It's not merely efficiency, though--the reason that these types of ideas suck is that they only care about buy-in from customers. What the
customer thinks would enhance their experience. What the
customer thinks would be nice "too many choices oh noes!".
The fact is that for the true clients in the market (the restaurants), we need to look at what makes their lives easier. And over the course of centuries, we've figured out more or less how to optimally use humans to service diners.
Take the idea of perks for frequent diners--this functionality is already exposed in most bars and restaurants if the customer comes back frequently enough to be recognized by the wait staff, and if they aren't so damned obnoxious that the restaurant wants to get rid of them.
Electronic menus for a place with 20 tables could be an outlay of around 4-10K, assuming you need only one tablet per table (you won't) and that the tablets won't ever break (they will) and that the customers will appreciate the move (they may not) and that there is no backend integration (there should be). Or, the owner can spend half that (say, 5 grand) on an 2 additional servers at $2.13/hr (in Texas) and "rent" them for a split 40 hrs/wk and better service. That's just silly.
Taking the example of Tex-Mex food, the same basic palette of food in storage can be combined in many different ways to provide variety to the end user, all with little extra cost to the restaurant, and so why bother simplifying a menu? You needlessly increase the data entropy of the choices offered and in so doing force yourself to have to purchase more varied ingredients (bad) in order to provide fewer perceived menu items (also bad). It's just dumb.
The problem of too much choice, bad descriptions, or not remembering last food ordered is very strictly a diner issue, not a restaurant one. Solving it, despite the relatively large amount of work the restaurant would have to put forth, would result in little payback. The places where people spend enough per-plate to justify that outlay already have quality staff kept on specifically because they can keep track of that and give the high-touch to their select audience.
This really is a great example of somebody trying to use tech to solve problems that don't exist for people in an industry they don't understand.
The fact is that for the true clients in the market (the restaurants), we need to look at what makes their lives easier. And over the course of centuries, we've figured out more or less how to optimally use humans to service diners.
Take the idea of perks for frequent diners--this functionality is already exposed in most bars and restaurants if the customer comes back frequently enough to be recognized by the wait staff, and if they aren't so damned obnoxious that the restaurant wants to get rid of them.
Electronic menus for a place with 20 tables could be an outlay of around 4-10K, assuming you need only one tablet per table (you won't) and that the tablets won't ever break (they will) and that the customers will appreciate the move (they may not) and that there is no backend integration (there should be). Or, the owner can spend half that (say, 5 grand) on an 2 additional servers at $2.13/hr (in Texas) and "rent" them for a split 40 hrs/wk and better service. That's just silly.
Taking the example of Tex-Mex food, the same basic palette of food in storage can be combined in many different ways to provide variety to the end user, all with little extra cost to the restaurant, and so why bother simplifying a menu? You needlessly increase the data entropy of the choices offered and in so doing force yourself to have to purchase more varied ingredients (bad) in order to provide fewer perceived menu items (also bad). It's just dumb.
The problem of too much choice, bad descriptions, or not remembering last food ordered is very strictly a diner issue, not a restaurant one. Solving it, despite the relatively large amount of work the restaurant would have to put forth, would result in little payback. The places where people spend enough per-plate to justify that outlay already have quality staff kept on specifically because they can keep track of that and give the high-touch to their select audience.
This really is a great example of somebody trying to use tech to solve problems that don't exist for people in an industry they don't understand.