation for a two-week observation period that included lots of
“shadowing learning” of store visits with the MUM. The MUM candidate would be asked to
solve the problem of a “financial suffering (low sales volume)” or “people suffering (high
employee turnover)” store. The MUM would also encourage each store manager to share “better
practice” in his/her store to “test’ who may be a better candidate for the senior store manager or
MUM candidate. In terms of store operation, the MUM candidate would be asked to recruit, staff
up and open a new store or to manage additional store. The additional store could be a high
grossing store, a drive-through store, or a low sales “suffering” store. One MUM mentioned that
every MUM candidate would need to complete the Phase Two’s leadership academy training in
our restaurant system (Phase One was the store manager training). Overall, the MUM was
constantly training and testing if the experienced store manager could level up as a two-store
119

operator before formally recognizing (need to obtain approval from MUM’s boss) as a senior
GM or MUM candidate with their restaurant system.
Q4: What Attributes Would You Like to See in a Recent Graduate From a Multi-Unit Fast
Causal Restaurant Curriculum?
All interview participants said they would be “very excited” to see the recent graduate of
a restaurant management degree making the job application to their stores. Most application
candidate with restaurant management degree would be evaluated by the store manager and store
manager’s direct boss, or by the headquarter of the restaurant company. The key attributes they
wanted to see in graduates included
• Ability to convert book knowledge into practice immediately
• Hunger to apply skills acquired at school into the field
• Readiness and commitment to enter the profession as an assistant store manager, or as a
general management in training
• Familiarity with hospitality law and HR functions
• Ability to quickly become the trainer for the franchise system
• Analytical skills necessary to be very good at analyzing the profit and losses of store
operations
• Appreciation of the rule & philosophy of “work your way up” in the restaurant industry
• Personality that fits the restaurant concept, “People-Concept Fit”
• Prior internship experience with some leading restaurant chains
• Capable of leading by example
• Possession of innovation mindset and people development skills in the store
120

• Understanding of the business landscape, food equipment, supply chain, food safety,
growth strategy
• Ability to help on the strategic planning & business plan development of the store
immediately
• Great smile and hospitality mindset to serve the team members and customers
• Good understanding of restaurant technology and tech-enhanced operations
Overall, the recent graduate from a multi-unit fast causal restaurant curriculum is
expected to be well-rounded in all types of skills (people skill and operation knowledge) and do
have the prior field internship experience. The fresh graduate with restaurant management degree
would be treated as “special applicant candidate” to the restaurant company and in most cases
the headquarters or field HR specialist would involve with the evaluation.
Q5: What Specific Competencies Are Required to Be Promoted As Multi-Unit Manager
Candidate?
Most quoted specific competencies of the MUM candidate by the interview participants
were communication skills, people development skills, interpersonal skills, emotion intelligence,
and decision making skills. The MUM candidate was expected to possess strong operation safety
mindset among people, customers and within four walls of the stores. The MUM candidate
needed to have strong business acumen and financial management skills and could be held
accountability for the store and people operation. The MUM candidate was expected to show
willingness to solve the store operation challenge with some innovative ideas. This was
described as “store turnaround skill.” Other competencies were all have been touched upon in Q2
and Q4.

121

Q6: What Value Do You See in a Multi-Unit Fast Causal Restaurant Certificate or Degree?
Most interview participants did see a great value of multi-unit fast causal restaurant
certificate or degree. The certificate or degree shall be a great mindset builder of well-rounded
restaurant professionals or mid-career changers into the restaurant industry. A few MUM
participants mentioned “love to see not only the undergraduate MFR curriculum and also some
online, hybrid, or in-person master-level degree or curriculum for the in-the-field MUMs.” They
also anticipated UNLV to offer executive professional development courses (one-week long or
two weeks), similar to Cornell Hotel School, in MUR operations, restaurant supply chain,
restaurant technology, restaurant business analytics (master-level or professional development
course), and multi-unit leadership areas, but at lower cost and more inclusive to the applicants.
One MUM participant particularly stated, “I will sign up the summer professional development
course for multi-unit management certificate at UNLV Hospitality College.”
Some participants mentioned, “the curriculum or degree value will be enhanced through
internship experience requirement and live problem-solving challenges. People skills and
problem-solving skills can’t be taught at classroom and can only be built up in the field
operations.” They also wanted to see the curriculum being “future-oriented” to teach new
skillsets of restaurant technology, digital order, third party delivery and digital marketing that
can be “plug & play” into the operations, post COVID-19 era. One interviewee suggested a
restaurant business analytics concentration could be added to UNLV’s BSHM Degree.
The curriculum, either degree or certificate program, needed to be built up a career path
mindset for the graduates in the restaurant industry. One MUM hoped UNLV offers “restaurant
entrepreneurship course and restaurant venture acceleration services” to the restaurant managers.
For the UNLV alumni or certificate holders of UNLV Hospitality College, they anticipated some
122

“restaurant career services,” assisted by UNLV. It is worth to mention one MUM participant
said, “sees no value at all for the restaurant certificate or degree, if the certificate holder is never
in the restaurant field cooking and serving people.” This is a great point for the candidate
admission review in the restaurant certificate program in the future.
Proposed Draft Courses
Six MUMs were asked to indicate the extent to which each course (nine courses in total)
listed below reflected the learning needs of a multi-unit fast casual concentration manager on a
Likert-type scale of 1–7. Table 34 sets out the course preference of six MUMs toward nine
courses with no means and standard deviation presented due to a small sample.

Table 34
Course Preference by Six Multi-Unit Managers
Course Subject
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Mildly
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Mildly
Disagree
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Restaurant Career & Talent Development 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development 66.7% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics 33.3% 50.0% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations 50.0% 16.7% 16.7% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0%
Food Service Equipment and Technology 33.3% 16.7% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies 50.0% 16.7% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7%
Supply Chain Management 16.7% 16.7% 33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Restaurant Marketing 16.7% 0.0% 33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0%
New Product Development 16.7% 0.0% 33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7%
123
124

Six MUMs all ranked restaurant career & talent development as the most recommended
course, following by multi-unit fast casual system development, multi-unit fast casual
quantitative analytics, MFR operations, and food service equipment and technology. The second
group of recommended courses were restaurant concept growth strategies, supply chain
management, restaurant marketing and new product development.
Write-in Courses by Six MUMs.
The MUMs were asked to indicate any other suggested courses (up to four courses)
during the interview. A total of eight course counts were recorded by the six MUMs and
summarized in Table 35. The write-in results indicated that MUMs’ additional desired courses
were on the communication, HR, general management, and restaurant business & labor law.

Table 35
Write-in Courses by Six Multi-Unit Managers
#
Course Grouping
Type
Course Write-in (Number of Counts) Count
1 Communication
- Interpersonal Communications & Emotional Intelligence (1)
- Effective Communications & Goal Setting (1)
2
2 Human Resource - Employee Management and Emotional Intelligence (1) 1
3
General
Management
- Restaurant Operation Efficiency Improvement (1)
- Real Estate and Lease Negotiation (1)
2
4 Law
- Ethics and Business Law (1)
- Hospitality & Labor Law (2)
3
8

The write-in results indicated that MUMs’ additional desired courses focused on the
communication skills, HR, general human, and restaurant business law. This is a similar result to
the surveyed 47 MUMs’ additional desired courses presented in Table 29.
125

Conclusion
Summary of Interview & Survey Findings
The results and findings from Steps One, Two and Three were synthesized in Chapter
Four to answer the first research question, “What knowledge, skills, dispositions do future
managers in the MFR industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard and the
industry expectation?”. In this section, two comparisons are presented: (a) course preference and
development sequence comparison and (b) comparison for write-in courses.
Course Preference and Development Sequence Comparison
A comparison showing the three course preference ranking (From Step One by 12
MFRIC Member Interview, Step Two by 47 MUM Online Survey, and Step Three by 6 MUM
Interview) and development sequence (From Step Two by 47 MUM online survey) of the
propose courses is summarized in Table 36, following the ranking or sequence order of number
one to number nine.

126

Table 36
Comparison for Course Preference and Development Sequence
#
From Step One:
Course Preference
Ranking by 12
MFRIC Member
Interview
(From Table 22)
From Step Two:
Course Preference
Ranking by 47
MUM Online
Survey
(From Table 28)
From Step Two:
Development
Sequence by 47
MUM Online
Survey
(From Table 30)
From Step Three:
Course Preference
Ranking by 6
MUM Interview
(From Table 34)
#1
Restaurant Career &
Talent
Development (as
the number 1 write-
in course)
Restaurant Career &
Talent
Development
Restaurant Career &
Talent
Development
Restaurant Career
& Talent
Development
#2
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant
Operations
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant
Operations
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant
Operations
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
#3
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Quantitative
Analytics
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual
Quantitative
Analytics
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual
Quantitative
Analytics
#4
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
Restaurant
Marketing
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual
Restaurant
Operations
#5 Restaurant Marketing
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
#6
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
Restaurant
Marketing
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual
Quantitative
Analytics
Restaurant
Concept Growth
Strategies
#7
Supply Chain
Management
Supply Chain
Management
Supply Chain
Management
Supply Chain
Management
#8
Restaurant Concept
Growth Strategies
Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
Food Service
Equipment and
Technology
Restaurant
Marketing
#9
New Product
Development
New Product
Development
New Product
Development
New Product
Development

127

The survey results indicated that the stakeholders’ top recommended courses were
restaurant career & talent development, followed by MFR operations and the third by multi-unit
fast casual quantitative analytics. The fourth recommended course could be multi-unit fast casual
system development, then restaurant concept growth strategies, and restaurant marketing. The
least preferrable courses were new product development, supply chain management and food
service equipment and technology. New product development was clearly the bottom course
among all interview & survey findings.
Write-in Course Summary
A comparison showing the various write-in courses (From Step One: 12 MFRIC Member
Interviews, From Step Two: 47 Online MUM Survey, and From Step Three: 6 MUM interviews)
were grouping into six course grouping types – communication, HR, general management, law,
technology and internship. In the last column, I also suggested each write-in course could be
generally covered by the nine MFR courses.

Table 37
Comparison for Write-in Courses
Course
Grouping
Type
From Step One:
12 MFRIC Member
Interview
(From Table 23)
From Step Two:
47 MUM Online Survey
(From Table 29)
From Step Three:
6 MUM interview
(From Table 35)
Suggested to be
Covered by the 9
MFR Courses
Communi-
cation
- Dealing with
Unexpected (1)
- Constructive Conflict Skills (1)
- Communication Case Study (1)
- Interpersonal Communications (1)
- Emotional intelligence (1)
- Coaching Skills (1)
- Delegating (1)
- Interpersonal Communications &
Emotional Intelligence (1)
- Effective Communications &
Goal Setting (1)
- Restaurant Career &
Talent Management
Human
Resource
- Human Resources &
Talent Management
(11)
- People Manpower &
Technology (1)
- Leadership Skills
Development (2)
- Recruiting,
Assessment,
Relationship
Building (1)
- Self-Development &
Career Planning (1)
- Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion
(1)
- Human Resources Practice (1)
- Talent Management (1)
- Performance Management Skills
(1)
- Talent Selection & Retention (1)
- Inclusion (1)
- Employee Management and
Emotional Intelligence (1)

- Restaurant Career &
Talent Management
- Multi-Unit Fast
Casual System
Development
- Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant
Operations

128

Course
Grouping
Type
From Step One:
12 MFRIC Member
Interview
(From Table 23)
From Step Two:
47 MUM Online Survey
(From Table 29)
From Step Three:
6 MUM interview
(From Table 35)
Suggested to be Covered
by the 9 MFR Courses
General
Manage-
ment
- Financial Management (1)
- Franchise Development (1)
- Restaurant
Entrepreneurship (1)
- Finance, Accounting and
QuickBooks (1)
- Unit Economics and
Decision Making (1)
- Financial Management &
P&L Analytics (1)
- Basic Accounting (1)
- Restaurant Store Operations
(1)
- Six Sigma & Lean
Principals (1)
- Organizing and Planning
(1)
- Restaurant Operation
Efficiency Improvement (1)
- Real Estate and Lease
Negotiation (1)
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual
System Development
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Restaurant Operations
Law - Nil
- Hospitality Law (1)
- HR & Law Compliance (1)
- Ethics and Business Law
(1)
- Hospitality & Labor Law
(2)
- Multi-Unit Fast Casual
System Development
Tech-
nology
- Restaurant Technologies &
Social Media (1)
- Restaurant Technology 101
(1)
- Nil - Nil
- Restaurant Marketing
- Food Service Equipment
and Technology
- Supply Chain Management
Internship - Structured Internship (1) - Nil - Nil - Internship Credit
25 Counts 19 Counts 8 Counts
129
130

The write-in courses seemed covered in the most nine proposed MFR courses. For the
“restaurant career & talent development” course, it is prudent to address more communication
matter subjects in its body of knowledge (at Table 40).
Summary and Recommendations
The suggestion of a five-course MFR concentration at UNLV’s B.S. in Hospitality
Management Degree would be similar to five other concentrations. These recommended five
courses should be included in the “core curriculum” of MFR concentration:
1) Restaurant Career & Talent Development
2) Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
3) Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
4) Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
5) Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
(Note: the same simple weighted score with “Restaurant Marketing” course, according to
Table 36. I suggested to put it as No. 5 course because such course was more preferred by
47 MUMs in Table 28).
In addition, these four proposed courses should be included as “electives” for the MFR
concentration or as co-elective courses with “Innovative Restaurant Management” concentration.
1) Restaurant Marketing
2) Food Service Equipment and Technology
3) Supply Chain Management
4) New Product Development
Chapter Four reported the results and findings of data collection in respect to two
research questions by adopting exploratory mixed method approach of a three-step process. Both
131

qualitative data (Step One and Step Three) and quantitative data (Step Two) were collected,
reviewed, analyzed, and triangulated to understand the preference of nine proposed courses for
MFR curriculum and to address the knowledge, skills, dispositions that future MFR managers
need to possess. The results were also compared with the assumed influences of the knowledge
and skills, motivation and organizational influences articulated in Chapter Three. Chapter Four
concluded with a five required courses and four elective courses of multi-unit fast casual
curriculum for BSHM degree at UNLV Hospitality College.
Chapter Five will examine ways to scale the identified practices through recommendation
practice, implementation detail, and evaluation framework. This will further address the second
research question, “What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational
solutions related to establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College?” We
will further expand the research direction and explore the body of knowledge of each
recommended courses in Chapter Five. The research will also propose recommendations in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources may be appropriate to advancing
the innovation study in establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College.

132

Chapter Five: Recommendations
The problem of practice addressed through this research was a gap analysis of formal
industry-based education to serve the growing MFR industry, while very limited research toward
MFR education was undertaken. The purpose of this innovation study was to establish the MFR
concentration program at UNLV Hospitality College by September 2022 with an incoming class
of 20 students. Chapter One introduced the problem of practice and situated the study with the
following two research questions.
1. What knowledge, skills, dispositions do future managers in the Multi-Unit Fast Casual
Restaurant (MFR) industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard and
the industry expectation?
2. What are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related
to establishing this new MFR concentration at UNLV Hospitality College?
Chapter Two explored existing literature focused on the topics of restaurant education
research and KSF of the MFRs, and identified assumed KMO influences to be studied. Chapter
Three detailed the method and research plan guiding the study. The study took an exploratory
mixed method approach to learn the industry needs of the MFR curriculum and then to reconcile
the industry needs of the proposed MFR curriculum. Chapter Four presented the findings
analyzed through the interviews, online surveys, and an analysis of documents. Data collected
with the industry have validated the five KMO influences laid out in Chapter Two. In the
innovation study, data validation means that those influences would need to be addressed and the
corresponding suggested actions would need to be undertaken in the future to achieve the
organization goal.
133

This chapter briefly reviews the validated KMO influences and provides recommendation
to address them. The three recommendations are:
1. Build a people-centric and technology-enhanced MFR curriculum
2. Co-create a restaurant practicum with industry partners
3. Diversify recruiting access and student body background
This chapter also addresses implementation considerations and provides an evaluation
framework to assess the progress by following the model of Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2006,
2011, 2016). The chapter further discusses the COVID-19 pandemic impact how future MFR
would need to be technology-enabled operations in all fronts. The chapter concludes with an
overview of limitations and future research directions addressing how UNLV Hospitality
College could enhance innovation and entrepreneurship for the long-term relevance and
sustainability through launching MFR education. Restaurant Innovation Hub (RIH) is discussed
as an avenue for future research (in Appendix F) worth examining its potential beneficial
features of acceleration learning model and restaurant innovation ecosystem. The RIH is not
derived from research survey and findings.
Overview of Key Findings
Five confirmed influences were found to be high areas of need across the knowledge,
motivation and organization framework applied to this study. UNLV Hospitality College, as an
organization, has influence on the resources, industry relationship, structure and efficacy of
curriculum development, and internship practicum relationship for future MFR managers
(students). The proposed recommendations outlined in this chapter have relevance to the
apparent culture model and cultural setting of the university as an organization. Table 38 links
134

the identified influences with the proposed three recommendations and aligns the relevant KMO
gap analysis framework component.

Table 38
Influences and Aligned Recommendation Practice
Gap Analysis
Component
Influences
Aligned Recommendation
Practice
Knowledge
Future MFR managers should
understand all key facets of the multi-
unit fast casual restaurant industry and
relevant principles of accounting,
finance, management, and marketing.
- Building people-centric and
technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum (Rec #1)
Knowledge
Future MFR managers should
demonstrate the ability to utilize their
knowledge of key leadership skills in a
multi-unit fast casual restaurant setting.
- Building people-centric and
technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum (Rec #1)
Motivation
Future MFR managers should value
their studies and their intended career
path in the multi-unit fast casual
restaurant industry.
- Building people-centric and
technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum (Rec #1)
- Co-creating restaurant
practicum with industry peers
(Rec #2)
Motivation
Future MFR managers should have
confidence in their ability to succeed in
the MFR industry.

- Building people-centric and
technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum (Rec #1)
- Co-creating restaurant
practicum with industry peers
(Rec #2)
Organization
UNLV Hospitality College must
provide resources for future MFR
managers to pursue careers in the
industry upon graduation.
- Building people-centric and
technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum (Rec #1)
- Co-creating restaurant
practicum with industry peers
(Rec #2)
- Diversifying recruiting
access and student body
background (Rec #3)

135

Table 38 exhibited how the three proposed recommendation practice aligned with
identified KMO influence in this study. In the following section, each of the recommendations
that has been outlined are explained in further detail, along with the respective implementation
plans, by following Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick (2006, 2011, 2016) model. The relevance and
importance of each recommendations are provided as the methods by which UNLV Hospitality
College might use to measure the success and outcomes.
A five course concentration is required for MFR curriculum track at UNLV’s B.S. in
Hospitality Management Degree. Following the finding in Chapter Four, these recommended
five courses should be included in the “core curriculum” of MFR concentration:
1) Restaurant Career & Talent Development
2) Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
3) Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
4) Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
5) Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
In addition, these four proposed courses should be included as “electives” for the MFR
concentration or as co-elective courses with “Innovative Restaurant Management” concentration.
1) Restaurant Marketing
2) Food Service Equipment and Technology
3) Supply Chain Management
4) New Product Development
The body of knowledge of each proposed course is shown in below Table 40 and Table
41. The body of knowledge could be further reviewed, edited, modified under the guidance of
136

MFRFC, which is to be formed by September 2021 and led by Dean of UNLV Hospitality
College.
Recommendations for Practice and Implementation Plan
Three recommendations were outlined in Table 38, which addressed the confirmation and
validation of influences as identified in Chapter Four. The first proposed recommendation is to
build a people-centric and technology-enhanced MFR curriculum during the academic year 2021
so that the organization performance goal can be successfully achieved by launching MFR
concentration program by September 2022. The core mission and vision of the College (UNLV
Hospitality College, 2021c), in the form of the education curriculum strategy, is to deliver
resources and the responsive curriculum, which reflects the academic rigor and industry
practicality, and to empowers the success of every student. The College is also charged with the
social responsibility, particularly relevant during the COVID-19 pandemic, to engage future
technology-enabled operation and research that advances restaurant management knowledge and
moves restaurant industry forward.
The second proposed recommendation is for the College to co-create its restaurant
practicum with the industry peers. This industry partnership relationship should be accomplished
in the academic year of 2021 under the leadership of the MFRFC. The MFRFC will be
established with core faculty and career office to plan and implement the program for the first
cohort of student intake in September 2022. The latest proposed MFRFC committee members
are provided in Appendix B, and the committee will be led by Dean of UNLV Hospitality
College. This will enable the future MFR managers (students) to experience the wholistic field
experience and to build his/her restaurant industry resume. Ideally, within two-three years
137

practicum or working sponsorship while at college, the student may start the first day outside
school as the senior store manager or franchise field manager for a MFR company.
The third proposed recommendation is to diversify recruiting access and student body
background for the MFR curriculum program. This task will be led by the College’s recruiting
team with a goal to enroll 20 high-qualified students for the MFR concentration program by July
2022. Two additional hires of industry-based lecturers for MFRFC could also help the recruiting
effort reaching out to various culinary school programs, community colleges, and business
analytics community. This session will be reflecting “Recruiting Team” as one of the three
pillars of work as stated in Table 4 for the organization mission, global goal and stakeholder
performance goals. Given the complexity of MUR business nature and technology-enabled
operations, it is imperative that the College could recruit various background of the students
(including culinary schools, veterans, computer engineer and data science students, and
restaurant company-sponsored students) and also develop partnership relationship with various
industry trade associations, global culinary high schools and associate degree programs, various
hospitality industry-adjacent companies, and business analytics & data science community. On
the restaurant company partnership, the recruiting access may refer to the restaurant company-
sponsored employee students, similar to the Starbucks College Achievement Plan (Sharma,
2020) and Chipotle Crew Bonus Program (Klein, 2019a). This will assure that the MFR
curriculum can be provided to anyone who have passion for the restaurant industry (particularly
for those who is already working part-time or full-time in the industry) and be consequently
diversifying the recruiting access and student background.
The three recommendations are in a purposeful sequence and are suggested to be
implemented in order such that MFRIC, MFRFC, and recruiting team, three pillars of the
138

organization stakeholder group, could work in tandem to achieve the organization performance
goal. The following section introduces the evaluation plan framework of Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, (2006, 2011, 2016) and then describes in greater detail the proposed solutions and
recommendations for the College to implement. These recommendation practices and evaluation
plans are aligned with Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluations: reaction, leaning, transfer
and impact (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The details of these recommendations are
conveyed below on pages 122–134.
Evaluation Plan Framework
This study proposes an evaluation framework based on the work of Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick (2006, 2016) for use in determining the effectiveness of plans, programs, or
interventions. The Kirkpatricks’ model of measuring training effectiveness consists of four
levels: Reactions, Learning, Transfer, and Results.
Level 1: Reaction. The degree to which participants find the training favorable, engaging
and relevant to their jobs.
Level 2: Learning. The degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge,
skills, attitude, confidence and commitment based on their participation in the training
Level 3: Behavior. The degree to which participants apply what they learned during
training when they are back on the job
Level 4: Results. The degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training
and the support and accountability package
By applying to Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick model, participants, under the subject research,
can refer to the prospect students of MFR curriculum, current students at UNLV Hospitality
College, transfer-in students from other hospitality colleges or computer science programs,
139

corporate-sponsored restaurant employees (such as Starbucks, Chipotle and Taco Bell), and
recent graduates of UNLV hospitality college students. Training refers to the suggested MFR
curriculum and its learning community weaved by the faculty, administrator, recent graduates,
hospitality college alumni, and industry peers.
Each level (referring to Figure 2) represents a sequential method of evaluating with
increased complexity. This tiered evaluation framework can help leadership understand at which
level of implementation of recommended solutions breakdown. Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick
(2016) also suggests defining program outcomes during the planning phase and confirming the
true Level 4 result of the organization exits. This further defines the expectations in the return on
expectations (ROE) for the program (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2011), meaning what a
successful MFR curriculum concentration delivers to future MFR curriculum students,
demonstrating the degree to which their expectations have been satisfied for UNLV Hospitality
College. Required drivers refers to the processes and systems that reinforce, monitor, encourage,
and reward performance of critical behaviors on the job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The
combined Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick frameworks (2006, 2011, 2016) builds an evaluation tool
toward each of the three recommendations proposed in this chapter that addresses the
performance goal of UNLV Hospitality College.

140

Figure 2
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016)

The evaluation model is based on Kirkpatrick Foundational Principles (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2011, 2016) as following:
The End is the Beginning
Effective training and development begin before the multi-unit fast casual curriculum
program even starts. It is important that the results are defined in measurable terms so that all
involved in can see the ultimate destination of the new curriculum initiative. Clearly defined
results will increase the likelihood that resources will be used most effectively and efficiently to
accomplish the mission of establishing MFR curriculum at UNLV Hospitality College by
September 2022 with 20 student in-takes.
Return on Expectations Is the Ultimate Indicator of Value
Stakeholder expectations define the value that training professionals (MFR curriculum
faculty and industry-based lecturers) are responsible for delivering. Learning professionals
141

(referring to the MFR curriculum students) must ask the stakeholders questions to clarify and
refine their expectations on all four Kirkpatrick evaluation levels, starting with Level 4 Results.
This is described as a negotiation or iterative process in which the training professional makes
sure that the expectations are satisfying to the stakeholder and realistic to achieve with the
resources available in UNLV Hospitality College. Once stakeholder expectations are clear, MFR
curriculum faculty then need to convert those typically general wants into observable,
measurable success outcomes by asking the question, "What will a success MFR curriculum look
like to the future MFR manager (students)?" Those outcomes then become the Level 4 Results –
the targets to which MFR curriculum faculty can sharply focus the collective efforts to
accomplish ROE of the MFR curriculum students and participating restaurant peers in some
MFR curriculum programming.
Business Partnership is Necessary to Bring About Positive ROE
Producing ROE for MFR curriculum students, requires a strong Level 3 execution plan.
Therefore, it is critical not only to call upon industry-based lecturers and participating restaurant
business partners to help identify what success will look like for MFR curriculum students, but
also to design a cooperative effort throughout the learning and field internship processes in order
to maximize results. Before taking the MFR curriculum course, MFR students need to partner
(more as “take guidance” in the school context) with faculty and industry managers to prepare
themselves for MFR curriculum training. Even more critical is the role of the faculty after the
course delivery. The faculty is the key trainer to reinforce newly delivered knowledge and skills
through support and accountability to MFR students. The degree to which this reinforcement and
coaching happens directly correlates to improved performance and positive outcomes of MFR
students, and the organization goal of UNLV Hospitality College.
142

Value Must Be Created Before It Can Be Demonstrated.
MFR field practice and reinforcement that occurs after the MFR course produces the
highest level of learning effectiveness, followed by activities that occur before the learning
event. Currently, typical restaurant curriculum students are putting most of their resources into
the part of the course process that produces the lowest level of learning results. Students are
spending relatively little time on the pre-training and follow-up activities that translate into the
positive behavior change and subsequent results (Levels 3 and 4) that MFR faculty seeks. Formal
MFR curriculum training is the foundation of performance and results. To create ultimate value
and ROE for MFR students, however, strong attention must be given to Level 3 activities. To
create maximum value within UNLV Hospitality College, it is therefore essential that
prospective MFR curriculum students redefine their roles and extend their learning, involvement
and influence into Levels 3 and 4.
A Compelling Chain of Evidence Demonstrates Your Bottom-Line Value
Following the Kirkpatrick’s levels of training evaluation will create a chain of evidence
showing the MFR curriculum value of the entire industry partnership effort. It consists of
quantitative and qualitative data that sequentially connects the four levels and shows the ultimate
contribution of learning and reinforcement to the MFR curriculum students. When students work
in concert with their faculty and industry partners, this chain of evidence supports the partnership
effort and shows the MFR curriculum value of working as a team to accomplish the overall
mission of MFR curriculum practice.
143

Recommendation One: Building a People-Centric and Technology-Enhanced MFR
Curriculum
The first recommendation is to build a people-centric and technology-enhanced MFR
curriculum, as a core mission of UNLV Hospitality College. Specific recommendation, time
frame and action steps are summarized in Table 39 in relation to the first recommendation.

Table 39
Building People-centric and Technology-enhanced MFR Curriculum
Specific
Recommendation
Timeframe Action Steps
Develop MFR course
content by sequence
Academic Year 2021–
2022
Hire outside industry consultants and
full-time faculty to develop the
course material
Launch UNLV Fast
Casual Restaurant
(Virtual) Summit and
Speaker Series
Academic Year 2021–
2022
Reach out industry peers and build
brand awareness of UNLV MFR
curriculum
Recruiting industry-
based lecturers
Academic Year 2021–
2022
Recruit first two industry-based
lectures to pilot teaching 2–3 courses
of MFR curriculum

144

UNLV Hospitality College is fortunate to have received a $5 million gift in September
2020 from Panda Express co-founders to support new MFR curriculum as a support to the
continued growth in a post-pandemic economy (UNLV News Center, 2020b). The gift has been
used to support hiring outside industry consultants and full-time faculty to design a
comprehensive fast-casual curriculum. The faculty will be teaching MFR concentration courses
(5 courses/15 credits) to the College’s BSHM degree program from September 2022.
The findings from this study recommended five courses as the “core curriculum” of MFR
concentration and the other four elective courses, as summarized in the following two tables
along with the respective body of knowledge of each proposed course. The body of knowledge
has been modified along the way with research process through Step One, Step Two and Step
Three in the past two years.

Table 40
Core Course Names and its Respective Body of Knowledge
Course Name Body of Knowledge
Restaurant
Career and
Talent
Development
- Understand organization chart and job description in all restaurant & foodservice companies (field operation,
corporate/support center, and technology services)
- Develop personal restaurant career plan that fits personal values, interests, personality, and skills;
- Create strategies and approaches to set new career vision, goals and action plans;
- Apply knowledge of career models and tools for successful career planning and management;
- Learn mission & culture of restaurant business, and people priority;
- Master hiring, recruiting, retention, leading and developing people;
- Acquire growth mindset from one store to multi-units;
- Develop safe, respectful, inclusive and diversity workplace;
- Interpret knowledge, motivation, organization vs. people skills;
- Build effective communication, goal setting and coaching skills;
- Deliver employee happiness and guest satisfaction;
- Practice coaching and performance management;
- Adopt best practice for labor law compliance and implementation;
- Exercise conflict management, change management, and crisis management;
- Practice scenario-based, situation analysis simulation and internship workshop;
- Harmonize people, technology, and organizational outcomes.

145

Course Name Body of Knowledge
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
Restaurant
Operations

- Elevate practice from single-store operations to multi-unit operations;
- Design and practice customer services;
- Expand from POS (point of sale) to comprehensive restaurant technology applications;
- Build financial acumen of restaurant operations and profit & loss statement;
- Comprehend legal matters on human resources law, business insurance, licensing vs franchising, intellectual
property protection, health permits, food safety compliance, and ethical leadership;
- Turn operation metrics into a restaurant management report card;
- Curate off-premises sales, online ordering, kiosk ordering, curbside and in-store pick-up, and kitchen queue
system;
- Build drive-through operation capacity and efficiency;
- Implement mobile app operations and digital marketing & sales;
- Examine and operate self-delivery or third party delivery;
- Develop catering business operations;
- Design and implement a culture of teamwork and sustainability into the organization.
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
Quantitative
Analytics
- Use statistics/data science to determine staffing requirements;
- Examine price sensitivity of different menu items;
- Determine the bundling strategy for the menu items;
- Comprehend within-store data and between-store data;
- Perform life-time value analysis for guests and business clients;
- Learn time and motion studies to improve throughput;
- Master kitchen capacity analysis, and store labor requirement;
- Use activity-based costing for indirect restaurant cost;
- Develop analysis & reporting dashboard for the franchise system.

146

Course Name Body of Knowledge
Multi-Unit
Fast Casual
System
Development
- Carry system development from one store operation to multi-units;
- Develop restaurant business culture, mission statement, business skills and multiple effective systems (such as
training, labor, employee handbook, kitchen, safety, menu, procurement, inventory management, marketing,
branding, online ordering, delivery, business continuity planning, etc.);
- Prepare a comprehensive manual that serves as the foundation for the organization and its staff training
programs;
- Develop real estate system, prototype, architect drawings, and store opening & operation plans;
- Design and implement quality control systems for maintaining brand image and quality standards;
- Develop franchise disclosure document and all the supporting operating manuals and procedures;
- Learn intellectual property and other intangible assets in the restaurant business;
- Design organizational charts needed to effectively manage the business and support the future growth.
Restaurant
Concept
Growth
Strategies
- Restaurant business formation & partnership;
- Develop growth strategies for the multi-unit restaurants;
- Build entrepreneurial growth mindset within the organization, including investing in staff, embracing innovation,
capitalizing on new technology and utilizing social media;
- Create a data-driven and profit & loss driven restaurant company;
- Achieve growth through new store buildout, franchising sales, joint ventures, management contract service, ghost
kitchen, virtual brand and restaurant company acquisitions;
- Practice site selection, lease negotiation, building requirements, dining room and kitchen design;
- Real estate purchase vs. lease strategy;
- Develop virtual brand and dark/ghost kitchen, and launch direct-to-consumer food service offerings;
- Gain knowledge of restaurant company accounting, financial projection, investment underwriting, and valuation;
- Access growth capital (debt and equity capital) and alternative financing;
- Research into restaurant portfolio holding company set-up, restaurant accumulation, restaurant private equity
fund, restaurant M&A, IPO (Initial public offering) and SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition Company).

Table 41
Elective Course Names and its Respective Body of Knowledge
Course Name Body of Knowledge
Restaurant
Marketing
- Learn marketing concepts from the 4 P’s (product, price, place, and promotion), the 7 P’s (product, price,
promotion, place, packaging, positioning and people) to now the 15 C’s (Complexity, Control, Change, Crisis,
Communication, Complacency, Customers, Culture, Competition, Commodification, Creativity, Channels,
Cyberspace, Consolidation, Collaboration);
- Master the consumer behavior, motivation, decision making, service attributes, purchase behavior, and purchase
cycle with marketing tactics and strategies;
- Practice market research design, implementation, and customer & consumer insights;
- Apply marketing, brand strategies, packaging and consumer storytelling;
- Practice customer profiling, customer segmentation and customer data analysis;
- Develop marketing plans for local stores, franchise system, and company-wide brand;
- Design and implement social media strategies and tactics;
- Develop analytics and visualization dashboard for business insights, operation analytics, store performance, and
franchise system metrics;
- Understand the marketing mix, media investment analysis and marketing mix modeling;
- Utilize restaurant marketing technologies, loyalty membership program, customer data platform, and location-
based digital marketing;
- Practice recommendation algorithm and artificial intelligence in digital marketing strategy development.

147
148

Course Name Body of Knowledge
Food Service
Equipment
and
Technology
- Learn how menu drives equipment, kitchen design, supply choices, energy use, labor utilization, and real estate
space requirements;
- Match foodservice equipment choices and their performance parameters with operational demand requirements;
- Design workflow optimization – the right systems, equipment training, and layout;
- Implement “Total Cost of Ownership” concept for foodservice equipment;
- Develop safety protocol and preventative maintenance program for foodservice equipment;
- Carry out foodservice equipment repair and operation maintenance;
- Develop foodservice information system framework, covering guest management, back of house, data analytics,
human resource information management, POS (point of sale), loyalty, payment, digital signage, customer
relationship management, store-level infrastructure, service & support, security & compliance, IT management,
online order, catering, drive-through & self-service, and delivery;
- Research the impact of advanced technology automation and equipment (kitchen robot, in-store service robot,
delivery robot and drone delivery) and labor management software in restaurant operations.
Supply Chain
Management
- Explore key aspects of restaurant supply chains from an operation management, food system, and sustainable
perspective;
- Develop detailed-oriented processes in running a restaurant and keeping food costs controlled;
- Optimize restaurant operation’s profits by effectively managing food selection, procurement, logistics, receiving,
storage, and inventory management processes;
- Develop food risk management, product specifications, food regulation, safety and quality procedures;
- Comprehend technology and innovation trends in food supply chain, food manufacturing, and food packaging;
- Understand manufacturing, co-Packing, supply chain fulfillment, and legal contracts;
- Develop food grocery and direct-to-consumer restaurant product, delivery & subscription model;
- Transform the restaurant supply chain into a value chain.

149

Course Name Body of Knowledge
New Product
Development
- Learn product development fundamentals, participants, process and steps – from ideation, launch and scale up;
- Master opportunities mapping and product research using consumer data insight;
- Validate principles of brand consistency, food ingredient selection, food safety, food labelling, process design,
nutrition, costing and quality control;
- Practice product positioning, food safety & packaging considerations, and government regulations;
- Comprehend product launch blending restaurant operation, food science, marketing, and culinary arts;
- Develop meal plan package, ready-to-go-food, grocery shelf items and subscription-based food & beverage
products, and explore various sales channels;
- Practice menu modification and sustainable food packaging for to-go and for-delivery items;
- Understand the impact of a new product on the whole restaurant chain system;
- Participate practicum of one product launch project with a restaurant partner.

150
151

For “restaurant career & talent management” course, the course would start from the
career development of the future MFR managers him/herself, and then cover talent management
and development work to be carried out by future MFR managers. The suggested curriculum
supports established career pathways in the MFR industry. For a detailed examination of career
stages in the industry see Appendix G.
Table 42 summarizes the evaluation plan and measurement for the first recommendation
to building the people-centric and technology MFR curriculum. UNLV leadership can evaluate
each level through survey items, specially looking at the response change over time among
various stakeholders. Survey results need to be reviewed, analyzed, understood, and debated
across the College. End of immediate course evaluations can be leveraged to inform MFR
curriculum leadership how to address identified course deficiencies. This will be part of the on-
going curriculum development, which requires funding commitment over multiple years to
ensure that progress toward stated goals can be measured effectively.

Table 42
Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 1
Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 1: Reaction –
How do participants
react to the new
intervention (MFR
curriculum)?
- Gauge opinion and receptiveness of current students at UNLV Hospitality College (the College) through
surveys and forums
- Gauge perspective and feasibility of faculty & administrators at the College through surveys and forums
- Gauge opinion and receptiveness of the industry peers toward the proposed launching of the MFR
curriculum
- Gauge opinion and receptiveness of alumni of the College through surveys and forums
- Track the number of faculty, administrators, students engaged in the MFR industry events and forums
Level 2: Learning –
Do participants
acquire knowledge,
increase skills,
change attitudes, or
improvement
confidence as a
result?
- Include a survey item regarding faculty & administrators understanding the steps necessary to operate MFR
curriculum
- Survey the feedback of students who take any MFR course
- Survey the industry companies who take in MFR-curriculum students as internship
- Survey the direct reporting managers who supervise MFR-curriculum students as internship
- Survey the faculty members who teach the MFR course
- Survey the alumni feedback of the College regarding the MFR curriculum implementation
Level 3: Behavior –
Do participants apply
knowledge or change
behavior as a result?

- Compare students survey feedback, before, during and after, taking the MFR course
- Survey faculty their feedback regarding teaching the MFR course
- Survey the industry company feedback after MFR-curriculum students competed the internship
- Survey the direct reporting manager feedback after MFR-curriculum students competed the internship

152

Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 4: Results –
What are the results
due to the
intervention?
- Include survey items tracking confidence level of students who take the MFR course.
- Compare employer’s feedback after students completed the MFR course and the internship.
- Compare student satisfaction & feedback of MFR curriculum vs. non-MFR curriculum student at the
College
153
154

As suggested by a few interview participants (MFRIC members in Step One and MUMs
in Step Three), outside the BSHM’s MFR concentration, UNLV Hospitality College could
consider offering a series of professional development courses and industry certificates in the
future to the restaurant working professionals or to those career-changers into the restaurant
industry. The course format could be similar to the Professional Development Program at the
Cornell School of Hotel Administration or eCornell Online Certificate. Some of the weekly long,
bi-weekly long in-person classroom or hybrid programs could be Multi-Unit Manager Program
(MMP), General Manager Program (GMP), or specialty certificate programs in restaurant
technology, restaurant digital marketing, restaurant growth & entrepreneurship, restaurant
investment & financing, applied restaurant data science practicum, restaurant management for
non-restaurant executives, food delivery & retailing, virtual kitchen & food court operation, and
etc.
Both MMP and GMP Certificates could be further developed into the trademark
restaurant professional development certificates in the restaurant industry and build alumni
network among MMP and GMP certificate holders within UNLV Hospitality College. Some of
the specialty program could also be developed into an undergraduate concentration (such as
restaurant business analytics) or a specialty master of science program (such as MUR
management and restaurant business analytics). The discussion of professional development
courses and industry certificates is not part of the recommended solution to address two research
questions of the study, but that was suggested by some MFRIC members and MUM interviewees
as one emergent theme. I suggest this area as a future research direction for UNLV Hospitality
College to continue serving restaurant working professionals and career-changers into the
restaurant industry.
155

Recommendation 2: Co-Creating Restaurant Practicum With Industry Peers
The second proposed recommendation is for the College to co-create a restaurant
practicum with industry peers. Specific recommendation, time frame and action steps are
summarized in Table 43 in relation to the second recommendation.

Table 43
Co-creating Restaurant Practicum with Industry Peers
Specific Recommendation Timeframe Action Steps
Build industry peer relationship
that has hiring need from MFR
curriculum students
Academic Year
2021–2022
Design the for-credit co-curricular
courses with industry companies
Structure curriculum practical
training at field for students
Academic Year
2021–2022
Pilot students with industry practicum
program
Assist students in obtaining full-
time employment after the
internship
Academic Year
2021–2022
Design the industry sponsorship and
their recruiting program for UNLV
students

156

Table 44 summarizes the evaluation plan and measurement for the second
recommendation to co-creating restaurant practicum with the industry peers. UNLV leadership
and participating restaurant companies can evaluate each level through survey items, specially
looking at the response change over time of students and participating industry companies.
Survey results need to be reviewed, analyzed, understood, and debated across the College and
participating restaurant companies. End of immediate practicum course evaluations can be
leveraged to inform MFR curriculum leadership how to address identified course deficiencies
both for the students and for the participating companies. This will be part of the on-going
practicum curriculum development, which requires funding commitment from both the College
and participation of restaurant companies to ensure that progress toward stated goals can be
measured effectively.

157

Table 44
Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 2
Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 1: Reaction –
How do participants
react to the
intervention (Co-
creating restaurant
practicum)?
- Gauge awareness and opinion of prospective and current MFR
curriculum students planning to take the restaurant practicum course
through surveys and forums
- Gauge the interest level of the restaurant companies to co-create the
restaurant practicum course
- Gauge perspective and feasibility of faculty & administrators at the
College through surveys and forums
- Gauge opinion and receptiveness of alumni of the College through
surveys and forums
- Track the number of faculty, administrators, students engaged in the
information session events and forums regarding restaurant
practicum course
Level 2: Learning –
Do participants
acquire knowledge,
increase skills,
change attitudes, or
improvement
confidence as a
result?
- Include a survey item regarding faculty & administrators
understanding the steps necessary to design, operate and deliver
restaurant practicum course
- Survey the student feedback who enroll in the restaurant practicum
course
- Survey the industry companies who take in restaurant practicum
students
- Survey the guest speakers who lead the restaurant practicum session
- Survey the faculty who teach the restaurant practicum course
- Survey the alumni feedback of the College regarding restaurant
practicum course
Level 3: Behavior –
Do participants apply
knowledge or change
behavior as a result?
- Compare students survey feedback, before, during and after, taking
the restaurant practicum course
- Survey faculty their feedback regarding teaching the restaurant
practicum course
- Survey the industry company feedback after student competes the
restaurant practicum course
- Survey the guest speaker feedback who leads the restaurant
practicum session
Level 4: Results –
What are the results
due to the
intervention?
- Include survey items tracking confidence level of students who take
the restaurant practicum course
- Compare the industry company feedback, before, during, after
student completing the restaurant practicum course
- Compare MFR-curriculum student satisfaction & feedback among
those who complete the restaurant practicum course vs. who has not

158

Recommendation 3: Diversifying Recruiting Access and Student Body Background
The third proposed recommendation is to diversify recruiting access and student body
background for the MFR curriculum program. Specific recommendation, time frame and action
steps are summarized in Table 45 in relation to the third recommendation.

Table 45
Diversifying Recruiting Access and Student Body Background
Specific
Recommendation
Timeframe Action Steps
Partnership with industry
trade association in food,
restaurants, hotels, allied
health, restaurant
technology, digital
marketing, data science
and business analytics.
Academic Year
2021–2022
Develop specific partnership plans with various
vertical trade organizations, such as National
Restaurant Association, Institute of Food
Technologists, Asian American Hotel Owners
Association, Association of Schools Advancing
Health Professions, American Marketing
Association, Internet Marketing Association,
Mobile Marketing Association, Academy of
Marketing Science, Association of Data Scientists,
American Statistical Association, Data Science
Council of America, and International Institute of
Business Analysis, Digital Analytics Association,
Institute for Operations Research and the
Management Sciences, etc.
Develop articulation
partnership relationship
with global culinary
high schools and
professional chef
schools
Academic
Year
2021–2022
Identify, develop and execute partnership
agreement and education programming, such as
The International Centre for Culinary Arts in
Dubai, The Sichuan Higher Institute of Cuisine in
China, Hattori Nutrition College in Japan, Hong
Kong Culinary Academy, MSC Thai Culinary
School in Thailand, Kai Ping Culinary High
School in Taiwan, etc.
Develop training
agreement with
hospitality companies
(casino, cruises, hotel,
restaurant, and
foodservice providers)
Academic
Year
2021–2022
Identify, develop and execute training agreement
with industry companies. Can be structured as
certificate program or professional development
course series.

159

Table 46 summarizes the evaluation plan and measurement for the third recommendation
to diversifying recruiting access and student body background. UNLV leadership can evaluate
each level through survey items, specially looking at the response change over time of
participating trade associations, global culinary schools, professional chef schools, and
hospitality companies (such as Chipotle and Starbucks). ProStart (NRA’s two-year high school
program), DECA (an organization preparing emerging high school student leaders and
entrepreneurs), and Veterans’ Educational Assistance Program of U.S. Department of Veterans
Affairs are three special industry organization examples that the College could build relationship
with. The recruiting team can also reach out the business analytics and data science community
to diversify the student background and further co-create a vertical restaurant business analytic
specialty program to serve the restaurant industry community.
160

Table 46
Evaluation Plan of Recommendation 3
Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 1: Reaction –
How do participants
react to the
intervention
(Diversifying
recruiting access)?
- Gauge the partnership interest level with industry trade association
in food, restaurants, hotels, allied health, technology, digital
marketing, data science and business analytics
- Gauge the partnership interest level with global culinary schools &
associate degree programs, and professional chef schools
- Gauge the training agreement interest level with hospitality
companies (casino, cruises, hotel, restaurant) for professional
development and certificate courses
- Circulate the partnership agreement template to industry trade
association and culinary schools to obtain their feedback
- Gauge perspective and feasibility of faculty & administrators of
UNLV Hospitality College through surveys and forums
- Track the recruiting team’s confidence level in achieving the MFR
curriculum student count
- Track the numbers of events and forums promoting MFR curriculum
- Track the number of prospective students shown interest in the MFR
curriculum
Level 2: Learning –
Do participants
acquire knowledge,
increase skills,
change attitudes, or
improvement
confidence as a
result?
- Track the partnership agreement discussion with industry trade
association in food, restaurants, hotels, allied health and technology
- Track the partnership agreement discussion with global culinary
high schools and professional chef schools
- Track the training agreement discussion with hospitality companies
(casino, cruises, hotel, restaurant)
- Track the conversion rate of the prospective students shown interest
in the MFR curriculum
Level 3: Behavior –
Do participants apply
knowledge or change
behavior as a result?

- Perform and monitor the execute partnership agreement with
industry trade association in food, restaurants, hotels, allied health,
technology, digital marketing, data science and business analytics
- Perform and monitor the execute partnership agreement with global
culinary schools & associate degree programs, and professional chef
schools
- Perform and monitor the training agreement with hospitality
companies (casino, cruises, hotel, restaurant)
- Track the number of enrolled MFR curriculum students
- Track the trained employees from the hospitality companies (casino,
cruises, hotel, restaurant)
- Track media mentions and tone regarding MFR curriculum

161

Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 4: Results –
What are the results
due to the
intervention?
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level with industry trade
associations and culinary schools
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level of trained hospitality
industry employees
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level of hospitality
companies, who sent their employees
- Compare student feedback toward on-boarding process onto MFR
curriculum.

162

Survey results need to be reviewed, analyzed, understood, and debated across the College
and participating organizations. Timely review of the partnership agreement and training
agreement with participating organizations or schools need to be priorities so as to guide the
MFR curriculum leadership on how to address identified recruiting deficiencies and future
workforce skill gaps from the participating organizations. This will be part of the on-going
recruiting diversification program, which requires funding commitment from both the College
and participation organizations to ensure that progress toward stated goals of the College and
participating organizations can be measured effectively.
In Step Two’s online survey among 47 MUM/HR managers, nearly 80% MUMs agreed
to recommend his/her store managers for the professional development courses and certificates at
UNLV Hospitality College, while in Step Three’s in-depth interview with 6 MUM/HR
managers, most interview participants did see a great value of multi-unit fast causal restaurant
certificate or degree. This is where UNLV’s MFR curriculum could be developed into something
similar to Starbucks ASU Partnership (Starbucks ASU Partnership, 2021) on a larger scale for
various restaurant company-sponsored programs.
Starbucks is seeing significantly higher retention rates and longer tenures for employee
participants in the Starbucks College Achievement Plan (SCAP) program and surely high return
on investment for Starbucks corporate (Sharma, 2020). According to official website of
Starbucks ASU Partnership (Starbucks ASU Partnership, 2021), the SCAP program was
launched in 2014 and has provided an opportunity for all U.S. benefits-eligible Starbucks
employees to earn their first bachelor’s degree through Arizona State University (ASU) Online
with 100% tuition coverage. The SCAP program has over 4,800 college graduates to date
(Starbucks ASU Partnership, 2021), and over 13,000 participating employees (Sharma, 2020).
163

The SCAP currently offers employees access to more than 100 undergraduate degree programs
through ASU Online. Starbucks also expanded the SCAP benefit to include veteran family
members and in addition, the Pathway to Admission program that allows employees to work
towards admission into ASU. The Pathway to Admission program, a bridge program, refers to
those Starbucks employees who are interested in earning their first bachelor’s degree, but do not
meet ASU’s admission requirements (Koenig, 2019).
As suggested by a few interview participants (MFRIC members in Step One and MUMs
in Step Three), restaurant is a super data-rich industry, and it is a pity that MUMs and restaurant
corporates are not collecting these data for the business analytics and insights. The MFR
curriculum recruiting team shall reach out broader computer engineer and data science working
professionals (who may seek employment opportunities in the restaurant industry) or computer
science students with passion in the restaurant industry. 2020 Top 500 Chain reports indicated
the importance of IT investment (Maze, 2021) and digital readiness preparation work prior to the
COVID-19 pandemic, where there is huge restaurant technology skill gap in the industry,
particularly for small restaurant chains and independent restaurants.
Limitations
One key limitation of this research is the small sampling population size of the multi-unit
fast casual MUM or HR manager of 47 in Step Two online survey, due to only four participating
multi-unit fast casual companies and each contributing 10–15 MUMs or HR Managers.
Alternatively, the interview protocol could be largely expanded by surveying a larger number of
MUMs in each participating MFR company, or reaching out to a larger number of MFR
companies and each contributing a small number of MUMs. The second limitation was the
164

online Zoom interview format, due to the research restriction during COVID-19 pandemic
period, which could not accommodate some relationship build-up through the in-person meeting.
The third limitation of this research was to take an exploratory mixed method approach to
learn the industry needs of the MFR curriculum and then to reconcile the industry needs with the
proposed MFR curriculum portfolio by the College. The original research idea is to “measure the
industry demand” of such multi-unit fast casual curriculum and perhaps the research can go
direct “measuring the industry demand” and “creating a whitepaper or business plan” for the
multi-unit fast casual curriculum program at UNLV Hospitality College.
Future Research
The scope of this study included KMO influences, and recommendations related to
establishing this new MFR curriculum at UNLV Hospitality College. Future research could,
firstly, examine the efficacy of these recommendations, both short term to meet the goal of 20
student in-takes of September 2022, and long term in how MFR curriculum is valued in the
industry, and in the student success of future MFR graduates. As the subject research is an
“innovation study” in nature, all the recommendations should be closely evaluated before taking
actions.
The first recommendation in this chapter is to build a people-centric and technology-
enhanced MFR curriculum. The digital & technology-enabled operation in the restaurant
education was not commonly addressed in the U.S., nor highly appreciated by the industry
before the COVID-19 pandemic. This experiment in the proposed MFR curriculum may have
impact of future student intake (for example, computer engineer and data science students),
curriculum design, industry-based lecturers, and academic-industry partnership, which all merits
close review, monitor, acceleration and transformation in the restaurant education.
165

The second recommendation in this chapter was to co-creating restaurant practicum with
industry peers. The proposed scholarship, internship students’ stipend and work & learning
model could be further reviewed by looking at the current education sponsorship cases among
the U.S. restaurant industry, such as Starbucks, Chipotle, Taco Bell, McDonald’s and Panera
Breads, or at the international scope such as Kai Ping Culinary High School in Taiwan. UNLV
may be able to design the student training and recruiting pipeline program for various partnership
restaurant companies.
Moreover, this research could be further expanded to address the KSF of “multi-unit fast
casual” concentration, or KSFs (or attributes) of multi-unit fast casual operation and education.
DiPietro et al. (2007) developed eight KSFs of MUMs at casual dining operation setting but did
not specifically address QSR nor fast casual restaurant operations.
Next, during the Step Three’s interview with MUMs and Step One’s MFRIC members,
the customer needs (either individual or corporate training needs) were discovered for
online/hybrid master-level curriculum and professional development course in the field of MUR
operations, restaurant supply chain, restaurant technology and multi-unit leadership. This is an
area that UNLV could internally evaluate, validate, and consider launching in the future for its
professional development and certificate programs, a new “restaurant business analytics”
concentration at BSHM degree program, or a specialized master of science degree program of
“MUR management” and “restaurant business analytics.” At this moment, for the “restaurant
business analytics” course, there is no bootcamp at university or at the industry, master-level
class at university, or executive-level training course in the industry.
Lastly, the learning model of the RIH idea is a potential opportunity to be explored
through future research (in Appendix F). The RIA can be further researched, articulated,
166

reviewed, designed and implemented, by making reference into innovation hub concept
supported by Engineering Schools, such as SkyDeck Accelerator & Incubation Program at UC
Berkeley, Viterbi Startup Garage at University of Southern California, Center for Entrepreneurial
Studies at Stanford University, and MIT Media Lab. There is limited academic research of
restaurant innovation accelerating learning model at this moment.
Conclusion
The innovation study sought to include KMO influences, and recommendations related to
establishing the new MFR curriculum at UNLV Hospitality College. To that end, the study
identified a specific stakeholder goal that by September 2022, an incoming class of 20 student
for MFR curriculum will be achieved. For a total of 18 in-depth interviews (12 MFRIC members
in Step One and 6 MUMs in Step Three), mostly are positive about the future of fast causal
restaurant education by fostering innovation and increasing productivity of digital-ready
restaurant operations. Chapter Five laid out the three recommendations, relating primarily to five
KMO factors, to address this gaps, along with an evaluation plan to track progress. I also
provided an appendix to discuss the RIH research idea, which may strengthen the creative
ecosystem for restaurant innovators, operators and disrupters.
Of the 47 participants in the online MUM survey that occurred in Step Two of data
collection, the majority of MUMs suggested that a store manager with a hospitality degree did
actually harm the restaurant organization in terms of store manager’s high turnover rate,
workplace reliability, employee’s productivity, and the asset management’s capabilities of a
store manager. This organizational expectations of online MUM survey participants toward a
store manager with a hospitality college degree is daunting and worth further investigation. One
possible explanation is that the current MUMs are afraid being “replaced” by the future MFR
167

curriculum college graduates. One could argue, alternatively, that this is a case of sample bias
that the participating MUMs being 70.2% with high school (or certificate diplomas) and only
23.4% with bachelor degree and 6.4% with master degree. As a matter of fact, this 29.7% college
degree & above in our survey sample is in-line with Schierholtz (2014) research that 22.3% food
service manager in the US with college degree & above, and the entire workforce being only
10% with college degree & above (all other sector is 35.6% with college degree & above).
The NRA on January 26, 2021, reported that “As of December 1, 2020, more than
110,000 eating-and-drinking places were closed for business temporarily, or for good” out of the
latest available count in January 2020 at 600,000 restaurants (NRA, 2021b). The eating-and-
drinking-place sector finished 2020 nearly 2.5 million jobs below its pre-coronavirus level. Most
of the restaurant shutdown for good is reported single-store operation that has no digital footprint
to recover the lost revenue due to the regulatory COVID-closing period of the restaurant dining
room (Ruggless, 2020). This “closing tragedy” substantiates the needs for the upskill needs of
the restaurant workforce. UNLV Hospitality College, as a leader of hospitality education, is
obligated to take the “future restaurant” mindset, and to provide the guidance for the restaurant
industry through innovative education, research and service for students, educators, and industry
partners around the world.
The job market in Las Vegas has been the hardest-hit among large U.S. metro areas
during the COVID pandemic, reported by Fox News in November 2020, due to the its economy
being heavily reliant upon service industry covering domestic and international travel,
discretionary spending, business conferences, casino, hotel and restaurants. The research is
confident by launching MFR education (with people-centric and technology-enhanced
curriculum) UNLV Hospitality College could serve as economic development recovery engine
168

for the Southern Nevada region, and further advance innovation and entrepreneurship
opportunities in the foodservice, restaurant and hospitality sectors. Ultimately, catalyzing
regional development can prove UNLV Hospitality College’s importance and be a strong case
for investment in the institutions for many generations to come.

169

References
Airey, D. (2015). 40 years of tourism studies – a remarkable story. Tourism Recreation Research,
40(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2015.1007633
Alexander, M. (2007). Reflecting on changes in operational training in UK hospitality
management degree programmes. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 19 (3), 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110710739912
Alexakis, G. & Jiang, L. (2019). Industry competencies and the optimal hospitality management
curriculum: an empirical study. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 31 (4), 210–
220. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2019.1575748
Ann, C., Garcia, C., Hertzman, J. & Mandabach, K. (2020). An assessment of beverage
management programs in U.S. hospitality schools. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality,
Volume 9, Issue 2 (2020). https://www.longdom.org/open-access/an-assessment-of-
beverage-management-programs-in-us-hospitality-schools-53253.html
Barron, P. (2012). The Chipotle Effect: The changing landscape of the American food consumer
and how fast casual is impacting the future of restaurants. Transmedia Press.
Barrows, C. & Vieira, E. (2013). Recommendations for the development of a new operational
classification system for the foodservice industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Research, 37 (3), 349–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348012436375
Baum, T. (2002). Skills and training for the hospitality sector: a review of issues. Journal of
Vocational Education & Training, 54 (3), 343–364.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820200200204

170

Baum, T., Mooney, S., Robinson, R., & Solnet, D. (2020). COVID-19’s impact on the hospitality
workforce – new crisis or amplification of the norm? International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32 (9), 2813–2829.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2020-0314
Beckett E. & Littman, J. (2020, November 17). How 5 mega chains are designing restaurants for
a digital future. Restaurant Dive. https://www.restaurantdive.com/news/how-5-mega-
chains-are-designing-restaurants-for-a-digital-future/589162/
Breakey, N. & Craig-Smith, S. (2007). Hospitality degree programs in Australia: a continuing
evolution. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 14 (2), 102–118.
https://doi.org/10.1375/jhtm.14.2.102
Brown, G. (2020, February). Food delivery apps: Friend or foe?. QSR Magazine.
https://www.qsrmagazine.com/outside-insights/food-delivery-apps-friend-or-foe
Canziani, B., Almanza, B., Frash, R., Mckeig, M. & Sullivan-Reid, C. (2016). Classifying
restaurants to improve usability of restaurant research. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28 (7), 1467–1483.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-12-2014-0618
Carman, T. (2019, December 31). Why fast-casual restaurants became the decade’s most
important food trend. Washington Post.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/voraciously/wp/2019/12/31/why-fast-casual-
restaurants-became-the-decades-most-important-food-trend/
Carman, T. (2020, January 6). Why fast-casual restaurants became the decade’s most important
food trend. The Seattle Times. https://www.seattletimes.com/life/food-drink/why-fast-
casual-restaurants-became-the-decades-most-important-food-trend/
171

Celentano, D. (2019, July 31). Three basic casual restaurant formats - QSR, casual dining, and
fast-casual concepts. The Balance Small Business. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/types-
of-restaurant-formats-1326193
Clark, R. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: a guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Pub Inc.
Coley, B. (2020a, April). Wingstop keeps momentum going despite COVID-19. QSR Magazine.
https://www.qsrmagazine.com/fast-food/wingstop-keeps-momentum-going-despite-covid-
19
Coley, B. (2020b, May). Dunkin’ adds curbside pickup, doubles delivery footprint. QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/finance/dunkin-adds-curbside-pickup-doubles-
delivery-footprint
Coley, B. (2021, April 29). McDonald's loyalty program gathering overwhelming response. QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/fast-food/mcdonalds-loyalty-program-gathering-
overwhelming-response
Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches
(5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Dedeke, A. (2015). Wagamama: creation of a fast casual restaurant. Journal of Ethics &
Entrepreneurship, 5 (2), 39–53. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1773253192/
Digest of Education Statistics (2018), National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/
DiPietro, R. (2017). Restaurant and foodservice research. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 29 (4), 1203–1234. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-01-2016-0046
172

DiPietro, R. & Bufquin, D. (2018). Effects of work status congruence and perceived
management concern for employees on turnover intentions in a fast casual restaurant chain.
Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 17 (1), 38–59.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2017.1328260
DiPietro, R., Murphy, K., Rivera, M. & Muller, C. (2007). Multi-unit management key success
factors in the casual dining restaurant industry. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 19(7), 524–536. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110710818275
Dixon, D., Miscuraca, J. & Koutroumanis, D. (2018). Looking strategically to the future of
restaurants: casual dining or fast casual? Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 1(1),
102–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127417737288
Enz, C. (2004). Issues of concern for restaurant owners and managers. The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 45 (4), 315–332.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010880404270065
Fantozzi, J. (2019, March 13). Restaurant chains expand employee education perks. Nation’s
Restaurant News. https://www.nrn.com/print/383672
FastCasual.com (2021, March 29) . 2021 fast casual top 100 movers and shakers.
FastCasul.com. https://www.fastcasual.com/resources/2021-fast-casual-top-100-movers-
shakers-awards-ceremony and https://youtu.be/x_8ZzB5Iu4A
Foderaro, L. (2016, February 15). Cornell’s plan to merge hotel school gets an icy reception.
New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/nyregion/at-cornells-hotel-school-an-icy-reception-
for-a-planned-merger.html
173

Gallimore, R. & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36(1),
45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Goodin, R., Moran, M. & Rein, M. (2009). The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199548453.001.0001
Goss‐Turner, S. (1999). The role of the multi‐unit manager in branded hospitality chains. Human
Resource Management Journal, 9 (4), 39–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-
8583.1999.tb00209.x
Goss-Turner, S. & Jones, P. (2000). Multi-unit management in service operations: Alternative
approaches in the UK hospitality industry. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2 (1), 51–66.
https://doi.org/10.1177/146735840000200109
Garavan, T., O'Brien, F. & O'Hanlon, D. (2006). Career advancement of hotel managers since
graduation: A comparative study. Personnel Review, 35 (3), 252–280.
https://doi.org/10.1108/00483480610656685
Gross, M. & Manoharan, A. (2016). The balance of liberal and vocational values in hospitality
higher education: Voices of graduates. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 28 (1),
44–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2015.1127165
Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., Urbano, D., Cunningham, J. & Organ, D. (2014). Entrepreneurial
universities in two European regions: a case study comparison. The Journal of Technology
Transfer, 39 (3), 415–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-012-9287-2
Gursoy, D. & Swanger, N. (2004). An industry-driven model of hospitality curriculum for
programs housed in accredited colleges of business. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Education, 16 (4), 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2004.10696804
174

Gustafson, C., Love, C. & Montgomery, R. (2005). Expanding the food service curriculum: who
has added fine dining to the menu? Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 4(1), 53–68.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J385v04n01_07
Han, H. & Ryu, K. (2009). The roles of the physical environment, price perception, and customer
satisfaction in determining customer loyalty in the restaurant industry. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research, 33 (4), 487–510.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348009344212
Hanks, L. & Line, N. (2018). The restaurant social servicescape: establishing a nomological
framework. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74, 13–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.01.022
Hanushek, L. (2003). Redistribution through education and other transfer mechanisms. Journal
of Monetary Economics, 50(8), 1719–1750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2003.01.004
Harkison, T., Poulston, J. & Ginny Kim, J. (2011). Hospitality graduates and managers: the big
divide. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23 (3), 377–392.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111111122541
Harrington, R., Mandabach, K., Vanleeuwen, D. & Thibodeaux, W (2005a). The
institutionalization of culinary education: an initial assessment. Journal of Culinary Science
& Technology, 4 (4), 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1300/J385v04n04_04
Harrington, R., Mandabach, K., Vanleeuwen, D. & Thibodeaux, W. (2005b). A multi-lens
framework explaining structural differences across foodservice and culinary education.
International Journal of Hospitality Management, 24 (2), 195–218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.06.005
175

Hegarty, J. (2011). Achieving excellence by means of critical reflection and cultural imagination
in culinary arts and gastronomy education. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 9
(2), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2011.580705
Hertzman, J. (2008). A suggested curriculum for associate degree culinary arts programs.
Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 6 (4), 256–278.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15428050802516036
Hertzman, J. & Ackerman, R. (2010). Evaluating quality in associate degree culinary arts
programs. Quality Assurance in Education, 18 (3), 209–226.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09684881011058650
Hertzman, J. & Maas, J. (2012). The value of culinary education: evaluating educational costs,
job placement outcomes, and satisfaction with value of associate degree culinary and baking
arts program graduates. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 10 (1), 53–74.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2012.650609
Hertzman, J. & Stefanelli, J. (2008). Developing quality indicators for associate degree culinary
arts programs: a survey of educators and industry chefs. Journal of Quality Assurance in
Hospitality & Tourism, 9 (2), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/15280080802235466
Horng, J. (2004). Curriculum analysis of foods and beverage management of technological and
vocational education in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 9 (2), 107–
119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1094166042000233676
Hsu, C., Xiao, H. & Chen, N. (2017). Hospitality and tourism education research from 2005 to
2014. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29 (1), 141–160.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-09-2015-0450
176

Jones, P. (1999). Multi-unit management in the hospitality industry: a late twentieth century
phenomenon. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 11 (4), 155–
164. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596119910263540
Kaiser T. (2021, April 29). DoorDash eliminates one-plan-fits-all pricing model. Food on
Demand. https://foodondemandnews.com/04292021/doordash-eliminates-one-plan-fits-all-
pricing-model/
Katz, A. & Riley, D. (2018). Learning from failures: Engineering education in an Age of
academic capitalism. Association for Engineering Education - Engineering Library Division
Papers. https://peer.asee.org/learning-from-failures-engineering-education-in-an-age-of-
academic-capitalism.pdf
Kirkpatrick, D. & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs the four levels (3rd ed.).
Berrett-Koehler.
Kirkpatrick, J. & Kirkpatrick, W. (2011). Creating ROE: The end is the beginning. T+D
(Alexandria, Va.), 65 (11), 60–64. https://www.td.org/magazines/td-magazine/creating-roe-
the-end-is-the-beginning
Kirkpatrick, J. & Kirkpatrick, W. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
Association For Talent Development.
Klein, D. (2018, October). McDonald's launches career advising campaign for employees” . QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/employee-management/mcdonalds-launches-
career-advising-campaign-employees
Klein, D. (2019a, October). Chipotle now offering debt-free degrees to employees. QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/employee-management/chipotle-now-offering-
debt-free-degrees-employees
177

Klein, D. (2019b, December 12). The state of the fast casual industry. QSR Magazine.
https://www.qsrmagazine.com/exclusives/state-fast-casual-industry
Klein, D. (2020, April). Could COVID-19 usher in a golden era for pizza chains? QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/fast-food/could-covid-19-usher-golden-era-pizza-
chains
Koenig (2019, July). 5 Years Since Starbucks Offered to Help Baristas Attend College, How
Many Have Graduated? EdSurge. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-07-25-5-years-
since-starbucks-offered-to-help-baristas-attend-college-how-many-have-graduated
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice:
Revising Bloom’s Taxonomy, 41 (4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lalley H. (2021, May 1). How Chipotle crafted itself perfect pandemic brand. Restaurant
Business Magazine. https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/operations/how-chipotle-
crafted-itself-perfect-pandemic-brand
Le, A., Mcdonald, C. & Klieve, H. (2018). Hospitality higher education in Vietnam: Voices from
stakeholders. Tourism Management Perspectives, 27, 68–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.05.002
Lee, S., Chua, B. & Han, H. (2020). Variety-seeking motivations and customer behaviors for
new restaurants: An empirical comparison among full-service, quick-casual, and quick-
service restaurants. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 43, 220–231.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.04.004
Liddle, A. (2020, Apr 21). An early look at the impact of coronavirus on restaurant sales.
Nation’s Restaurant News. https://www.nrn.com/print/394369
178

Line, N. & Hanks, L. (2020). A holistic model of the servicescape in fast casual dining.
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32 (1), 288–306.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2019-0360
Lopes, J., Ferreira, J., Farinha, L. & Raposo, M. (2018). Emerging perspectives on regional
academic entrepreneurship. Higher Education Policy, 33 (2), 1–29.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-0099-3
Luna N. (2020a, April 20). Restaurants need $240 billion bailout as job losses reach 8 million.
Nation’s Restaurant News. https://www.nrn.com/news/national-restaurant-association-
restaurants-need-240-billion-bailout-job-losses-reach-8-million
Luna N. (2020b, April 30). El Pollo Loco triples delivery, online order sales during coronavirus
pandemic. Nation’s Restaurant News. https://www.nrn.com/quick-service/el-pollo-loco-
triples-delivery-online-order-sales-during-coronavirus-pandemic
McCarthy, A. (2020, August 28). Why your restaurant should offer food delivery. DoorDash for
Merchants. https://get.doordash.com/blog/why-your-restaurant-should-offer-food-delivery
Mathur, T. & Gupta, A. (2019). The impact of dining atmospherics and perceived food quality
on customers’ re-patronage intention – in fast casual restaurants. Tourism and Hospitality
Management, 25 (1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.25.1.6
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications.
Mayburry, T. & Swanger, N. (2011). Identification of industry needs for baccalaureate
hospitality graduates: A delphi study. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 23 (4),
33–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2011.10697018
179

Maze, J. (2019, May 2). Fast-casual chains are still growing. Restaurant Business Online.
https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/fast-casual-chains-are-still-
growing
Maze, J. (2021, April 2). Technomic top 500: the biggest chains stood out in a tough 2020,
fast-casual chains are still growing. Restaurant Business Online.
https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/financing/technomic-top-500-biggest-
chains-stood-out-tough-2020
Maze, J. and Lalley, H. (2020, April 17). Why the coronavirus shutdown will upend delivery
services for good. Restaurant Business Online.
https://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/operations/why-coronavirus-shutdown-will-
upend-delivery-services-good
Merriam, S.B. & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4
th
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Min, H., Swanger, N. & Gursoy, D. (2016). A longitudinal investigation of the importance of
course subjects in the hospitality curriculum: an industry perspective. Journal of Hospitality
& Tourism Education, 28 (1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2015.1127168
Mitra, S. & Euchner, J. (2016). Business acceleration at scale: An interview with Sramana Mitra.
Research Technology Management, 59 (3), 12–20.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2016.1161398
Murray, A. & Crammond, R. (2020). Witnessing entrepreneurial perceptions and proclivity in
university students. Education & Training (London), 62 (4), 459–481.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-03-2019-0052
180

Mone, M. & Umbreit, T. (1989). Making the transition from single-unit to multi-unit fast-service
management: what are the requisite skills and educational needs? Hospitality Education and
Research Journal, 13 (3), 319–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/109634808901300332
Morris, M., Kuratko, D., Allen, J., Ireland, R. & Schindehutte, M. (2010). Resource acceleration:
extending resource-based theory in entrepreneurial ventures. The Journal of Applied
Management and Entrepreneurship, 15 (2), 4–.
Muller, C. & DiPietro, R. (2007). A theoretical framework for multi-unit management
development in the 21st Century. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 9 (2-3), 7–25.
https://doi.org/10.1300/J369v09n02_02
National Restaurant Association (2021a, April 2). Restaurant employment rose for the third
consecutive month. https://www.restaurant.org/articles/news/restaurant-employment-rose-
in-march
National Restaurant Association (2021b, January 26). National Restaurant Association releases
2021 state of the restaurant industry report. https://restaurant.org/news/pressroom/press-
releases/2021-state-of-the-restaurant-industry-report
National Restaurant Association (2021c). 2021 state of the restaurant industry report.
https://www.restaurant.org/research/reports/state-of-restaurant-industry
National Restaurant Association (2020). 2020 restaurant industry factbook.
https://restaurant.org/Downloads/PDFs/Research/SOI/2020-State-Of-The-Industry-
Factbook.pdf
National Restaurant Association (2019). 2019 state of the restaurant industry report.
https://restaurant.org/Articles/News/Association-report-analyzes-industry-trends
181

Noguchi, Y. (2020, March 22). Closed all at once: restaurant industry faces collapse. NPR.org.
https://www.npr.org/2020/03/22/819189939/closed-all-at-once-restaurant-industry-faces-
collapse
Øgaard, T., Larsen, S. & Marnburg, E. (2005). Organizational culture and performance –
evidence from the fast food restaurant industry. Food Service Technology, 5 (1), 23–34.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-5740.2005.00109.x
Oktadiana, H. & Chon, K. (2017). Vocational versus academic debate on undergraduate
education in hospitality and tourism: The case of Indonesia. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Education, 29 (1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2016.1266942
Ottenbacher, M. & Harrington, R. (2009). The product innovation process of quick-service
restaurant chains. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21 (5),
523–541. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110910967782
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4 ed.). Thousand Oaks,
Calif: Sage Publications.
Pittman, R. & Oches, S. (2020, April), 2020 future of fast casual report, QSR Magazine.
https://www.qsrmagazine.com/fast-casual/2020-future-fast-casual-report
Politis, D., Gabrielsson, J., Galan, N., & Abebe, S. (2019). Entrepreneurial learning in venture
acceleration programs. The Learning Organization, 26 (6), 588–603.
https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-04-2018-0082
ProStart Program of National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation, National
Restaurant Association Educational Foundation. https://chooserestaurants.org/prostart
Qin, F., Wright, M., & Gao, J. (2019). Accelerators and intra-ecosystem variety: how
entrepreneurial agency influences venture development in a time-compressed support
182

program. Industrial and Corporate Change, 28 (4), 961–975.
https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtz036
QS World University Rankings (2021). Hospitality & leisure management. QS World University
Rankings. https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-
rankings/2021/hospitality-leisure-management
Reinstein, B. (2020, April 3). COVID-19 will forever change the foodservice industry. QSR
Web. https://www.qsrweb.com/articles/covid-19-will-forever-change-the-foodservice-
industry/
Reinstein, B & Hand, T. (2020, September 3). The restaurant of the future 3.0. Kinetic12
Consulting.
https://www.kinetic12.com/files/covid/The_Restaurant_of_the_Future_3.0_090320.pdf
Report of the workshop on social feasibility in small-scale fisheries development, Food and
Agriculture Organization of United Nations. Madras, India, 3-8 September 1979.
http://www.fao.org/tempref/FI/CDrom/bobp/cd1/Bobp/Publns/Reports/0005.pdf
Riley, M. (2005). Food and beverage management. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, 17 (1), 88–93. https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110510577707
Robinson, R., Breakey, N., & Craig-Smith, S. (2010). Food for thought: investigating food and
beverage curricular in Australian hospitality degree programs. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Education, 22 (1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2010.10696967
Ruggless R. (2020, November 24), COVID-related restaurant closures mount, but perhaps ‘less
dire’ than forecast. Nation’s Restaurant News. https://www.nrn.com/operations/covid-
related-restaurant-closures-mount-perhaps-less-dire-forecast
183

Ryu, K., & Han, H. (2010). Influence of the quality of food, service, and physical environment
on customer satisfaction and behavioral intention in quick-casual restaurants: moderating role
of perceived price. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 34 (3), 310–329.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348009350624
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values,
satisfaction and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22 (3), 416–432.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111011035981
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Kim, T. (2008). The relationships among overall quick-casual restaurant
image, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 27 (3), 459–469.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.11.001
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Salkind, N. (2018). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (6 edition.). Los Angeles:
SAGE.
Scott, N., A. Puleo, V., & Crotts, J. (2008). An analysis of curriculum requirements among
hospitality and tourism management programs in AACSB colleges of business in the United
States. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 7 (4), 71–83.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220802061014
Secundo, G., Del Vecchio, P., Schiuma, G., & Passiante, G. (2017). Activating entrepreneurial
learning processes for transforming university students’ idea into entrepreneurial practices.
184

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 23 (3), 465–485.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-12-2015-0315
Shankar, R., & Clausen, T. (2020). Scale quickly or fail fast: An inductive study of acceleration.
Technovation, 98, 102174–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102174
Sharma, V. (2020, January). Why restaurant employees crave education programs. QSR
Magazine. https://www.qsrmagazine.com/outside-insights/why-restaurant-employees-crave-
education-programs
Shierholz, H. (2014). Low wages and few benefits mean many restaurant workers can’t make
ends meet. In Policy File. Economic Policy Institute.
https://www.epi.org/publication/restaurant-workers
Simpson, S. (2015). Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.: Strategy with a higher mission or farmed and
dangerous? Journal of Case Studies, 2015, Vol.33 (2), p.38 (22).
Starbucks ASU Partnership (2021). Starbucks College Achievement Plan. Arizona State
University. https://starbucks.corporate.asu.edu/starbucks-college-achievement-plan
Stavytskyy, A., Dluhopolskyi, O., Kharlamova, G., Karpuk, A., & Osetskyi, V. (2019). Testing
the fruitfulness of the institutional environment for the development of innovative-
entrepreneurial universities in Ukraine. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17 (4),
274–288. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.17(4).2019.23
Still, K. (2017). Accelerating research innovation by adopting the lean startup paradigm.
Technology Innovation Management Review, 7 (5), 32–43.
https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1075
185

Suboleski, S., Kincaid, C. & DiPietro, R. (2009). An exploratory study of multiunit restaurant
management training: a qualitative perspective. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality
& Tourism, 8 (2), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332840802269833
Szende, P., Catalfamo, N. & Upneja, A. (2019). Benchmarking hospitality management
curricula: a comparison of top U.S. programs – A repeat study. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Education, 31 (3), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2018.1487788
Tan, T. (2019). Principles of inclusion, diversity, access, and equity. The Journal of Infectious
Diseases, 220 (Supplement_2), S30–S32. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiz198
Teng, C. (2013). Developing and evaluating a hospitality skill module for enhancing
performance of undergraduate hospitality students. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport &
Tourism Education, 13, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2013.07.003
Tesone, D., & Ricci, P. (2005). Attributes of entry-level employees: hospitality and tourism
managers seeking more than knowledge and skills. Journal of Applied Management and
Entrepreneurship, 10 (2), 3–12. https://www-proquest-
com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/203921000
The World Bank Data, Labor force total – United States, The World Bank Data.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.TOTL.IN?locations=US
Thompson, K. and Alexander, K (2020, February 19). What's the difference between fast food &
fast casual? Thrillist. https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/difference-between-fast-food-
vs-fast-casual-restaurants
Trading Economics. 2019 US GDP Data. Trading Economics.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-growth-annual
186

Traud, M., Bureau, W., Deutsch, J., & Schulman, S. (2017). The connections between culinary
education and the restaurant industry: A phenomenological investigation of educators’,
restaurant professionals’ and recent graduates’ views on culinary education. ProQuest
Dissertations Publishing. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1848682575/
Tribe, J. (2002). Research trends and imperatives in tourism education. Acta Turistica, 14 (1),
61–81. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1352296476/
Umbreit, W. (1989). Multi-unit management: managing at a distance. Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 30 (1), 52–59.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001088048903000115
Umbreit, W., and Smith, D. (1990). A study of opinions and practices of successful multi-unit
fast service restaurant managers. Hospitality Research Journal, 14 (2), 451–458.
https://doi.org/10.1177/109634809001400248
United Nations (2015). 17 sustainable development doals. United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. https://sdgs.un.org/goals
UNLV (2021a). Overview of Top Tier 2.0. UNLV. https://www.unlv.edu/toptier/2.0
UNLV (2021b). UNLV Fall 2020 enrollment statistics. UNLV.
https://ir.unlv.edu/IAP/reports/student-profiles/headcount-enrollment-by-college-and-major-
summarized-by-degree-type/
UNLV Hospitality College (2021a). Bachelor of science in hospitality management. UNLV.
https://www.unlv.edu/degree/bs-hospitality-management
UNLV Hospitality College (2021b). Dean’s global advisory board. UNLV.
https://www.unlv.edu/hospitality/advisory-board
187

UNLV Hospitality College (2021c). Our strategy today. UNLV.
https://www.unlv.edu/hospitality/about
UNLV News Center (2020a). UNLV opens new incubator for Integrated Resort Technology -
Gaming, entertainment, and resort research facility kicks off landmark public-private
partnership between UNLV and Caesars Entertainment. UNLV.
https://www.unlv.edu/news/article/unlv-opens-new-incubator-integrated-resort-technology
UNLV News Center (2020b). UNLV Hospitality College to establish Nation’s first academic
program in fast-casual restaurant management. UNLV.
https://www.unlv.edu/news/release/unlv-hospitality-college-establish-nation-s-first-
academic-program-fast-casual
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019). May 2019 national industry-specific occupational
employment and wage estimates, NAICS 722500, restaurants and other eating places. U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_722500.htm#(7)
Wallace A. (2021, January 13). Las Vegas, the hardest-hit metro economy in America, just
suffered another blow. Fox5 KVVU-TV. https://www.fox5vegas.com/coronavirus/las-vegas-
the-hardest-hit-metro-economy-in-america-just-suffered-another-blow/article_a1777cd7-
e746-5107-82c8-abf0a5f484ba.html
Webber, D. (1986). Analyzing political feasibility: political scientists1 unique contribution to
policy analysis. Policy Studies Journal, 14 (4), 545–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-
0072.1986.tb00360.x
Weeks, H., & Finch, J. (2003). An analysis of real estate curriculum requirements at AACSB
international-accredited institutions. Journal of Real Estate Practice and Education, 6 (2),
257–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/10835547.2003.12091597
188

West, M. (2021, May 13). With busy airports and restaurants, U.S. moves closer to full
reopening. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/with-busy-airports-full-
restaurants-u-s-moves-closer-to-full-reopening-11620898200
Wegner, D., Thomas, E., Teixeira, E., & Maehler, A. (2019). University entrepreneurial push
strategy and students’ entrepreneurial intention. International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behaviour & Research, 26 (2), 307–325. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-10-2018-0648
Wolfe A. (2021, April 29). Loyalty program pays off for Starbucks. Hospitality Technology.
https://hospitalitytech.com/loyalty-program-pays-starbucks
Ye, H., & Law, R. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on hospitality and tourism education: a case
study of Hong Kong. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-
print), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2021.1875967

189

Appendix A: Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee
The advisory team of the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum was formed in
September 2020 with an objective to provide the practical industry knowledge to the MFR
concentration program. MFRIC was established with industry participants, industry scholars, and
Dean’s global advisory board members of UNLV Hospitality College. MFRIC is a representative
group to the broader restaurant industry participants. The MFRIC is comprised of a total of 12
members and chaired by Ms. Kathleen Wood. She currently serves as CEO of Kathleen Wood
Enterprises (KWP), a collection of business portfolio.

Table A1
Advisory Team
No. Name Current Work Participant Type
1
Ms. Kathleen
Wood
Founder CEO of Kathleen Wood
Enterprises (KWP), former President
of Raising Cane’s Chicken Fingers
Industry participant
2
Mr. Douglas
Fryett
President, at Fryett Consulting Group
Dean’s global advisory
board members of
UNLV Hospitality
College
3 Mr. Phil Stanton
Vice President of Operations at The
Wendy’s International
Industry participant
4 Mr. Royce Chow
Vice President of Operations at Panda
Restaurant Group
Industry participant
5
Mr. Scott
Boatwright
Chief Restaurant Officer at Chipotle
Mexican Grill
Industry participant
6
Mr. Darren
Tristano
CEO at Foodservice Results, Former
President of Technomic, Inc.
Industry participant
7
Professor Robin
DiPietro
Director for International Institute for
Foodservice Research and Education,
at University of Southern Carolina
Outside Restaurant
Management
Professor

190

No. Name Current Work Participant Type
8 Mr. Lincoln Spoor
CEO at Feel Good Brands, LLC,
Franchise of Krispy Kreme
Industry participant
9 Mr. Todd Kelly
SVP at Diversified Restaurant Group,
Franchise of Taco Bell
Industry participant
10
Mr. James
Lessnick
CEO at Courthouse Caps LLC,
Franchise of Capriotti’s Sandwich
Shop
Industry participant
11 Mr. Toby Malbec
Managing Director at ConStrata
Technology Consulting
Industry participant
12
Mr. Michael
Wang
Regional Vice President Operations, at
Shake Shack
Industry participant

191

Appendix B: Proposed Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Faculty Committee
The execution team of the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum to be formed
by September 2021. MFRFC will be established with core faculty and career office of UNLV
Hospitality College to implement the program for the first cohort student intake in September
2022. The MFRFC will likely be comprised of seven faculty members (may include one new
hire of tenure-based restaurant management professor and two industry-based lecturers), and one
from Boughner Career Center of UNLV Hospitality College. The MFRFC committee will be
chaired by Dean of UNLV Hospitality College. Upon MFRFC’s installment by September 2021,
MFRFC will be working with MFRIC and recruiting team to formally drive and implement the
full MFR curriculum to meet the first student intake timeline by September 2022.

192

Table B1
Execution Team
No. Name Current Work Participant Type
1
Dr. Stowe Shoemaker Dean of UNLV Hospitality College UNLV Faculty
2
Dr. Anthony Gatling
Associate Professor at UNLV
Hospitality College
UNLV Faculty
3
Dr. Joseph Lema
Chair Professor for Food & Beverage
and Event Management
Department
UNLV Faculty
4
Chef Mark Peck
Lecturer at UNLV Hospitality
College; Las Vegas Area Operation
Coach, Taco Bell Corporation
UNLV Faculty
5
Ms. Maggie
Hausbeck
Executive Director of Alumni
Engagement & Career Services at
UNLV Hospitality College
UNLV Staff
6
To-Be-Hired
Professor by UNLV
Hospitality College
Not Applicable
UNLV Faculty (One
Tenure-based
Restaurant
Management
Professor)
7
To-Be-Hired
Industry-based
Lecturer
Not Applicable UNLV Faculty
8
To-Be-Hired
Industry-based
Lecturer
Not Applicable UNLV Faculty

193

Appendix C: Step One– Interview
Interviewee: Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee
Interview Protocol – Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee

Respondent (Name): _______________________________________________

Company Name: __________________________________________________

Position: ________________________________________________________

Location of Interview: ______________________________________________

Interview Data (yyyy-mm-dd): ________________________________________

Time in / Time Out: _________________________________________________

Introduction

Thanks for taking the Zoom video interview with me today. I am conducting this exercise
as part of my dissertation research with my USC doctoral program, exploring an innovative
study to establish Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant (MFR) Education at UNLV Hospitality
College.
I anticipate taking no more than 40 minutes of your time, and I have five open-ended
questions for your consideration and then follow by your opinions toward proposed draft courses
for the MFR curriculum. You may also critique the body of knowledge of each draft course, and
write-in additional course name.
Your participation is completely voluntary. We can skip any question you want at any
time, and you may stop the interview at any time. Any identifiable information obtained in
connection with this study will remain confidential. If you are comfortable with it, I would like
to video record our conversation. The video recording will be audio transcribed through Zoom’s
194

Cloud Recording services. The data will be stored on a password protected computer in the
researcher’s personal computer for three years, and then destroyed. Do you have any questions?
Ready to begin?
SECTION 1: Open-Ended Questions Following Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization
Framework

KMO Construct KMO Influence Interview Question
K-Declarative

Future MFR managers should
understand all key facets of the
multi-unit fast casual restaurant
industry and relevant principles
of accounting, finance,
management, and marketing.
What knowledge, skills, and
dispositions should a future
MFR manager possess?
K-Procedural
Future MFR managers should
demonstrate the ability to utilize
their knowledge of key
leadership skills in a multi-unit
fast casual restaurant setting.
How would you expect the future
MFR managers to demonstrate
his/her leadership and
management skills?
M-Utility Value
Future MFR managers should
value their studies and their
intended career path in the
multi-unit fast casual restaurant
industry
What reasons should future MFR
managers hold for pursuing a
career in the restaurant industry?
M-Self-Efficacy
Future MFR managers should
have confidence in their ability
to succeed in the MFR industry.
To what extent should the future
MFR managers exhibit
confidence in their skills and
ability to succeed in the
restaurant industry?
Cultural Setting
Influence:
Resources
UNLV Hospitality College must
provide resources for future
MFR managers to pursue
careers in the industry upon
graduation.
What kinds of hand-on, practical
experience will the future MFR
manager need to obtain with the
assistance of the College?

195

SECTION 2: Proposed Draft Courses
Instructions: Please indicate the extent to which course/subject material listed below should be
included in the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum.
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#1 Supply Chain Management
• Explores key aspects of restaurant supply chains from an operation management,
food system, and sustainable perspective;
• Develop detailed-oriented processes in running a restaurant and keeping food
costs controlled;
• Optimize restaurant operation’s profits by effectively managing food selection,
procurement, logistics, receiving, storage, and inventory management processes;
• Develop food risk management, product specifications, food regulation, safety
and quality procedures;
• Comprehend technology and innovation trends in food supply chain, food
manufacturing, and food packaging;
• Transform the supply chain into a value chain.

#2 Restaurant Marketing
• Learn marketing concepts from the 4 P’s, the 7 P’s to now the 15 C’s;
• Master the consumer purchase cycle with marketing tactics and strategies;
• Practice customer segmentation and customer data analysis;
• Develop marketing plans for local stores, and company-wide system;
• Design and implement social media strategies and tactics;
• Utilize restaurant marketing technologies, loyalty membership program, customer
data platform, and location-based digital marketing;
• Practice recommendation algorithm and artificial intelligence in digital marketing
strategy development.

#3 New Product Development
• Learn product development fundamentals, participants, process and steps – from
ideation to launch;
• Master opportunities mapping and product research using consumer data insight;
• Validate principles of brand consistency, food ingredient selection, food safety,
process design, nutrition, costing and quality control;
• Comprehend product launch blending restaurant operation, food science,
marketing, and culinary arts;
• Develop meal plan package, ready-to-go-food, grocery shelf items and
subscription-based food & beverage products;
• Practice menu modification and food packaging for to-go and for-delivery items;
• Understand the impact of a new product on the whole chain system;
• Participate practicum of one product launch project with a restaurant partner.

#4 Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
• Carry system development from one store operation to multi-units;
• Develop restaurant business culture, mission statement, business skills and
multiple effective systems (such as training, labor, kitchen, safety, menu,
procurement, inventory management, marketing, branding, online ordering,
delivery, etc.);
• Prepare a comprehensive manual that serves as the foundation for the
organization and its staff training programs;
• Design and implement quality control systems for maintaining brand image and
quality standards;
• Develop franchise disclosure document and all the supporting operating manuals
and procedures;

196

• Learn intellectual property and other intangible assets in the restaurant business;
• Design organizational charts needed to effectively manage the business and
support the future growth.

#5 Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
• Develop growth strategies for the multi-unit restaurants;
• Build entrepreneurial growth mindset within the organization, including investing
in staff, embracing innovation, capitalizing on new technology and utilizing
social media;
• Create a data-driven and profit & loss driven restaurant company;
• Achieve growth through new store buildout, franchising sales, joint ventures,
management contracts, ghost kitchen, virtual brand and restaurant company
acquisitions;
• Practice site selection, lease negotiation, building requirements, dining room and
kitchen design;
• Develop virtual brand and dark/ghost kitchen, and launch direct-to-consumer
food offerings;
• Gain knowledge of restaurant company accounting, financial projection,
investment underwriting, and valuation;
• Access growth capital (debt and equity capital) and alternative financing;
• Research into restaurant portfolio company build-up, restaurant private equity
fund, restaurant M&A, IPO (Initial public offering) and SPAC (Special Purpose
Acquisition Company).

#6 Food Service Equipment and Technology
• Learn how menu drives equipment, kitchen design, supply choices, energy use,
labor utilization, and real estate needs;
• Match foodservice equipment choices and their performance parameters with
operational demand requirements;
• Design workflow optimization – the right systems, equipment training, and
layout;
• Implement “Total Cost of Ownership” concept for foodservice equipment;
• Develop safety protocol and preventative maintenance program for foodservice
equipment;
• Carrey out foodservice equipment repair and operation maintenance;
• Develop foodservice information system framework, covering guest
management, back of house, data analytics, human resource information
management, POS (point of sale), loyalty, payment, digital signage, customer
relationship management, store-level infrastructure, service & support, security &
compliance, IT management, online order, catering, drive-through & self-service,
and delivery.
• Research the impact of advanced technology automation and equipment (kitchen
robot, in-store service robot, delivery robot and drone delivery) and labor
management software in restaurant operations.

#7 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
• Elevate practice from single store operations to multi-unit operations;
• Design and practice customer services;
• Expand from POS (point of sale) to comprehensive restaurant technology
applications;
• Build financial acumen of restaurant operations and profit & loss statement;
• Turn operation metrics into a restaurant management report card;
• Curate off-premises sales, mobile ordering, kiosk ordering, curbside and in-store
pick-up, and kitchen queue system;
• Build drive-through operation capacity and efficiency;
• Implement mobile app operations and digital marketing/sales;
• Examine and operate self-delivery or 3
rd
party delivery;
• Develop catering business operations;
• Design and implement a culture of teamwork and sustainability into the
organization.

197

#8 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
• Use statistics/data science to determine staffing requirements;
• Examine price sensitivity of different menu items;
• Determine the bundling strategy for the menu items;
• Comprehend within-store data and between-store data;
• Perform life-time value analysis for guests and business clients;
• Learn time and motion studies to improve throughput;
• Master kitchen capacity analysis, and store labor requirement;
• Use activity-based costing for indirect restaurant cost.

#9 Restaurant Career & Talent Development
• Learn mission & culture of restaurant business, and people priority;
• Master hiring, recruiting, retention, leading and developing people;
• Acquire growth mindset from one store to multi-units;
• Develop safe, respectful, inclusive and diversity workplace;
• Interpret knowledge, motivation, organization vs. people skills;
• Deliver employee happiness and guest satisfaction;
• Practice coaching and performance management;
• Adopt best practice for labor law compliance and implementation;
• Exercise conflict management, change management, and crisis management;
• Practice scenario-based, situation analysis simulation and internship workshop;
• Harmonize people, technology and organizational outcomes.

(Any other write-in courses/subject matters?)

#10:

#11:

#12:

#13:

198

Appendix D: Step Two – Online Survey

Human Resources Leader or Multi-Unit Manager of Each Participating Multi-Unit Fast
Casual Restaurant Company
Must serve as the HR leader or MUM as full-time job function in a MFR setting
operating over five (5) units, either as corporate-owned brand or franchise system operator.
Target number of online survey HR managers at 50. This survey be delivered via Qualtrics
Software. Given the blurred lines between QSR and fast casual restaurant, all HR managers in
the limited service restaurants (quick service and fast casual) are invited to participate in this
online survey.
At some fast casual restaurant chains, the lead HR function may be incorporated into the
role of MUM, regional director of operations, vice president of operations, chief administration
officer, chief operating officer, president or chief executive officer. Consequently, for the
operation purpose of the HR manager or MUMs in the research, those other titles will also
satisfy.

199

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education / Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90089, U.S.A

Information / Facts Sheet for Exempt Non‐Medical Research

Establishing Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Education at UNLV Hospitality College:
An Innovation Study

You are invited to participate in a research study. Research studies include only people who
voluntarily choose to take part. This document explains information about this study. You
should ask questions about anything that is unclear to you.

Purpose of the Study
The proposed study plans to address the lack of formal industry-based education to serve the
growing and changing multi-unit fast casual restaurant segment, particularly coping with the
continued social distancing of COVID-19, digital infrastructure requirement, and the restaurant
of the future.

Participant Involvement
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to complete an online survey which
is anticipated to take about 20-25 minutes. You do not have to answer any survey questions you
do not want to, click “next” or “N/A” in the survey to move to the next question.

You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to, and if you do not want to be taped
or recorded, handwritten notes will be taken.

You may also be invited to participate in a 30-45 minute follow-up through Zoom video
interview. The interview would be scheduled in January 2021. We are looking for a total of 5-8
volunteers.

If you may agree for the additional follow-up of a Zoom video call, please could you drop a
separate email to Cervantes Lee, leechihc@usc.edu, the principal investigator at +1 323 356
0628.

Alternatives to Participation
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with USC Rossier School of Education or
UNLV Hospitality College will not be affected whether you participate or not in this study.

Confidentiality
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential.
Your responses will be coded with a false name and maintained separately. The survey results
will be destroyed once they have been transcribed. The data will be stored on a password
protected computer in the researcher’s personal computer for three years after the study has been
completed and then destroyed.

200

The members of the research team, UNLV Hospitality College, and the University of Southern
California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP
reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

Investigator Contact Information

Principal Investigator: Cervantes Lee (leechihc@usc.edu +1 323-356-0628) at Los Angeles
Academic Advisor and Dissertation Chair: Dr. Mark Power Robison (mrobison@usc.edu, +1
213-821-5607)
UNLV Advisor: Dean Dr. Stowe Shoemaker (stowe.shoemaker@unlv.edu, +1 702-895-3308)

IRB Contact Information
University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los
Angeles, CA 90089‐0702, +1 213-821‐5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Would you like to participate in the study?
If you agree to participate in the study, please click on the circle below AND complete the
survey that follows. If you do not want to participate in the study, you may exit this site.

201

SECTION I. Demographics
Instructions: Please answer the following questions by circling the number that fits your
demographic profile.

1) What is your age?
o Below 30 years old
o 30-39
o 40-49
o 50 years old and above

2) How many years have you worked in the restaurant industry?
o Less than 5 years
o 5 years or more than but less than 10 years
o 10 years or more than but less than 15 years
o 15 years or more than but less than 20 years
o 20 years and more

3) Which type of the multi-unit restaurant concept are you currently working at?
o All corporate-owned chain (such as Chipotle and Panda Express)
o All franchisee system (such as Subway, Wendy’s and Taco Bell)
o All licensed chain
o Combination of all the above

4) Which restaurant brand do you work at now?
o Panda Express
o Taco Bell
o Arby’s
o Wendy’s
o Shake Shack
o Other:_________

5) Are you holding a Human Resources manager/director position in your multi-unit restaurant
company?
o Yes, I am a Human Resources Manager/Director
o No, I am not a Human Resources Manager/Director

202

5). If you are Not an HR manager/director, what is your main job responsibility in your restaurant
company?
a. Store Manager
b. Multi-unit Manager/Area Coach of Operation
c. Regional Director/District Manager
d. District/Zone Vice President
e. Chief Operating Officer/Chief Restaurant Manager
f. CEO/President
g. Other:_________

6). Which segments of restaurant industry have your worked (check all that apply)?
o Coffee & Snack Shop (e.g., Starbucks)
o Quick Service Restaurant (e.g., McDonald’s)
o Fast Casual Restaurant (e.g., Chipotle)
o Casual Dining/Family Dining (e.g., Applebee’s)
o Fine Dining (e.g. Morton's The Steakhouse)
o Cafeterias, Grill-Buffets and Buffets (e.g., Golden Corral)
o Bars and Taverns (with Alcohol)
o Business/Education/Government Restaurant
o Other: _________

7). Do you supervise store managers, both direct report and indirect report ? If yes, how many?
o None
o 1-10 managers
o 11-30 managers
o 31-100 managers
o 101-300 managers
o Larger than 300 managers

8). What is your highest post high school diploma earned?
o High School
o Certification
o Bachelor
o Master/MBA
o Doctor/PhD

203

SECTION 2. Attributes of Future Graduates of a Multi-Unit Fast Casual Concentration
What knowledge and skills do you believe the future managers of multi-unit fast casual restaurant
should possess?
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)
A. Critical/Reflective Skills
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A.1 The skills to provide creative solutions
A.2 The skills to implement change
A.3 Critical thinking skills
A.4 Problem-solving skills
B. Professional/Technical Skills
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
B.1 Supply chain management
B.2 Restaurant marketing
B.3 New product development
B.4 Foodservice equipment and technology
B.5 Company system development
B.6 Store site selection
B.7 Franchise development
B.8 Restaurant operations
B.9 Talent development
B.10 Financial and accounting skills
B.11 Quantitative analytics skills
C. Communicational/Relationship
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
C.1 Teamwork skills
C.2 Oral communication skills
C.3 Written communication skills
C.4 Interpersonal skills
D. Plasticity/Erudition (Broad-based knowledge)
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
D.1 A willingness to learn
D.2 Flexibility and adaptability
204

SECTION 3. Proposed Draft Courses
Instructions: Please indicate the extent to which course/subject material listed below should be
included in the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum.
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)

Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#1 Supply Chain Management
• Explores key aspects of restaurant supply chains from an operation management,
food system, and sustainable perspective;
• Develop detailed-oriented processes in running a restaurant and keeping food costs
controlled;
• Optimize restaurant operation’s profits by effectively managing food selection,
procurement, logistics, receiving, storage, and inventory management processes;
• Develop food risk management, product specifications, food regulation, safety and
quality procedures;
• Comprehend technology and innovation trends in food supply chain, food
manufacturing, and food packaging;
• Transform the supply chain into a value chain.

#2 Restaurant Marketing
• Learn marketing concepts from the 4 P’s, the 7 P’s to now the 15 C’s;
• Master the consumer purchase cycle with marketing tactics and strategies;
• Practice customer segmentation and customer data analysis;
• Develop marketing plans for local stores, and company-wide system;
• Design and implement social media strategies and tactics;
• Utilize restaurant marketing technologies, loyalty membership program, customer
data platform, and location-based digital marketing;
• Practice recommendation algorithm and artificial intelligence in digital marketing
strategy development.

#3 New Product Development
• Learn product development fundamentals, participants, process and steps – from
ideation to launch;
• Master opportunities mapping and product research using consumer data insight;
• Validate principles of brand consistency, food ingredient selection, food safety,
process design, nutrition, costing and quality control;
• Comprehend product launch blending restaurant operation, food science, marketing,
and culinary arts;
• Develop meal plan package, ready-to-go-food, grocery shelf items and subscription-
based food & beverage products;
• Practice menu modification and food packaging for to-go and for-delivery items;
• Understand the impact of a new product on the whole chain system;
• Participate practicum of one product launch project with a restaurant partner.

#4 Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
• Carry system development from one store operation to multi-units;
• Develop restaurant business culture, mission statement, business skills and
multiple effective systems (such as training, labor, kitchen, safety, menu,
procurement, inventory management, marketing, branding, online ordering,
delivery, etc.);
• Prepare a comprehensive manual that serves as the foundation for the organization
and its staff training programs;

205

• Design and implement quality control systems for maintaining brand image and
quality standards;
• Develop franchise disclosure document and all the supporting operating manuals
and procedures;
• Learn intellectual property and other intangible assets in the restaurant business;
• Design organizational charts needed to effectively manage the business and
support the future growth.

#5 Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
• Develop growth strategies for the multi-unit restaurants;
• Build entrepreneurial growth mindset within the organization, including investing
in staff, embracing innovation, capitalizing on new technology and utilizing social
media;
• Create a data-driven and profit & loss driven restaurant company;
• Achieve growth through new store buildout, franchising sales, joint ventures,
management contracts, ghost kitchen, virtual brand and restaurant company
acquisitions;
• Practice site selection, lease negotiation, building requirements, dining room and
kitchen design;
• Develop virtual brand and dark/ghost kitchen, and launch direct-to-consumer food
offerings;
• Gain knowledge of restaurant company accounting, financial projection,
investment underwriting, and valuation;
• Access growth capital (debt and equity capital) and alternative financing;
• Research into restaurant portfolio company build-up, restaurant private equity
fund, restaurant M&A, IPO (Initial public offering) and SPAC (Special Purpose
Acquisition Company).

#6 Food Service Equipment and Technology
• Learn how menu drives equipment, kitchen design, supply choices, energy use,
labor utilization, and real estate needs;
• Match foodservice equipment choices and their performance parameters with
operational demand requirements;
• Design workflow optimization – the right systems, equipment training, and layout;
• Implement “Total Cost of Ownership” concept for foodservice equipment;
• Develop safety protocol and preventative maintenance program for foodservice
equipment;
• Carrey out foodservice equipment repair and operation maintenance;
• Develop foodservice information system framework, covering guest management,
back of house, data analytics, human resource information management, POS
(point of sale), loyalty, payment, digital signage, customer relationship
management, store-level infrastructure, service & support, security & compliance,
IT management, online order, catering, drive-through & self-service, and delivery.
• Research the impact of advanced technology automation and equipment (kitchen
robot, in-store service robot, delivery robot and drone delivery) and labor
management software in restaurant operations.

#7 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
• Elevate practice from single store operations to multi-unit operations;
• Design and practice customer services;
• Expand from POS (point of sale) to comprehensive restaurant technology
applications;
• Build financial acumen of restaurant operations and profit & loss statement;
• Turn operation metrics into a restaurant management report card;
• Curate off-premises sales, mobile ordering, kiosk ordering, curbside and in-store
pick-up, and kitchen queue system;
• Build drive-through operation capacity and efficiency;
• Implement mobile app operations and digital marketing/sales;
• Examine and operate self-delivery or 3
rd
party delivery;
• Develop catering business operations;
• Design and implement a culture of teamwork and sustainability into the
organization.

206

#8 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
• Use statistics/data science to determine staffing requirements;
• Examine price sensitivity of different menu items;
• Determine the bundling strategy for the menu items;
• Comprehend within-store data and between-store data;
• Perform life-time value analysis for guests and business clients;
• Learn time and motion studies to improve throughput;
• Master kitchen capacity analysis, and store labor requirement;
• Use activity-based costing for indirect restaurant cost.

#9 Restaurant Career & Talent Development
• Learn mission & culture of restaurant business, and people priority;
• Master hiring, recruiting, retention, leading and developing people;
• Acquire growth mindset from one store to multi-units;
• Develop safe, respectful, inclusive and diversity workplace;
• Interpret knowledge, motivation, organization vs. people skills;
• Deliver employee happiness and guest satisfaction;
• Practice coaching and performance management;
• Adopt best practice for labor law compliance and implementation;
• Exercise conflict management, change management, and crisis management;
• Practice scenario-based, situation analysis simulation and internship workshop;
• Harmonize people, technology and organizational outcomes.

(Any other write-in courses/subject matters?)

#10:

#11:

#12:

#13:

Below are the nine courses you just evaluated. Since not all the courses can be developed at one
time, please rank order the courses in terms which should be developed first, second, third, etc.
To rank the courses, please click on the "Course Name" to move it up or down and come up your
"Order Ranking" of the 9 courses.

Course 1
st
2
nd
3
rd
4
th
5
th
6
th
7
th
8
th
9
th

#1 Supply Chain Management
#2 Restaurant Marketing
#3 New Product Development
#4 Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
#5 Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
#6 Food Service Equipment and Technology
207

#7 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
#8 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
#9 Restaurant Career & Talent Development

SECTION 4. Organization Expectations
Instructions: Please indicate the extent to which you agree with the statements below.
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)

Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#1: Having a hospitality college degree increases the
chances of getting hired as a store manager.

#2: Store managers with a hospitality college degree can
expedite the management learning curve more
effectively.

#3: If all candidates were equally qualified, you would hire
the individual with a hospitality college degree.

#4: Store managers with a hospitality college degree are
more likely to be promoted to higher level management
positions

#5: The overall turnover rates for managers who have a
hospitality college degree are lower than the turnover
rates for managers who do not have a hospitality college
degree.

#6: Store managers with a hospitality college degree are
more reliable in the workplace

#7: Store managers with a hospitality college degree are
better managers of employee productivity

#8: Store managers with a hospitality college degree are
better asset managers than those without a hospitality
college degree

208

SECTION 5. Future Preferences
Instructions: Please indicate how strongly agree or disagree with each of the following statements.
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)

Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#1: I am willing to learn more about the multi-unit fast
casual restaurant curriculum.

#2: For the training needs, I will consider sending my store
managers for the professional development at a
hospitality college.

#3: I am willing to hire candidates with multi-unit fast
casual restaurant certificate training or degree.

#4: I will recommend my store managers for the
professional development courses/certificates at UNLV
Hospitality College, either for the online course or in-
person session.

Final – Allowed Follow-up Concurrence

Would you be willing to participate in a 30-45 minute interview by Zoom video? The interview
would be scheduled late January 2021 or early February 2021. We are looking for a total of 5-8
volunteers.

If you may agree for the additional follow-up through a Zoom video call, please could you drop a
separate email to Cervantes Lee (leechihc@usc.edu, or +1 323 356 0628).

THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS ONLINE SURVEY.

209

Appendix E: Step Three – Interview
Solicited Human Resources Leader or Multi-Unit Manager Interview
The solicited leader interviewee must serve as the HR leader or MUM as full-time job
function in a MFR setting operating over three (3) units, either as corporate-owned brand or
franchise system operator. He or she also has completed the online survey in Appendix D.
Given the blurred lines between QSR and fast casual restaurant, all HR managers in the
limited service restaurants (quick service and fast casual) are invited to participate in this online
survey.
At some fast casual and QSR t chains, the lead HR function may be incorporated into the
role of MUM, regional director of operations, vice president of operations, chief administration
officer, chief operating officer, president or chief executive officer. Consequently, for the
operation purpose of the HR manager in the research, those other titles will also suffice.
These HR or MUM leaders will be solicited to participate with the final sample size at 5-
7, because the researcher will purposefully seek maximum variation in the manager interview
selection to allow for a greater range of applications of the findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
For the HR or multi-unit leader interview, it will not follow the Knowledge-Motivation-
Organization sequence, but the researcher will ask them to list in priority order the 8-10 course
names that the Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Industry Committee (MFRIC) reported and
then follow by some open-ended questions.

210

Interview Protocol – Solicited Human Resources Leader or Multi-Unit Manager

Respondent (Name): _______________________________________________

Company Name: __________________________________________________

Position: ________________________________________________________

Location of Interview: ______________________________________________

Interview Data (yyyy-mm-dd): ________________________________________

Time in / Time Out: _________________________________________________

Introduction
Thanks for taking the Zoom video interview with me today. I am conducting this exercise as part
of my dissertation research with my doctoral program at USC, exploring an innovative study to
establish Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant (MFR) Education at UNLV Hospitality College.

I anticipate taking no more than 30-45 minutes of your time, and I will start from asking your
opinions toward proposed draft courses for the MFR curriculum and then follow by six open-
ended questions for your consideration.

Your participation is completely voluntary. We can skip any question you want at any time, and
you may stop the interview at any time. Any identifiable information obtained in connection with
this study will remain confidential. Your responses will be coded with a false name and
maintained separately. If you are comfortable with it, I would like to video record our
conversation. The video recording will be audio transcribed through Zoom’s Cloud Recording
services. The data will be stored on a password protected computer in the researcher’s personal
computer for three years after the study has been completed and then destroyed. Do you have
any questions? Ready to begin?

211

SECTION 1. Proposed Draft Courses
Instructions: Please indicate the extent to which course/subject material listed below should be
included in the multi-unit fast casual concentration curriculum.
(1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Mildly Agree, 4 = Neither Agree nor Disagree, 5 = Mildly
Disagree, 6 = Disagree, 7 = Strongly Disagree)
Evaluation Items 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#1 Supply Chain Management
• Explores key aspects of restaurant supply chains from an operation management,
food system, and sustainable perspective;
• Develop detailed-oriented processes in running a restaurant and keeping food
costs controlled;
• Optimize restaurant operation’s profits by effectively managing food selection,
procurement, logistics, receiving, storage, and inventory management processes;
• Develop food risk management, product specifications, food regulation, safety
and quality procedures;
• Comprehend technology and innovation trends in food supply chain, food
manufacturing, and food packaging;
• Transform the supply chain into a value chain.

#2 Restaurant Marketing
• Learn marketing concepts from the 4 P’s, the 7 P’s to now the 15 C’s;
• Master the consumer purchase cycle with marketing tactics and strategies;
• Practice customer segmentation and customer data analysis;
• Develop marketing plans for local stores, and company-wide system;
• Design and implement social media strategies and tactics;
• Utilize restaurant marketing technologies, loyalty membership program, customer
data platform, and location-based digital marketing;
• Practice recommendation algorithm and artificial intelligence in digital marketing
strategy development.

#3 New Product Development
• Learn product development fundamentals, participants, process and steps – from
ideation to launch;
• Master opportunities mapping and product research using consumer data insight;
• Validate principles of brand consistency, food ingredient selection, food safety,
process design, nutrition, costing and quality control;
• Comprehend product launch blending restaurant operation, food science,
marketing, and culinary arts;
• Develop meal plan package, ready-to-go-food, grocery shelf items and
subscription-based food & beverage products;
• Practice menu modification and food packaging for to-go and for-delivery items;
• Understand the impact of a new product on the whole chain system;
• Participate practicum of one product launch project with a restaurant partner.

#4 Multi-Unit Fast Casual System Development
• Carry system development from one store operation to multi-units;
• Develop restaurant business culture, mission statement, business skills and
multiple effective systems (such as training, labor, kitchen, safety, menu,
procurement, inventory management, marketing, branding, online ordering,
delivery, etc.);
• Prepare a comprehensive manual that serves as the foundation for the
organization and its staff training programs;
• Design and implement quality control systems for maintaining brand image and
quality standards;

212

• Develop franchise disclosure document and all the supporting operating manuals
and procedures;
• Learn intellectual property and other intangible assets in the restaurant business;
• Design organizational charts needed to effectively manage the business and
support the future growth.

#5 Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies
• Develop growth strategies for the multi-unit restaurants;
• Build entrepreneurial growth mindset within the organization, including investing
in staff, embracing innovation, capitalizing on new technology and utilizing
social media;
• Create a data-driven and profit & loss driven restaurant company;
• Achieve growth through new store buildout, franchising sales, joint ventures,
management contracts, ghost kitchen, virtual brand and restaurant company
acquisitions;
• Practice site selection, lease negotiation, building requirements, dining room and
kitchen design;
• Develop virtual brand and dark/ghost kitchen, and launch direct-to-consumer
food offerings;
• Gain knowledge of restaurant company accounting, financial projection,
investment underwriting, and valuation;
• Access growth capital (debt and equity capital) and alternative financing;
• Research into restaurant portfolio company build-up, restaurant private equity
fund, restaurant M&A, IPO (Initial public offering) and SPAC (Special Purpose
Acquisition Company).

#6 Food Service Equipment and Technology
• Learn how menu drives equipment, kitchen design, supply choices, energy use,
labor utilization, and real estate needs;
• Match foodservice equipment choices and their performance parameters with
operational demand requirements;
• Design workflow optimization – the right systems, equipment training, and
layout;
• Implement “Total Cost of Ownership” concept for foodservice equipment;
• Develop safety protocol and preventative maintenance program for foodservice
equipment;
• Carrey out foodservice equipment repair and operation maintenance;
• Develop foodservice information system framework, covering guest
management, back of house, data analytics, human resource information
management, POS (point of sale), loyalty, payment, digital signage, customer
relationship management, store-level infrastructure, service & support, security &
compliance, IT management, online order, catering, drive-through & self-service,
and delivery.
• Research the impact of advanced technology automation and equipment (kitchen
robot, in-store service robot, delivery robot and drone delivery) and labor
management software in restaurant operations.

#7 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Restaurant Operations
• Elevate practice from single store operations to multi-unit operations;
• Design and practice customer services;
• Expand from POS (point of sale) to comprehensive restaurant technology
applications;
• Build financial acumen of restaurant operations and profit & loss statement;
• Turn operation metrics into a restaurant management report card;
• Curate off-premises sales, mobile ordering, kiosk ordering, curbside and in-store
pick-up, and kitchen queue system;
• Build drive-through operation capacity and efficiency;
• Implement mobile app operations and digital marketing/sales;
• Examine and operate self-delivery or 3
rd
party delivery;
• Develop catering business operations;
• Design and implement a culture of teamwork and sustainability into the
organization.

213

#8 Multi-Unit Fast Casual Quantitative Analytics
• Use statistics/data science to determine staffing requirements;
• Examine price sensitivity of different menu items;
• Determine the bundling strategy for the menu items;
• Comprehend within-store data and between-store data;
• Perform life-time value analysis for guests and business clients;
• Learn time and motion studies to improve throughput;
• Master kitchen capacity analysis, and store labor requirement;
• Use activity-based costing for indirect restaurant cost.

#9 Restaurant Career & Talent Development
• Learn mission & culture of restaurant business, and people priority;
• Master hiring, recruiting, retention, leading and developing people;
• Acquire growth mindset from one store to multi-units;
• Develop safe, respectful, inclusive and diversity workplace;
• Interpret knowledge, motivation, organization vs. people skills;
• Deliver employee happiness and guest satisfaction;
• Practice coaching and performance management;
• Adopt best practice for labor law compliance and implementation;
• Exercise conflict management, change management, and crisis management;
• Practice scenario-based, situation analysis simulation and internship workshop;
• Harmonize people, technology and organizational outcomes.

(Any other write-in courses/subject matters?)

#10:

#11:

#12:

#13:

214

SECTION 2: Open-Ended Questions

1) How many stores in your firm is a multi-unit manager responsible for?
2) What are the attributes you would like to see in a multi-unit manager candidate?
3) How do you train your store manager before they are promoted to be a multi-unit manager
candidate?
4) What attributes would you like to see in a recent graduate from a multi-unit fast causal
restaurant curriculum?
5) What specific competencies are required to be promoted as multi-unit managers?
- Prompt with the following, if required.
o Human resources planning
o People and social skills, mostly soft skills
o Marketing & sales skills
o Communicating and delegating skills
o Site selection skills
o Financial management skills

6) What value do you see in a multi-unit fast causal restaurant certificate or degree?

215

Appendix F: Restaurant Innovation Hub Idea
Preface of Restaurant Innovation Hub Idea
The ideas below expand on the future research option of exploring a RIH. This appendix
shall serve as one “innovative study” idea, rather than an academic research product. The section
is more a future-oriented research direction that has not been examined by the academic journals
nor by the restaurant vertical industry partnerships with academic settings. I want to explore one
possible future collaboration model among the restaurant degree program, acceleration learning,
restaurant industry participation, technology innovation, economic development, and early stage
venture capital funding. The potential vision of the RIH (or “Hub”) at UNLV Hospitality College
could be to build sustainable foodservice businesses that drive restaurant industry innovation to
the edge of possibility. By exploring setting up the Hub at UNLV Hospitality College, I see the
future research value of RIH to be independently discussed outside the Chapter Five’s research-
based recommendations and be included as one separate appendix. By no means, this appendix
of the “future research idea” shall be regarded as an academically supported research nor as any
endorsement from UNLV Hospitality College or USC Rossier School of Education.
What is a Restaurant Innovation Hub?
The Hub could be a creative ecosystem for fueling restaurant innovators. The suggested
vision is a constant reimaging the future of the restaurants to deliver great customer value in an
accessible, healthful, sustainable, and delicious way. Mission could be to foster companies that
innovate the face of restaurant business and delivery fulfillment in a rapidly changing
marketplace using design thinking as a key driving process. The goal could be at the forefront of
change, developing the new value chain of restaurant operations, promoting the best experience
for restaurant customers, and creating an ecosystem that matches industry partners for success.
216

Given the complexity operating a “futuristic” restaurant innovation hub under a research
university of UNLV Hospitality College, some of the suggested socially-responsible operating
philosophy may cover:
• Embrace sustainability that follow United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals
(United Nations, 2015)
• Advocate for moderate food consumption to promote a healthy lifestyle
• Demand integrity, honesty, and fairness in our internal and external relationships in the
restaurant industry and food system.
• Spread innovations that strengthen the restaurants and well-being of the restaurant industry
employees
• Recognize and nurture excellence in people, technology, food consumption, and restaurant
operations
• Mentor the next generation of foodservice & restaurant innovators
• Share and exchange ideas in an open forum to generate new solutions
• Encourage solutions from multiple sectors, applied to restaurant, food retail, packaged food
products, food safety, groceries, food delivery operations and direct-to-consumer products
The Hub may be an independent research center sponsored by UNLV Hospitality College
and by other restaurant or technology companies. Timely review of Hub’s mission, vision,
business plan, budget, potential business conflict, and operating results would be a priority for
the College’s leadership how to continue supporting this industry-wide innovation endeavors.
This future research direction could be part of the on-going industry innovation program, which
requires funding commitment from both the College, and the participation organizations to
217

ensure that progress toward stated goals of the College and participating organizations can be
measured effectively.
Why Now? Accelerating Digitalization in the Restaurant Industry.
The COVID-19 pandemic may have disrupted a few restaurant operations and forced
some drastic changes upon the restaurant industry. However, this disruption has also brought
many restaurant peers with an opportunity to accelerate technology trends, fast-track adoption
and re-imagine their digital-ready restaurant operations. Technology innovation presents unique
solutions for restaurants to differentiate themselves (or to fight for survival during COVID-19)
and for owners to elevate their digital operation footprint. Every restaurant needs to explore
getting digital-ready, and food delivery business is disrupting restaurant industry.
As a leading hospitality college, UNLV Hospitality College shall take the “future
restaurant” mindset toward establishing RIH to accelerate the growth with the restaurants of the
future. Currently, there are a few food innovation center or hubs within U.S. academic settings,
mostly with food manufacturing capacity and food & agriculture science labs, but no restaurant
innovation accelerator is running in major hospitality colleges, business schools or agriculture
colleges in the U.S.
Why Create a Restaurant Innovation Hub Within the UNLV Hospitality College?
Innovation drives advancement and creates the next competitive advantage for the
incumbent operators. That seems to be true, most of the time – throughout history, in every
organization around the world, including in higher education arena. Today, however, the drive
for innovation is more intense than ever before. Global talent competition, rising student
expectations, high education operating cost, continued social distancing requirement, and
escalating complexity now make innovation in a higher education institution imperative. Higher
218

education institutions know they need to continuously improve and reinvent to stay competitive
and relevant. And yet, innovation does not come easily within a hospitality college, mostly, in
my view, due to the “established” professorship system and the requirement of constant
interaction with entrepreneurial students and external stakeholders. It requires building an
innovation culture of a hospitality college and creating the right environment where people and
their ideas can thrive. Industry-based lecturers, professionals, and industry operating companies
are our identified peers to leverage up the Hub at UNLV Hospitality College.
The futuristic Hub could seed and spread innovations that strengthen the restaurants and
well-being of the foodservice employees. RIH could create lasting change in collaboration with
the College’s academic partners, restaurant partners, technology providers, food supplier, food
retail operators, and community partners in the restaurant operating ecosystem. The initial
suggested ecosystem of this future research could be operated on four pillars.
1) Restaurant Business: RIH could collaborate with restaurant businesses to inspire
innovative thinking and develop growth opportunities.
2) Entrepreneurial Startup: RIH could co-work with the resident startups and businesses for
connection and growth in Southern Nevada region.
3) Supply Chain Partner: RIH could create an open-dialogue innovative menu, testing
kitchen, delivery operation, food packaging, food retailing, service & kitchen robot,
automatic servicing machine (such as Pizza, Noodle, Salad, Coffee, etc.), delivery drone
& robot operator to build connected, collaborative, and data-rich solutions for restaurant
operations of the future.
4) Capital Partner: RIH could work with investors from various capital sources, including
endowment, family office, corporate venture capital (restaurant, grocer, food supply, food
219

distributor, kitchen equipment provider, delivery, fintech and tech companies),
government & state agency grants, and small business administration funds.

Some specific timeframe and action steps of this future research toward establishing RIH
is summarized in the following table.

Table F1
Establishing Restaurant Innovation Hub Idea
Specific Recommendation Timeframe Action Steps
Develop the business plan of
restaurant innovation hub
Academic
Year
2021-2022
Build the urgency awareness of
restaurant innovation needs for the
hospitality & restaurant industries.
Raise capital to install the
restaurant innovation hub
Academic
Year
2021-2022
Identify, develop and execute funding
partnership agreement with restaurant
companies, foodservice, and private
equity investment companies, as
investor partnership in the restaurant
innovation hub
Intake the first cohort of restaurant
acceleration startups to address
the “restaurant innovation
challenges”
Academic
Year
2022-2023
Build the acceleration infrastructure
among UNLV Hospitality College

220

Table 48 summarizes the evaluation plan and measurement for the future research “idea”
toward establishing RIH. UNLV leadership and participating industry companies (including
restaurant companies, foodservice providers, private capital, foodtech startups, and other
community organization) could evaluate each level through survey items, specially looking at the
response change over time of participating organizations. Survey results need to be reviewed,
analyzed, understood, and debated across the management team of RIH, the participating
organizations, and the College.

221

Table F2
Evaluation Plan of Restaurant Innovation Hub Idea
Specific
Recommendation
Evaluation Plans
Level 1: Reaction
– How do
participants react
to the intervention
(Restaurant
Innovation Hub)?
- Gauge the interest level from industry organizations (restaurant
companies, foodservice providers, venture capital, private equity,
foodtech startups, and other community organization) in partnership up
in the restaurant innovation hub through surveys and forums
- Circulate the partnership agreement template to industry organization
to obtain their feedback
- Gauge perspective and feasibility of faculty & administrators at the
College through surveys and forums
- Track the business development team’s confidence level in launching
the Hub
- Track the numbers of events and forums promoting the Hub
- Track the number of industry organizations shown partnership interest
in the Hub
Level 2: Learning
– Do participants
acquire
knowledge,
increase skills,
change attitudes,
or improvement
confidence as a
result?
- Track the partnership agreement discussion with industry organizations
- Track the partnership interest in endowing the restaurant innovation
hub and signing the startup project’s funding scheduling agreement.
- Track the conversion rate of partnership agreement executions for the
Hub
Level 3: Behavior
– Do participants
apply knowledge
or change behavior
as a result?

- Develop, execute and monitor partnership agreement for the Hub
- Track the number of executed partnership agreements for the Hub
- Track the current students’ and UNLV alumni’s involvement in the
Hub’s events & activities
- Track media mentions and tone regarding the Hub
- Track the number of restaurant startups applying for the restaurant
innovation accelerator
- Track the numbers of startup founders are current or graduate students
at the College
Level 4: Results –
What are the
results due to the
intervention?
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level with industry sponsors
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level of participating startups
- Include survey items tracking satisfaction level of demo day audience
- Include survey items tracking the current student feedback (of
restaurant innovation hub) at the College
- Compare industry organizations’ feedback toward on-boarding process
for the restaurant innovation hub
- Compare restaurant startups’ feedback toward on-boarding process for
the restaurant innovation accelerator program
222

Organization of Restaurant Innovation Hub
This subsection serves as an organization structure discussion of the futuristic RIH
establishment, and also conveys my ideal organization mapping by learning from a few operating
models of university-based technology innovation hubs, such as UC Berkeley, Stanford, USC,
and MIT. Depending on initial raised capital of RIH during 2021-2022, the futuristic Hub could
start with a total of five staff (one executive director, one research director, one operating
manager and one coordination staff), a number of 12-18 volunteer advisors, and some
programming of advisory board, investment committee, Entrepreneur-in-Residence program,
research fellowship program and restaurant innovation accelerator to get started in the academic
year of 2022. The first two years’ operating budget is estimated to be at US$ 2.0 million.
Volunteer Advisor of Restaurant Innovation Hub.
The volunteer advisors, in my view, is one most important “enrollment” activities to
launch the RIH. UNLV Hospitality College could continue leveraging the 12-member Multi-unit
Fast Casual Industry Committee (MFRIC) to expand into the volunteer advisor group for the
Hub. A number of 12-18 advisors from various organization types, suggested in Table 49, should
be a good start.

223

Table F3
Suggested Volunteer Advisor Background – for a total of 12-18
Organization
Type
Member
Count
Notes
Investment
Partners
3-5
General Partners or Venture Partners at the consumer or restaurant-
focused growth capital firms.
Industry
Partners
3-5
CEOs/SVPs/VPs at the restaurant, food manufacturer, grocer, food
retailer, or integrated casino/hotel operators.
Food
Delivery
Partners
1-2
Senior professionals from delivery companies, such as DoorDash,
Uber Eats, Postmates, and Grubhub. Delivery companies are deep
technology companies recently. They are also building good
relationship with all types of restaurant operators (Kaiser, 2021;
McCarthy, 2020), developing its integrated POS business and
virtual kitchens now.
Academic
Partners
1-2
Professors in the field of food science, agriculture, restaurant
management, food business, and consumer technology
management.
Industry
Associations
2
Senior professionals from associations, such as National Restaurant
Association (NRA), International Food and Beverage Technology
Association, Commercial Food Equipment Service Association,
Institute of Food Technologists, Association of Nutrition and
Foodservice Professionals, National Grocers Association, and
American Marketing Association.
Media
Partners
1
Journalists from restaurant/foodservice magazines, such as Nation’s
Restaurant News, Restaurant Business Magazine, Foodservice
Management, Restaurant Startup and Growth, QSR Magazine,
Fast Casual, Pizza Today, FSR Magazine, Total Food Service,
Food and Wine Magazine, Food Network Magazine, etc.
Restaurant
Research
Firms
1
Senior researchers at Technomic Inc, Black Box Intelligence,
Datassential (Haiku Master of Jack Li), Mintel Group Ltd,
Foodservice Results, Tango Analytics, Placer Labs, Restaurant
Research, etc.

Advisory Board, Investment Committee and Entrepreneur-in-Residence of RIH
Regarding the advisory board of the futuristic RIH, I suggest no need to distinguish
voluntary advisors and advisory board members of RIH in the beginning. Advisory board may
meet once per quarter to advise the business plan and operating budget of RIH. The formation of
224

investment committee of restaurant innovation accelerator shall depend on the investment fund
structure of participating investment organizations and their executed pre-structured capital
investment partnership agreement with RIH. I would suggest no more than five investment
committee members at the initial phase, and the investment committee could be chaired by the
Executive Director of RIH. Entrepreneur-in-Residence (EIR) Program could create up to three
EIR seats in the first phase, and each individual has experience in scaling up consumer-facing
technology deployment or technology-enhanced restaurant operations. EIR may come from the
industry-based lecturers or professor-in-practice at UNLV Hospitality College, retired industry
seniors or venture partners in the venture capital & private equity firms.
Research Fellow
Research Fellow is one way to demonstrate RIH’s research capabilities to digest the
market intelligence and to predict the future trend of the restaurant innovation and industry
growth. The futuristic RIH can start with five research fellows in the following five categories of
acceleration focus – Restaurant information framework, Restaurant Equipment & Robotics, Off-
premises Operation & Delivery, Food Supply Innovation, and Food Science Innovation. Each
research fellow could be granted research stipend. Research fellow application shall be reviewed
by the RIH’s research director and the research sub-committee of the advisory board of RIH.
Given RIH’s research focus nature being “future looking” and “innovation,” UNLV Hospitality
College may also seek interdisciplinary academic resource collaboration with Lee Business
School (Department of Management, Entrepreneurship, and Technology and Master of Science
program in Management Information Systems), and School of Integrated Health Sciences
(Kinesiology & Nutrition Sciences, UNLV Food Pantry).

225

Restaurant Innovation Accelerator
The Restaurant Innovation Accelerator (RIA) could be an entrepreneurship accelerator for
the next generation of entrepreneurs in the foodservice and restaurant technology sectors. Th
RIA is proposed to be housed under RIH. The RIA can follow a few acceleration learning model
scholars, including Morris et al. (2010), Mitra & Euchner (2016), Still (2017), Katz & Riley
(2018), Politis et al. (2019), Qin et al. (2019), Shankar and Clausen (2020), and Murray and
Crammond (2020), to come up the detailed acceleration programming & activities, upon
installation. RIA’s acceleration methodology could follow, “Ideation–Validation–Education–
Launch” and assist UNLV students and local entrepreneurs in launching stronger and faster
startups in the foodservice and restaurant technology area. RIA can also create an “accelerated
restaurant entrepreneurship” course, which could be one accredited compulsory course to the
admitted startup founders.
Technology Focus Area
Restaurant operation is increasingly enhanced by technology adoption during COVID-19
pandemic. The proposed technology focus within the futuristic RIH shall be able to cover the
following five areas:
1) Restaurant Information Framework: Multi-channel ordering, reservations & waitlists, POS
(point of sale), loyalty program, digital payment, digital marketing, geofencing, customer
data platform, business intelligence & analytics, staff scheduling & payroll, and guest
WiFi.
2) Restaurant Equipment & Robotics: Advanced kitchen equipment automation, kitchen
robot, in-store service robot, digital kitchen boards, virtual kitchen system build-up,
automated food hygiene & safety program, and air purification technology.
226

3) Off-premises Operation & Delivery: Catering, drive-through, self-service delivery, third
party delivery, delivery robot, drone delivery and other last-mile delivery services.
4) Food Supply Innovation: Back-of-house operations, inventory management, order tracing,
food manufacturing, food packaging, food distribution, food retailing in groceries, and
contracted farming.
5) Food Science Innovation: Food microbiology, food engineering & processing, food
chemistry, nutrition analysis, sensory analysis, new menu development, alternative protein,
plant-based introduction, ready-to-go (including ready to eat and ready to heat) food
development, and meal kit.
Typical Startups
The startups need to have some minimum “desirable” product and prototype ready, and a
minimum two full-time founders. RIA may require a minimum of one co-founder being UNLV
alumni, current UNLV student or Nevada state resident. The startups may already have 3-7 full-
time employees, $200,000 ~ $600,000 funded capital, and have some early adopter and revenue-
paying customers. The startups may be looking for help in the followings:
• Entrance into UNLV Hospitality College & its ecosystem with industry partners
• Better understanding of restaurant and foodservice stakeholders through UNLV Hospitality
College
• Validation of product-market fit in restaurant technology and foodservices
• Restaurant & foodservice insights, research support
• Business and entrepreneurship guidance

227

Restaurant Innovation Accelerator
The “futuristic” acceleration program could be designed to run twice per year from Year
2022, every program for a 3-month duration. The RIA program aims to bring together
entrepreneurs, academics, food science, investors, corporate partners, F&B brands, restaurants,
and grocery retailers to foster rapid innovation and unlock new opportunities in restaurant
business. As reflected in the name, the accelerator could feature a distinctive and explicit focus
on speed. The RIA shall pre-qualify and run a very strict selection process for the startup in-takes
that are positioned to create significant change in the foodservice industries. The startups shall be
running on a cohort basis. In each cohort, there could be a suggested number of 10 companies to
be invited (suggested two startups in each of technology focus area). In each cohort, RIA may
also have a “sponsoring industry partner” to name the “challenge” area in advance and solicit
startups to provide solutions to those challenges.
The acceleration period shall be structured to provide an intensive, business growth
educational and support program, including mentoring and networking for the selected startups
to improve their ability to attract investment capital following the end of the program generally
marked by a so-called “Demo Day.” The demo day is a formal event designed for the RIA to
introduce the startups to the external community and connect them with investors and restaurant
operators in the local entrepreneurship ecosystem.
The accelerator could offer a bundle of activities and the opportunities to access a variety
of contacts in the ecosystem—from in-house mentors with whom participating entrepreneurs can
have in-depth discussions about their ventures, instructors for the structured courses who give
general advice on business development, external advisor members with whom regular
appointments could be made, to speakers and visitors who interact with entrepreneurs on an ad-
228

hoc basis, as well as the RIA’s partnership with general partners of the investment fund who
evaluate the venture investment projects.
Upon the formal start of the acceleration cohort period, the admitted startups could receive
non-dilutive grant money of the suggested $30,000 capital at this planning stage. $15,000 stipend
at entry into the 3-month acceleration program (suggest residence requirement post COVID-19
period), and $15,000 cash or in-kind upon graduation. The in-kind services may cover
accounting service, legal service, office space lease, cloud services (such as Amazon Web
Services and Microsoft Azure), restaurant kitchen & equipment that could be contributed by the
industry partners by cash or in-kind. Each startup also has opportunity to receive separate
investment capital from the participating capital partners that may have pre-structured capital
investment partnership agreement with RIH.
Evaluation Criteria for the Restaurant Innovation Hub
A total of five policy lens criteria could be used to evaluate the future research direction
of RIH for UNLV Hospitality College, that include (a) political feasibility, (b) social feasibility,
(c) equity and access, (d) cost benefit analysis, and (e) ethical and distributional impact.
Numerous innovation centers or acceleration programs as part of the extension of
entrepreneurship curriculum at engineering, business, medical or agriculture school setting have
been evidenced in the past 10 years in the U.S. Currently, there is no RIA found running in major
hospitality colleges, business schools or agriculture colleges in the U.S.

229

Political Feasibility of Entrepreneurial University
Political feasibility analysis is used to examine the actors and events involved in each
stage of a political policy‐making process and anticipates the likely resolution of a policy
problem as it works its way through the policy process (Webber, 1986). It is a frequently used
component of a policy analysis and can serve as an evaluative criterion in choosing between
policy alternatives (Webber, 1986). “Entrepreneurial University” concept has been discussed by
a few scholars as a natural incubator that tries to provide a supportive environment in which the
university community can explore, evaluate, and exploit ideas that could be transformed into
social and economic entrepreneurial initiatives (Guerrero, Urbano Cunningham & Organ, 2014;
Secundo, Del Vecchio, Schiuma & Passiante, 2017; Stavytskyy, Dluhopolskyi, Kharlamova,
Karpuk & Osetskyi, 2019; Wegner, Thomas, Teixeira & Maehler, 2019; Lopes, Ferreira, Farinha
& Raposo, 2020). Entrepreneurial universities are involved in partnerships, networks and other
relationships to generate an umbrella for interaction, collaboration and co-operation among
university, industry and community. Therefore, the future research direction explores setting up
the RIH for UNLV Hospitality College with a focus on the restaurant innovation research and
local business acceleration. The research anticipates by doing so the entrepreneurial university
could serve as a promising innovative model for their combination of knowledge triangle -
higher education, research, and innovation (Stavytskyy, Dluhopolskyi, Kharlamova, Karpuk &
Osetskyi, 2019).
Innovation & community impact has been addressed as one of UNLV’s vision and
mission (UNLV, 2021a). In UNLV’s Top Tier 2.0 core vision & mission, released on February
3, 2021, “Economic Development” has been separated into its own goal area known as “Socio-
Economic Development” and “Community Partnerships,” both further focusing innovation
230

within the local community. “Socio-economic development” is defined as “UNLV stimulates
economic development and diversification, fosters a climate of innovation, and advances
innovation and entrepreneurship opportunities in all sectors,” and its strategic objectives is
described as “Create an environment to drive a new spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship that
aligns with the regional economic development and includes disadvantaged business enterprises,
women-owned businesses, and STEAM-related businesses.”
The future research direction hopes by exploring launching RIH within UNLV
Hospitality College could align the UNLV’s Top Tier 2.0 core vision & mission, and further
advance innovation and entrepreneurship opportunities in the foodservice, restaurant and
hospitality sectors. UNLV actually already launched a new incubator for integrated resort
technology in 2020 (UNLV News Center, 2020a). It is a public-private partnership between
Caesars Entertainment Corporation and UNLV that fuels gaming, eSports, and hospitality
innovation. The future research direction of RIH could expand UNLV’s current acceleration
program in the gaming/hospitality into the restaurant innovation arena.
Social Feasibility
While defining social feasibility, it was generally agreed that a project is socially feasible
if its benefits reach the intended beneficiaries (The Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO), 1979). Both human factors and economic considerations impel a study of
social feasibility. The benefits should not only reach the beneficiaries, but should be distributed
equitably (FAO, 1979). If the benefits do not reach the intended beneficiaries, someone else will
benefit, thereby creating inequalities and engendering conflicts. In future research direction of
creating RIH initiatives, the desired goal is to create the social feasible environment that every
race, student, and class group have equal access to restaurant entrepreneurial activities within
231

UNLV Hospitality College. Diversified advisors and industry supporting groups could also be
invited to assist the acceleration activities of the future restaurant innovation business ventures,
launched by UNLV alumni and student founders.
Equity and Access
Equity and access are principles of social justice. Equity refers to an approach that
ensures that everyone has access to the same opportunities. It recognizes that advantages and
barriers exist and that, as a result, everyone does not start from the same place (Tan, 2019).
Access/accessibility refers to giving equitable access to everyone regardless of human ability and
experience (Tan, 2019). It refers to how organizations encompass and celebrate the
characteristics and talents that each individual brings to the organization. It is about
representation for all.
The future research discussion of RIH shall address UNLV Hospitality College’s pledge
to provide students with a curriculum that is adaptive, relevant, and holistic in its approach to
hospitality education. It also suggests leveraging UNLV’s restaurant industry connections to
bring real-world experiences into the classroom through restaurant entrepreneurial activities.
Students shall have equity and access into the innovative “project-based learning” at the RIH.
Activities at the RIH may include attending seminars, guest speaker sessions, industry
mentorship, restaurant practicum project, and restaurant innovation acceleration startups.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) can generally be thought of as a methodology to calculate
the efficiency of policy alternatives (Goodin, Moran & Rein, 2009). One of CBA’s attraction is
to offer a systematic way to judge the social worth of alternative policy options. Public interest is
conceived as social warfare, further defined a “aggregation of individual perception of their own
232

levels of utility or satisfaction” (Goodin et al., 2009). CBA can also provide an intuitive way to
rank alternatives on the basis of their cost effectiveness, as long as the cost and benefits can be
both reasonably quantified in monetary terms (Goodin et al., 2009) on the matter whether UNLV
Hospitality College shall explore future research direction toward establishing RIH. A CBA
could also be applied to evaluate the overall societal cost in achieving access, opportunity,
diversity, inclusion, and fairness among entrepreneurial activities in the RIH. The future research
direction may also explore the entire RIH to be run as an independent center, eventually, that
may be heavily relying on funding and partnership from the industry peers.
Ethical and Distributional Impact
Social and welfare policies are often assessed if their only purpose were to redistribute
from rich to poor (Goodin, Moran & Rein, 2009; Hanushek, 2003). Educational subsidies (in the
RIH, student founders could have his/her ownership interest in the restaurant startups) are
frequently justified as a method of altering the income distribution. Restaurant industry
employees has long been described as “living around the poverty lines” (Shierholz, 2014), and
low education attainment in the restaurant industry workforce may be on reason resulting in low
average salary. The objective of the future research direction of RIH establishment is to
encourage future restaurant leaders (or current students) solving the bigger industry challenges
by technology-enabled solutions, his/her reward upon success could be in a huge monetary terms
so that distributional impact may be achieved.
Among the five-discussed evaluation criteria, the most important parameter for the future
research idea, in my view, is “Political Feasibility of Entrepreneurial University.” Because this
would represent the overall organization & cultural change (of UNLV) to pivot into the
“entrepreneurial university” mindset and use that as a powerful economic development tool for
233

Southern Nevada, where UNLV is chartered as public (state-funded) research university. During
the COVID-19 pandemic, the overall economy of Las Vegas is one worst hit (convention, casino
and airport business) among the major cities in the U.S. The “Entrepreneurial University”
concept perhaps could serve a good “reset” button for Las Vegas, and my future research idea
suggesting picking RIH as one tool to boost the UNLV community and Southern Nevada
economy.
I spent the week of Jun 28 ~ July 2, 2021 in Las Vegas attending the Bar & Restaurant
Expo & Conference (the first national-level restaurant conference held in person after COVID-19
national shutdown from March 2020) and visiting a few casino & resort venues (most impressed
with the Food Hall at Resorts World Las Vegas, newly opened on June 24, 2021), and confirmed
the observation that restaurant sector could be a key industry recovery locomotive to spark the
Las Vegas economy.
234

Appendix G: Career Path Plans for Multi-unit Fast Casual Restaurants
Four Figures and one Table in Appendix G exhibit the referenced career path plans at
four MFR companies. These path diagrams were all directly retrieved from the career section of
four fast casual restaurant company websites, including Boston Market (No. 15 in Top 25 Fast
Casual Restaurant, Table 9), Chipotle (No. 2), Panda Express (No. 3), and Panera Breads (No.
1), on May 29, 2021.

Figure G1
Career Path for Boston Market

Note. From Make Great Food, Not Fake Food Far From Fries, by Boston Market, 2021.

235

Boston Market provides career path diagram from the entry-level team member to GM of
the store. Area Supervisor is similar to the trainer of the GM, and area manager manages
multiple stores. director of operations manages a few area managers.

Figure G2
Personal Development at Chipotle

Note. From Our Kitchen, Your Start, by Chipotle, 2021.

236

Chipotle provides career path diagram from full-time crew member to kitchen manager,
service manager, apprenticeship (assistant store manager) and GM of a single store. Certified
training manager is the trainer for apprentice and GM. Restaurateur manages multiple stores but
is not specified the number of managed store count on its career website. Chipotle also provides
guidance of the employee’s base pay plus the benefits & bonus information; for example, one
GM will be able to enjoy $80,000 all-in compensation & benefits.

Figure G3
Panda Express Career Path

237

Table G4
Panda Express Careers
Job Title Role
Compensation
+ Bonus
Benefits Total
Service
Team &
Kitchen
Staff
From serving guests with a smile
to firing up fresh fare in the
kitchen, learning the ins and outs
of running a Panda Express
$23,000 $5,600 $28,600
Assistant
Manager
Responsible for the successful
day-to-day performance of your
store under the guidance of the
general manager.
$44,500 $9,100 $53,600
General
Manager
In charge of the operation of a
single store - from the hiring,
managing and directing of
associates to achieving financial
goals and ensuring the delivery of
exceptional guest experiences.
$69,000 $10,400 $79,400
Training
Leader
In charge of training “Assistant
Managers In-Training” and
“General Managers In-Training”
while simultaneously functioning
as General Manager.
$78,500 $10,800 $89,300
Multi-unit
Manager
This transitional role to oversee
the operations of 3 to 6 stores.
$93,300 $15,900 $109,200
Area Coach
of
Operations
Oversee the operations of 7 to 15
stores, with accountability for
recruiting managerial candidates,
developing associates, ensuring
delivery of guest experience and
achieving financial targets.
$124,000 $16,000 $140,000
Regional
Director of
Operations
With 40 to 90 stores under
management. Serve as te driving
force in regional growth through
targeted marketing efforts, site
selection and real estate.
$184,900 $17,600 $202,500

Note. From Panda Careers by Panda Express, 2021.

238

Panda Express provides career path diagram from service team & kitchen staff, assistant,
manager, and GM of one store. Training leader is the trainer for assistant managers in-training
and GMs in-training while simultaneously functioning as GM. A MUM manages 3-6 stores, an
area coach of operations manages 7-15 stores, and a regional director of operations manages 40-
90 stores. The total employee cost of each job position was reported to be based on its company-
wide median and target including all compensation and available benefits. Actual earnings were
stated to vary based upon total hours worked, the applicable hourly wage rate, overtime pay,
bonuses and benefits. For example, a GM position at Panda Express would be able to enjoy
$79,400 all-in compensation & benefits, that is similar to Chipotle’s at $80,000.

239

Figure G5
Panera Bread’s Career Path Possibilities

Note. From Panera Career Path Possibilities, by Panera, 2021.

Panera Bread’s Career Path Possibilities offers detail breakdown of major divisions
within the Company, including retail (its bakery restaurant store operation), bakery, catering
sales, field support and support center (headquarter employee). Within the retail store, bakery
staff or catering sales may work inside the restaurant store, but they have their respective
division reporting lines within Panera Bread.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The problem of practice addressed through this research is a gap in formal industry-based education to the U.S restaurant industry. The dissertation addresses the creation of multi-unit fast casual restaurant (MFR) concentration for B.S. degree in hospitality management at The University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV). The organization performance goal is to achieve the first 20 student intake by September 2022. The study sought to answer the questions: What knowledge, skills, dispositions do future managers in the MFR industry need to possess in order to meet the academic standard and the industry expectation? And, what are the recommended knowledge, motivation, and organizational solutions related to establishing this new MFR concentration? The research took an exploratory mixed method approach through a three-step process including interviews and surveys of industry experts. The findings indicate demand for a five-course (15 credits) MFR curriculum that is people-centric, technology-enhanced, and provides a co-created practicum developed with industry partners. These five courses are: (a) Restaurant Career and Talent Development, (b) MFR Operations, (c) MFR Quantitative Analytics, (d) MFR System Development, (e) Restaurant Concept Growth Strategies. Recommendations from this study also include a call for UNLV to diversify its recruiting access to culinary students, veterans, computer engineers, data scientists, and restaurant working professionals. Lastly, the findings suggest that UNLV may benefit from launching professional development and certificate courses (similar to Cornell Hotel School) for industry professionals and mid-career-changers entering the restaurant industry.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Creativity and innovation in undergraduate education: an innovation study

PDF

Assessing the needs of teachers when creating educational technology professional development for an urban charter school district: an innovation study

PDF

Generation Y employee retention in a diverse generational mix

PDF

Supporting online English language teachers’ ability to implement advanced technical teaching proficiency: a gap analysis case study

PDF

A promising practice case study from Singapore of socio-emotional development in a non-traditional context

PDF

Systemic multilayered assessment of global awareness in undergraduate students: an innovation study

PDF

Changing course, creating opportunity: a study on the implementation of an early college model for African American ninth grade students

PDF

Increasing the number of petroleum engineering students in the United Arab Emirates: an improvement model

PDF

Increasing faculty engagement in entrepreneurial behavior to advance regional economic development: an innovation study

PDF

Fostering competent professionals: instructional systems specialists at the instructional systems technology program

PDF

How socioeconomic status influences career planning for college business majors in Hong Kong

PDF

Gender parity in American academic philosophy: a promising practice study

PDF

Preparing international students for management school through pathway programs

PDF

Creating a faith-integrated Bachelor of Science nursing program: an innovation model

PDF

Increasing female representation in the finance and banking sector in Qatar

PDF

Preparing students for the 21st century labor market through liberal arts education at a Chinese joint venture university

PDF

Understanding digital transformation of early childhood pre-service teacher education in China

PDF

The role of U.S. historic sites and museums in supporting social studies instruction in K-12 classrooms

PDF

Building computations thinking through teaching of computer programming: an evaluation of learning centers in China

PDF

Imagining an equitable child care system

Asset Metadata

Creator Lee, Cervantes Chih-Chieh (author)

Core Title Establishing multi-unit fast casual restaurant education at UNLV Hospitality College: an innovation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Global Executive

Degree Conferral Date 2021-08

Publication Date 07/27/2021

Defense Date 06/08/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag innovation,multi-unit fast casual,OAI-PMH Harvest,restaurant education,technology-enhanced operations

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Robison, Mark Power (committee chair), Krop, Cathy (committee member), Shoemaker, Stowe (committee member)

Creator Email cerlee@alum.mit.edu,leechihc@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC15640550

Unique identifier UC15640550

Legacy Identifier etd-LeeCervant-9903

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Lee, Cervantes Chih-Chieh

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu