Results-Based Scheduling

I just watched a restaurant burn through $250,000 because they scheduled to sales instead of covers. The owner was proud of their "28% labor cost." The reality? They were bleeding money. Here's what actually happened: —> When sales projections hit $50K/week, they scheduled 800 labor hours. —> When average check dropped from $35 to $30, they kept the same staff. Result: Same covers, less revenue, labor % through the roof. The owner's response? "Cut hours! Get labor back to 28%!" Wrong move. Here's the math they missed: Week 1: 1,400 covers ÷ 800 hours = 1.75 CPLH Week 8: 1,400 covers ÷ 800 hours = 1.75 CPLH Their productivity never changed. Only the revenue per cover did. But they panicked. Cut staff. Service tanked. Then covers dropped to 1,200. Then to 1,000. Death spiral. The fix was simple: → Schedule to cover patterns, not sales projections. → Focus on covers per labor hour (CPLH) → Let labor % float with check average Most restaurants schedule backwards: -> Project sales -> Apply labor % -> Build schedule -> Pray it works -> Cut if it doesn’t -> Repeat and hope Smart restaurants do this: -> Analyze cover patterns -> Calculate optimal CPLH by daypart -> Schedule to productivity -> Monitor and adjust -> Repeat intentionally One client made this switch last month: • Labor % went from 28% to 31% • CPLH improved from 1.4 to 2.1 • Profit increased $18,000 Because here's the truth: You can't take labor percentage to the bank. You take dollars. Stop managing to percentages. Start managing to productivity. Your P&L will thank you. Want my CPLH scheduling template? Comment "CPLH" and I'll send it over. Because it doesn't have to be so hard. 👊🏻 #Restaurants #RestaurantManagement #LaborCost #RestaurantOwner

Remote work killed the 40-hour work week. Good. THE ARBITRARY HOUR TRAP: → Industrial age factory thinking → Time input focus over value output → One-size-fits-all scheduling → Inefficient use of human energy THE ENERGY-BASED WORK MODEL: → Work when most effective → Optimize for peak performance → Match energy to task requirements → Value results over time spent THE POST-HOUR WORK FRAMEWORK: ENERGY OPTIMIZATION: → Identify personal peak performance hours → Schedule high-value work during energy peaks → Use low-energy times for routine tasks → Take restorative breaks when needed TASK-ENERGY MATCHING: → Creative work during inspiration hours → Analytical work during focus periods → Communication during social energy peaks → Administrative work during low-energy times SEASONAL RHYTHMS: → Adjust schedule for life seasons → Increase intensity during optimal periods → Reduce demands during challenging times → Plan major projects around energy cycles OUTCOME ACCOUNTABILITY: → Measure success by results achieved → Focus on value created and impact → Evaluate efficiency and effectiveness → Reward excellence over hours logged THE FUTURE WORK SCHEDULE: FLEXIBLE INTENSITY: → High-intensity work during peak periods → Lower intensity during restoration times → Project-based scheduling → Outcome-driven timelines PERSONAL OPTIMIZATION: → Early birds work mornings → Night owls work evenings → Parents work around family needs → Athletes work around training schedules COLLABORATIVE CORE HOURS: → Limited overlap time for team coordination → Asynchronous work as default → Meeting-free blocks for deep work → Flexible collaboration windows PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: PRODUCTIVITY METRICS: → Value delivered per unit of effort → Goal achievement and milestone completion → Quality of work and customer satisfaction → Innovation and process improvement WELL-BEING MEASURES: → Employee satisfaction and engagement → Work-life integration success → Stress levels and health indicators → Sustainability and burnout prevention BUSINESS RESULTS: → Revenue and profitability growth → Customer retention and satisfaction → Innovation and competitive advantage → Talent attraction and retention The future of work is human-centered, not hour-centered. How are you moving beyond the 40-hour work week? #FutureOfWork #EnergyBasedWork #FlexibleScheduling

In companies where productivity has increased by 50%, creativity has doubled, and employee satisfaction is at an all-time high, one surprising change stands out: ditching the outdated obsession with time tracking. Too many managers are stuck in an outdated paradigm, fixating on: • When employees clock in • How long they sit at their desks • Micromanaging daily schedules But we’ve hired smart, capable professionals. Treating them like children who need constant supervision is not just demeaning – it's counterproductive. However, it's crucial to maintain a balance. While micromanagement is detrimental, companies still need to ensure discipline and focus on key priorities. The goal is to empower employees while aligning their efforts with organizational objectives. That’s why one needs to focus on result-focused management: 1. Shift your metrics: Focus on project milestones, work quality, and client satisfaction instead of hours logged. 2. Embrace flexibility: Allow flexible hours and remote work when possible. Trust employees to manage their time effectively. 3. Cultivate a culture of trust: Communicate openly about priorities and challenges. Reward results, not face time. Promote work-life balance and well-being. Companies like Netflix, Basecamp, and Atlassian have implemented results-only work environments (ROWE) with remarkable success. They report higher employee engagement, better outcomes, and a more dynamic, innovative workplace culture. What's one positive outcome you've experienced (as a manager or employee) when given more autonomy at work? #Leadership #EmployeeEmpowerment #WorkplaceCulture

Working long hours only matters if they’re completed to drive winning results. The 40-hour workweek wasn’t designed for knowledge work. It was designed for factories. Yet many companies still equate “hours worked” with “value created.” That mindset is broken. Here’s what research from top institutions tells us about how the best companies manage performance: MIT Sloan Research: Organizations embracing results-based models—like Neiman Marcus Group’s “total freedom” policy, saw 40% productivity gains and lower attrition. MIT recommends replacing annual reviews with quarterly check-ins for strategic alignment. AI tools can reduce administrative work by 75% while eliminating bias in performance tracking. Harvard Business School Findings: HBS advocates strategic alignment between individual goals and organizational priorities using performance scorecards. They caution against over-focusing on revenue, arguing for balanced metrics that include brand equity and team engagement. Stanford Graduate School of Business: Stanford’s GPS program uses continuous, forward-looking feedback instead of backward-facing reviews. AI helps employees align personal growth goals with cross-functional team needs, making career mobility more fluid and equitable. McKinsey & Company: Companies with modern performance systems are 4.2x more likely to outperform peers and see up to 30% more revenue growth. They recommend using AI to synthesize feedback and simplify decisions—not overwhelm teams with complexity. Boston Consulting Group: Outcome-driven performance frameworks paired with quarterly business reviews help teams stay aligned in fast-moving markets. AI tools rapidly assess skill gaps and rebalance workloads during organizational pivots. ⸻ Three Key Trends: ✅ AI as an enabler reduces administrative burden, eliminates bias, and improves predictive performance planning. ✅ Culture trumps compliance as managers shift from scorekeepers to coaches. ✅ Agility beats rigidity through frequent check-ins and dynamic goals over annual reviews. ⸻ The shift can create a competitive advantage. How is your company measuring what really matters? What’s working (or not working)? Share your thoughts below 👇 ♻️Repost & follow John Brewton Do. Fail. Learn. Grow. Win. Repeat. Forever. ____ 📬Subscribe to Operating by John Brewton for weekly deep dives on the history and future of operating companies.