Antun 2005

This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University]
On: 15 November 2014, At: 14:12

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK
Journal of Nutrition in Recipe

& Menu Development
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wznr20
Menu Analysis
a b
John M. Antun & Catherine M. Gustafson
a
University of Tennessee , USA
b
University of South Carolina , USA
Published online: 22 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: John M. Antun & Catherine M. Gustafson (2005) Menu Analysis,
Journal of Nutrition in Recipe & Menu Development, 3:3-4, 81-102
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J071v03n03_07
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Florida Atlantic University] at 14:12 15 November 2014
Menu Analysis:
Design, Merchandising,
and Pricing Strategies
Used by Successful Restaurants
and Private Clubs
John M. Antun
Catherine M. Gustafson
ABSTRACT. The menu is a key factor in influencing the guest’s first

impression of the facility, the menu selections they are likely to order,
and sets expectations about the food and beverages they are about to re-
ceive. Menu development is an ongoing process. To maintain a competi-
tive advantage, menus must remain flexible. This study examines the
dinner menus of successful restaurants and private clubs. The analysis
compares menu design characteristics and pricing strategies used by res-
taurants and clubs that have been awarded honors in their industry seg-
ment. Each restaurant has received the DiRoNA award, and each club
has received the Platinum Clubs of America honor. By identifying menu
design techniques and pricing strategies used by these restaurants and
clubs, other operators may benefit from applying these aspects to their
businesses. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document
Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.
com> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2005 by The Haworth
Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
John M. Antun is Assistant Professor, University of Tennessee (E-mail: antun@

utk.edu).
Catherine M. Gustafson is Assistant Professor, University of South Carolina.
Journal of Nutrition in Recipe & Menu Development, Vol. 3(3/4) 2005
Available online at http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JNRMD
 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J071v03n03_07 81
82 JOURNAL OF NUTRITION IN RECIPE & MENU DEVELOPMENT
KEYWORDS. Menu analysis, menu design, menu merchandising,

menu pricing, restaurants, clubs
INTRODUCTION
A menu tells a story about the dining operation. Its contents and de-
sign indicates to the consumer the operation’s overall concept and im-
age. The menu is a key factor in influencing the guest’s first impression
of the facility, the menu selections they are likely to order, and sets ex-
pectations about the food and beverages they are about to receive.
Closer analysis of a menu will also reveal many of the perceptions the
operator has of his or her customer base, the degree of culinary skills
likely to be found in the kitchen, and the level of service the patron can
expect in the dining room.
Menu development is an ongoing process. No longer can operators of
restaurants or clubs afford boring or stagnant menu selections. To main-
tain a competitive advantage, menus must remain flexible. Changes in
the menu can happen for many reasons. Restaurant and club operators
may choose to add new menu items, thereby initiating menu changes for
such reasons as, trying out new products, building consumer traffic,
cross-utilizing products already on hand, or simply offering their “regu-
lars” or members something new and different.
The average guest chooses to glance over a menu, and not read it
cover to cover, left to right, top to bottom. Research shows consumer’s
eye movements are predictable and will seek out visual points of inter-
est. The average restaurant guest spends less than three minutes reading
the menu (Main, 1995). In private clubs, often members do not even
open the menu prior to ordering, given they know it so well.
A dysfunctional relationship exists here–between diners and opera-
tors–of catastrophic proportions! How can restaurateurs and club man-
agers continue to place the lifeline of their operation in such a
precarious position, that a consumer can pass judgment on it in three
minutes or less–or worse, not even look at it at all. Of course it is likely
that closer analysis would reveal that restaurateurs and club managers
Menus 83
have created this situation by providing only fairly mundane reading

materials in the past.
The hospitality industry has existed literally for many centuries. Ref-
erences to buying meals away from home, the equivalent of today’s res-
taurants, can be found dating back to the earliest travelers. References to
shared baths and coffee shops, the equivalent of today’s private clubs,
can be found dating back to the Roman and Greek Empires. However it
was not until after World War II, and then escalating in the 1970s, that
restaurateurs and club managers began to recognize the value, and its
potential, of their greatest marketing tool–the menu.
Statement of the Problem
This study examines the dinner menus of 61 successful restaurants

and private clubs in North America. The menu analysis compares de-
sign characteristics and pricing strategies used by restaurants and clubs
that have been awarded honors by outside, objective assessment organi-
zations in their industry segment. Each restaurant has received the Dis-
tinguished Restaurants of North America (DiRoNA) award, and each
private club in the study has been awarded the “Platinum Club of Amer-
ica” honor awarded by Sibbald Associates. It stands to reason that these
operations are among the best in the hospitality industry. By identifying
menu design techniques and pricing strategies used by these restaurants
and clubs, other operators may benefit from applying these aspects to
their businesses.
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Awards in Dining–Being the Best
Numerous restaurants claim to offer the best . . . seafood/beef/pizza

and so forth. So how can a consumer determine which operation consis-
tently offers the finest in dining–from the moment he or she enters the
establishment until the last morsel of culinary quality is enjoyed? The
restaurant industry needed an objective organization to establish crite-

ria and perform inspections that was not affiliated with any other food
business. In 1990 the Distinguished Restaurants of North America

(DiRoNA), a nonprofit organization, was founded. Two years later, af-
ter fine-tuning their rigorous 75-point criteria, teams of highly skilled
inspectors began visiting fine dining restaurants in North America. All
inspectors are anonymous, and they have been specifically trained to as-
sess all aspects of an operation. If an operation successfully meets all
DiRoNA criteria, they are honored with DiRoNA’s “The Award of Ex-
cellence.” This award remains in effect for three years and then the
property is revaluated (The 2002 Guide, 2001).
Private clubs by their very nature are exclusive and often choose to
not seek publicity or attention. Consequently they do not get evaluated
by AAA, Mobil, or DiRoNA, as their open-to-the-public counterparts
do. However every three years John Sibbald Associates in St. Louis
conducts a tightly controlled survey to determine the best clubs in the
United States, within each segment of the private club industry. The sur-
vey is sent only to club managers and club presidents/owners, and each
is asked to rate the top regional clubs and top national clubs. The “Plati-
num Clubs of America” is an award given to top clubs based on the sur-
vey results (Platinum Clubs, 2000).
The Restaurant Industry
National restaurant sales, industry wide, are projected to reach over

$440 billion in 2004. Sales projections indicate operators are optimistic
and expect sales to continue to grow. The National Restaurant Associa-
tion estimates the full-service segment will reach $157.9 billion in sales
in 2004, which is 4.6% over 2003. This demonstrates a 4.1% com-
pounded annual growth in the full-service segment, from 2001 to 2004,
as compared to a 3.5% growth in the limited-service operations (2004
Restaurant Industry, 2004).
For the purposes of this study, the full-service restaurant segment is
that which is being examined. The DiRoNA awards honor fine dining
establishments, which would be classified as full-service restaurants.
Menus 85
For the purposes of this study, the National Restaurant Association’s

definition of full-service restaurants will be used. The full-service res-
taurant segment is defined by “waiter/waitress service is provided, and

the order is taken while the patron is seated. Patrons pay after they eat”
(2004 Restaurant Industry, 2004, p. 3). The National Restaurant Associ-
ation states the “small, full-service restaurants remain the backbone of
the restaurant industry, (with) more than eight out of 10 full-service
firms consisting of just one unit” (Fullservice, 2001).
Club Industry
Private clubs make up a unique segment of the hospitality industry.

By their very nature a finite number of customers exist–the club’s mem-
bers–that can utilize the club’s facilities and services. It is only through
the club’s members, and guests of members, that private clubs can gen-
erate sales revenue. To thrive, or even survive in business, it is impera-
tive that each club not only meet its members’ expectations, but entice
them to return often and continuously anticipate the member’s needs
and wants.
For the purpose of this study, private clubs can be defined as “groups
of people who share a common interest or bond and generally have a
central meeting place. Clubs are usually exclusive in that there is a re-
quirement for admission and a cost to join” (Barrows, 1999).
The average gross revenue per club, represented through Club Man-
agers Association of America (CMAA), was $3.98 million, with an av-
erage of $1.28 million being generated in food and beverage. The
collective total nationwide of gross revenue for all CMAA managed
clubs was $10.16 billion in 2003. The food and beverage gross revenue
in CMAA managed private clubs was $3.26 billion in 2003 (CMAA,
2004). The Club Managers Association of America (CMAA) is the pro-
fessional association for managers of private membership clubs: coun-
try clubs, golf clubs, city clubs, yacht clubs, and others.
The food and beverage department in both country clubs and city
clubs generates a large degree of the club’s revenue. In 2000, the aver-
age food and beverage spending per country club member reached
$2,444, up 24.8% from 1999 (York, 2002). In city clubs, the average
food and beverage spending per club member was $1,872 in 2000
(York, 2002). Club managers and chefs must be responsive to the din-
ing needs and preferences of their membership. In 2003, 34% of manag-
ers in CMAA clubs reported their club had increased the size of the
informal dining space, while an additional 27% of managers reported
their clubs had increased the number of nights they offered casual din-
ing (CMAA, 2004).
Menu Design
Operators need to realize the complexity of the message they send to

consumers through their menu design: personality, image, style, price,
and professionalism. “Your members expect to be greeted by a well
trained waiter. Another key element is the menu that the waiter presents.
A high-quality, attractive, easy-to-read menu helps to create confidence
in the cuisine presented–a positive impression–that properly establishes
the image of the club and the dining facility” (On the Menu, 1998, p. 26).
What exactly is included in the study of menu design? Hug and
Warfel (1991) describe the components of menu design as use of de-
scriptions, quality claims in descriptions, ordering of items, focal points
in layout, use of photographs, considerations in menu cover and design,
and typography.
Each year the National Restaurant Association has a menu design
contest, which is considered to be their most prestigious contest. Menus
are not judged on their content, but on three categories–imagination, de-
sign, and merchandising power. The National Restaurant Association’s
contest criteria are described as:
Imagination centers on creativity, originality and coordination of

elements for novel and striking effects. Design is all about the lay-
out, illustration, typeface, and paper that combine to present a
clean and readable document. Merchandising power is judged on
graphic layout, descriptions, and appropriate visual strategies that
Menus 87
draw attention to featured items and entice the customer to try ad-
ditional items. (Keegan, 1994, p. 132)
There are a few “rules of thumb” which are well respected and often
shared throughout the hospitality industry. These include design ele-
ments need to reflect the concept of the dining room–casual is expected
in a pub, upscale in fine dining, and laminated in high volume establish-
ments. Mill (2001) states at a minimum in designing the menu, the menu
should identify the name of each dish, the major ingredients, and how
the dish is prepared. Main (1994) states the “back-to-basics, common
sense approach . . . the first item in every categorical listing should be
the one that has the highest gross profit contribution, and the last item in
every categorical listing should be the second-highest gross profit con-
tributor” (p. 79).
Sheridan (2001) recognizes the enormous impact menus can have on
a business. Using an analogy between the theater and restaurants, she
calls the menu the “coming attractions” to the restaurant business as
they whet the appetite, create expectations, and ultimately influence de-
cisions. She highlights numerous success stories of restaurants with
well matched menus to their theme. Sheridan shares design tips from
Molly Smith of Atlanta, whose clients include the Ritz Carlton, and
Lois Grimm of Chicago.
These two highly sought professional menu designers suggest:
• Do not crowd the menu with too many items or long, flowery food
descriptions. It intimidates and tires the reader.
• Use boldface type to highlight only the entrée name, not the de-
scription. Get the reader to glance over the menu first, then return
to read the description. Boldface grabs the eye.
• Use print size that can be easily read in any lighting. Test by read-
ing it in candlelight.
• Keep the size of the menu in proportion to the size of the table.
• Be practical. Menus in high-end restaurants change daily. Make
sure inserts can be printed in-house and are easy for the hostess to
assemble.
• Menus pass many hands. Make them soil- and water-resistant.

• For a new restaurant, coordinate menu design plans with the archi-
tect and interior designer to use colors and textures that comple-
ment via typeface and paper stock.
• Menus need visual continuity to suggest style of dining, price, and
ambiance.
• Do not fear white space. Use it. White space allows the eye to
pause and rest. (Sheridan, 2001, p. 87)
Creativity in design always adds appeal. Don Shula’s restaurant in

Florida places a regulation football on a tee in the middle of each table,
which is hand-painted with menu selections using the Miami Dolphins’
colors. Walt Disney offers a menu in a fish pail and inside the pail are
plastic fish with menu items on them. Menu designers, restaurateurs,
and club managers know that a professionally created menu is para-
mount to the success of the dining operation.
Menu Merchandising
One of the intricacies of menu design is its impact on merchandising

the food and beverage selections. Patrons enter a restaurant and mem-
bers enter a club’s dining room with the goal of obtaining a meal. There
is often little doubt that the guest will eat, but what is of signifi-
cance–impacting the operation and its profitability–is what and how
much will the guest eat.
Research studies have been conducted on numerous menu variables.
Those studies examining the “selling” aspects of menus on food and
beverages agree that the menu is an essential part of the marketing effort
and should be used as marketing tools (Mill, 2001; Frei, 1995). “Wil-
liam Doerfler–considered the expert on menu design by many of the
best-known restaurateurs in America . . . (believes the) mere recogni-
tion that the menu has been, or should be, elevated from a secondary in-
formation source to a motivational device obscures the complexities of
making today’s menu effective” (Menu Design, 1978, p. 1). He further
elaborates that effective menu design, which “gently steers diners to
Menus 89
those items whose sale was the most advantageous to the house” re-
quires experience and extensive knowledge in both culinary arts and
printing (Menu Design, 1978, p. 1).

Doerfler was one of the first to apply the concept of the “focal point”
to menu design. Effective use of the focal point of a document is com-
monplace in graphic arts. The focal point is the place or area where the
reader’s eye will be drawn, and its location varies given the size, shape,
and fold of a menu. Doerfler revealed this concept was effective in in-
creasing the sales of the menu items placed in the focal point region.
Restaurateurs utilizing the focal point concept can strategically place
menu items they wish to feature, or those with a higher profit margin, on
their menu to increase the sale of those items (Menu Design, 1978).
Dessert menus and wine lists provide the restaurateur or club man-
ager with two additional opportunities to increase sales by appropriately
merchandising the selections available. The same design and merchan-
dising techniques apply to these two documents, with one exception.
Both desserts and wine appeal to the senses, and exceed the patron’s ini-
tial objective in entering the dining room–to obtain food. Consequently,
dessert menus and wine lists both require tantalizing descriptions of
their selections to entice the diner to act and make a purchase.
Restaurant Business interviewed several restaurateurs to learn their
secrets of menu merchandising. Their advice: (1) Sell the sizzle using
adjectives in the descriptions. Menu descriptors should educate the con-
sumer, but also entice them to buy. Use clear, simple, but compelling
language. (2) Go beyond the traditional and expected menu, utilizing
reader boards on the sidewalk, blackboards, or even digital continuous
tape messages to reinforce the marketing. (3) Keep it simple and do not
try to offer too many choices, prepared too many different ways. Focus
on what the house does well, and promote it. (4) Remember that eating
out is a special occasion for most diners, and promote items on the menu
that consumers are likely to not prepare at home. (5) When selling sea-
food, the geographic region of water should be stated, such as Maine
Lobster. Think of fish as wine, and describe it accordingly. (6) Health
notations and nutritional information sell, and by providing the infor-
mation on the menu it eliminates any possibility of confusion between
the consumer, wait staff, and chef. Consumers are demanding healthy
choices on the menu, and this is expected to only increase in the future.
(7) Get back to basics. People enjoy basic foods, and like seeing some-
thing on the menu that is familiar (Sell the sizzle, 1995, p. S18).
Menu Pricing
Price points are what customers want to spend on certain menu items.
Each price point is influenced by the patron’s perception of value, mar-
ket driven prices, and fluctuations in demand (Main, 1994). These facts
are reinforced by Laube (1999), who states that determining menu
prices can be among the trickiest and most perplexing decisions for op-
erators. However, the customer’s purchase decision, based on their per-
ception of value, ultimately determines the price. Laube also suggests
operators should be aware of what their competition is charging for sim-
ilar menu items, and seek advice from their wait staff as they hear com-
ments directly from the customer.
Gordon (2003) examined three quantitative methods used for calcu-
lating menu pricing. However he cautioned that the price derived from
any method must be analyzed in relation to its perceived-price-value
from the customer’s viewpoint.
Several menu analysis techniques have been explored, created, ad-
justed, debated, and a few have claimed to be the best. Miller (1980) pio-
neered this area, and developed a matrix so operators could compare
different menu items. Miller stated the best items to have, and promote,
on the menu where those with the lowest food cost percentage, and high-
est popularity. Pavesic (1983) did not agree with Miller’s perspective,
and explained that operators who chose pricing and menu strategies that
promoted the overall lowest food cost were sacrificing total operational
revenues. Pavesic pointed out that with reduced total revenues, the
fixed-cost percentages needed in the operational may not be met.
Kasavana and Smith (1982) developed menu engineering as an advanced
analysis matrix. Menu engineering examines the contribution margin of
an individual menu item and its popularity. Menu engineering computer
software is available today to assist operators with this process.
Menus 91
Though researchers do not totally agree on one best way to determine

menu price, and therefore an item’s position on the menu, there are
common elements. Effective menu analysis, for making menu pricing

and positioning decisions, must consider the menu item’s popular-
ity–measured by sales volume, the food cost percentage of that menu
item, and its contribution margin in dollars towards profits (Miller,
1980; Kasavana & Smith, 1982; Pavesic, 1983; Hayes & Huffman,
1985; Pavesic, 1985; Gordon, 2003). Pavesic (1985) reminds operators
to emphasize placement as a critical tool to analysis, as no matter how
profitable an item is, it will not be ordered frequently if not positioned in
the correct location.
Food cost has been the historically popular way to determine menu
prices. Main (1994) discusses the hospitality industry’s reliance on food
cost percentage, and points out this practice is extremely limiting and
assumes constant profit margins exist in all menu categories–which is
not at all likely. Main suggests operators examine their menu from a
gross profit perspective. “Consumer behavior studies indicate that cus-
tomers only perceive 25-cent price-point increments on items below
$5.00. On menu items over $5.00, they only recognize 50-cent and
95-cent increments” (Frei, 1995, p. 144).
Can Menu Variables Affect the Bottom-Line?
Many research studies support the concept that a well designed and
well written menu can increase food and beverage sales, and ultimately
profits. “Properly priced, designed, and presented, the menu can increase
the average check, boosting sales of specialty items while completing the
overall atmosphere of the facility” (Mill, 2001). Frei (1995) states a menu
determines the image, price range and profit potential of a restaurant.
Frei (1995) interviewed restaurateur Bill Main, seeking advice on
creating a profitable menu. Main identified a five-step strategy to make
menus more profitable.
1. Round prices upward to improve gross profit.

2. Use value perceptions–look at pricing from standpoint of quality.
3. Enhance value perception–use marketing resources to boost value,

i.e., Dijon mustard.
4. Target sell–know which items yield the most profit.

5. Engineer the menu–draw attention to certain items, using layout
and language techniques.
Menus of the Future
The technology already exists today to offer programmable screen

menus at a tabletop. Operators see numerous advantages including ease
of updating prices, making changes, adding specials, and their upselling
abilities. Tim Ryan of the Culinary Institute of America makes the anal-
ogy of advances in menu technology to the changes at gasoline stations.
In the past attendants pumped gas for the customer, today most people
use digitized screens at the pumps, which show flashing messages sug-
gesting the customer buy milk, eggs, and so forth inside . . . upselling.
Programmable menus may also offer operators an opportunity to apply
the principles of yield management to food, and change menu prices
based on time of day, to encourage off-peak use/ordering (Menus New
Magic, 2000).
Design trends are moving towards the easier-to-read menus. With the
aging population in the United States operators are trying to be mindful
of possible limitations. A few unique twists to menus being used today
that are easier to read include Braille options, and a mini-flashlight at-
tached by Velcro to the menu for easy spot lighting.
“Your menu is more than a mere listing of every dish you offer. It is a re-
sume, an autobiography, an extension of self. Presented strategically, it can
also be your most successful profit-making device” (Frei, 1995, p. 144).
METHODOLOGY
The primary research questions addressed in this study were related

to menu pricing and design epistemology. Particular attention was paid
Menus 93
to pricing differences between restaurant operations and private clubs.

Secondarily data was analyzed regarding the design characteristics
most popular in restaurants and private clubs.

Two samples were selected from the populations of restaurants and
private clubs. The menus from a sample of these populations were evalu-
ated according to predetermined study matrices. These data were entered
into a statistical processing program (SPSS 12.0, 2004). Descriptive and
inferential tests were applied to the data. The resultant calculations were
graphically described on charts and tables. On completion, the implica-
tions from these data were documented.
Sample
The task of selecting a representative random sample of the entire pop-

ulation of private clubs and restaurants is impossible. The number of es-
tablishments and the variety of types of operations in these two market
populations varies substantially. That is, restaurants can be identified as
casual theme, tablecloth, gourmet, fast food and hundreds of sub-catego-
ries. Further, private clubs can be luncheon clubs in inner cities, country
clubs, yacht clubs, golf clubs and other equally variable establishments.
A stratified sample for each industry was created referring to the ma-
jor principles of the quota sampling technique (Ritchie & Goeldner,
1994). This sampling activity prescribes that only elements with certain
characteristics be selected. A stratified random sample is obtained by
separating the population elements into group, or strata. such that each
element belongs to one and only one stratum, and then independently
selecting a simple random sample from each stratum (Scheaffer,
Mendenhall & Ott, 1996).
To insure the most unbiased, valid and reliable comparison of the sam-
ples, the researchers composed a plan of studying only those establish-
ments who had been nationally identified, by a disinterested third party
evaluator, as outstanding in their field. To this end the clubs selected for the
sample were selected from the “Platinum Clubs of America” awarded
clubs and the restaurants from the Distinguished Restaurants of North
America awarded restaurants: both awards and organizations met the

criteria mentioned above.
The “Platinum Clubs of America” is an award given to top clubs

across the United States as the result of a survey conducted by John
Sibbald Associates. This tightly controlled survey, which is conducted
every three years, is sent to both club managers and club presi-
dents/owners. Each participant is asked to rate the top regional clubs
and top national clubs. In each category the top five clubs remained the
same from 1997 awards to 2000 awards (Platinum Clubs, 2000).
Distinguished Restaurants of North America (DiRoNA) is a non-
profit organization, founded in 1990. Since 1992, teams of highly
skilled anonymous inspectors have been visiting fine dining restaurants
in North America. All aspects of an operation are assessed on a rigorous
75-point criterion. “The Award of Excellence” is bestowed upon opera-
tions that successfully meet all DiRoNA criteria, and is in effect for
three years (The 2002 DiRoNA Guide, 2001). An additional qualifier
for these strata was type of cuisine. That is, all ethnic restaurants were
eliminated from the sample because their menus centered on ethnicity
and were not representative of the popular taste and could not be accu-
rately compared to other establishments.
By selecting these particular groups the researchers were able to cre-
ate two strata of foodservice operations that were similar in more ways
than they were different. Each group represented the best in their strata,
they were considered “fine dining/white table cloth” type operations,
their service methods were similar and ostensibly they shared the same,
or highly similar, kind of clientele. The normative consensus is that in-
dustry leaders such as these are usually trend leaders as well. Hence, if
this group offers a preponderance of certain kinds of menu items, all
other restaurants and clubs will also be offering these items, over time.
Data Collection
Letters were written and sent to each of the sample establishments in

the two strata. The researchers described the study and asked for copies of
that establishment’s fine dining dinner menus. After the return deadline
Menus 95
follow up letters were sent to those not responding, and, finally, several
establishments were later called and personally asked for their coopera-
tion. These efforts yielded 61 menus from private clubs and restaurants.
A matrix was created to facilitate the evaluation of each menu and an ac-
curate comparison of all the menus in the study. According to Kiewra, a
matrix is a grid or cross-classification table representing information
along two dimensions. Column headings designate topics; row headings
designate repeatable categories common to the topics (1994). Relational
information is drawn more easily from a matrix. In particular, the matrix
is computationally efficient because it localizes the information and facil-
itates perceptual enhancement (Larkin & Simon, 1987).
These data from these matrices were then entered onto the statistical
software program and prepared for the application of several statistical
descriptive data and Inferential tests.
Findings
What follows are bar charts comparing private clubs and restaurants
menu pricing. Particular problems were encountered when making
price comparisons across the sample. Difference in recipes and the in-
gredients included in different recipes resulted in undiscoverable rea-
sons for differences in prices. Consequently, the researchers “leveled
the playing field” by listing the menu items according to their major in-
gredient–beef, pork, etc.
The data presented below is charted so as to best compare the entrée
prices of private clubs and restaurants.
The data on Charts 1 and 2 clearly indicate that, in general, private
clubs menu offerings are either the same or less expensive than the res-
taurants. This might fly in the face of conventional wisdom which dic-
tates that “meals in private clubs are usually more expensive than in a
local restaurant.” Although the poultry items are slightly more expen-
sive, restaurants had offerings at a far higher level than the private clubs.
In the seafood area these same phenomena occurred.
Charts 3 and 4 identify a clear divergenance among private clubs and
restaurants. Few private clubs offered pork items on their regular fine
CHART 1. Poultry Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants

12
10 POULPRIC
10-12.5
8
12.6-15
6 15.1-17.5
17.6-20
4 20.1-22.5
22.6-25
2
25.1-30
Count
0 30.1 +
Club Restaurant
Type
CHART 2. Fish Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants
14
12
10
FISHPRIC
8
12.6-15
6 17.6-20
20.1-22.5
4
22.6-25
2
Count
25.1-30
0 30.1 +
Club Restaurant
Type
dining menu whereas restaurants offered a broad array. The lamb of-
fered by clubs was almost all above $25.00 per entrée whereas restau-
rants offered a broad base of lamb dishes.
This would indicate that, in general, restaurant menus seem to be
more broadly based than private clubs’ menus.
Here again (see Chart 5) it can be deduced from the data shown above
that clubs tend to offer their entrees at a lower price than restaurants.
Menus 97
CHART 3. Pork Menu Prices for Private Clubs and Restaurants
6
4
PORKPRIC
15.1-17.5
3
17.6-20
2 20.1-22.5
22.6-25
1
7
Count
0 30.1 +
Club Restaurant
Type
CHART 4. Lamb Menu Prices for Private Clubs and Restaurants
16
14
12
10 LAMBPRIC
15.1-17.5
8
17.6-20
6
20.1-22.5
4
22.6-25
2 25.1-30
Count
0 30.1 +
Club Restaurant
Type
CHART 5. Beef Menu Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants

14
12
10
BEEFPRIC
8
15.1-17.5
6 17.6-20
20.1-22.6
4
22.6-25
2 25.1-30
Count
0 30.1 +
Club Restaurant
Type
Chart 6 indicates that the breadth of the seafood offerings at both pri-
vate clubs and restaurants appears to be almost the same. This also ne-
gates the normative consensus that private clubs only offer small menus
that appeal to a limited number of people–affluent members.
CORRELATIONS
Statistical tests were conducted to determine if the prices on restau-

rant menus or prices on private club menus could be correlated in some
way. Tables 1 and 2 list the correlation results utilizing the four entrée
items identified above.
ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATIONS
“Your menu is more than a mere listing of every dish you offer. It is
a resume, an autobiography, an extension of sell presented strategi-
Menus 99
CHART 6. Types of Entrée Preparation in Private Clubs and Restaurants

20
10
Type
Club
Count
Restaurant
0
crustacean grilled w/sauce both
FISHTYPE
TABLE 1. Correlations–Restaurants
Correlations
BEEFPRIC LAMBPRIC PORKPRIC FISHPRIC POULPRIC

BEEFPRIC Pearson 1 .883(**) .861(**) .846(**) .811(**)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) - .000 .001 .000 .000
N 22 16 10 22 21
LAMBPRIC Pearson .883(**) 1 .904(*) .804(**) .789(**)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 - .035 .000 .000
N 16 16 5 16 15
PORKPRIC Pearson .861(**) .904(*) 1 .991(**) .855(**)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .035 - .000 .002
N 10 5 10 10 10
FISHPRIC Pearson .846(**) .804(**) .991(**) 1 .815(**)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 - .000
N 22 16 10 23 21
POULPRIC Pearson .811(**) .789(**) .855(**) .815(**) 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .000 -
N 21 15 10 21 22
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
It appears that prices are varying in the same direction for restaurants.
TABLE 2. Correlations–Clubs
Correlations
BEEFPRIC LAMBPRIC PORKPRIC FISHPRIC POULPRIC

BEEFPRIC Pearson 1 .771(**) -(a) .561(**) .026
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) - .000 - .007 .932
N 22 20 1 22 13
LAMBPRIC Pearson .771(**) 1 -(a) .419 ⫺.258
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 - - .066 .396
N 20 20 0 20 13
PORKPRIC Pearson -(a) -(a) -(a) -(a) -(a)
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) - - - - -
N 1 0 1 1 0
FISHPRIC Pearson .561(**) .419 -(a) 1 .354
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .066 - - .235
N 22 20 1 22 13
POULPRIC Pearson .026 ⫺.258 -(a) .354 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .932 .396 - .235 -
N 13 13 0 13 13
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

a
Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant.
The only significant correlations here are for Beef * Lamb and Beef * Fish. The rest of the price variables are not related to
each other.
cally, it can also be your most successful profit making device” (Frei,
1995, p. 144). Hence, what is offered via the menu sets the tone for the
establishment, be it a private club or a public restaurant. Clearly there is
fierce competition in the marketplace for food dollars. This would then
necessitate these two large segments of the fine dining arena to under-
stand each other as competitors and deal with each other in a manner
consistent with competition.
That is, restaurants are offering menus with selections, breadth of se-
lection and pricing that is far more similar than it is different from pri-
vate clubs. Restaurants and private clubs are competitors for the same
dollars spent by diners in both their establishments. If either or both of
these market segments want to remain a force to be reckoned with, they
will need to take the other into account when strategically planning their
activities.
Menus 101
REFERENCES
2002 Guide to Distinguished Restaurants of North America, The. (2001). New York,
NY: Lebhar-Friedman Books.
2004 Restaurant Industry Forecast: Executive Summary. National Restaurant Associa-
tion. Retrieved March 1, 2004 from https://www.restaurant.org/research/forecast.
cfm
Barrows, C. W. (1999). A definition of clubs. In Jafari, J. (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Tour-
ism. Routledge, London.
CMAA–Club Managers Association of America (2004). 2003 Impact of Club Opera-
tions on State and Local Economies Survey Report. Alexandria, VA: CMAA.
Frei, B. T. (1995). The menu as money maker. Restaurants & Institutions, 105 (6), 144.
Fullservice Steams Ahead. (2001, October) Restaurants USA. National Restaurant As-
sociation. Retrieved March 1, 2004 from https://www.restaurant.org/research/
magarticle.cfm?ArticleID=671
Gordon, L. (2003). Pricing Strategies Can Improve Customer Acceptance. Retrieved
from http://www.gecconsultants.com
Hayes, D. K. & Huffman, L. (1985, February). Menu analysis: A better way. Ithaca,
New York: The Cornell Hotel Restaurant Administration Quarterly Publications.
Hug, R. J. & Warfel, M. C. (1991). Menu Planning and Merchandising. Berkeley, CA:
McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Kasavana, M. L. & Smith, D. I. (1982). Menu Engineering: A Practical Guide to Menu
Analysis. Lansing, MI: Hospitality Publications.
Keegan, P. O. (1994, January). On the menu. Nation’s Restaurant News, 28 (1), 132.
Laube, J. (1999). Menu Pricing: How to Make the Process Easier & More Profitable
(Electronic Version). Retrieved from www.Foodservice.com
Main, B. (1994). Mining the menu. ID: The Voice of Foodservice Distribution, 30
(11), 79.
Main, B. (1995). Mastering menu psychology. ID: The Voice of Foodservice Distribu-
tion, 31 (7), 28.
Menu Design for Effective Merchandising. (1978, November). Ithaca, NY: The Cor-
nell Hotel Restaurant Administration Quarterly Publications.
Menus’ New Magic. (2000). Restaurant Business, 99 (1), 67.
Mill, R. C. (2001). Restaurant Management. 2nd Ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall Inc.
Miller, J. (1980). Menu Pricing and Strategy. Boston: CBI.
On the Menu: Advancements in Menu Design for Private Clubs. (1998, January-Febru-
ary). Club Management, 26.
Pavesic, D. V. (1983). Cost-margin analysis: A third approach to menu pricing and de-
sign. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2 (3), 127-134.
Pavesic, D. V. (1985, November). Prime numbers: Finding your menu’s strengths. Ithaca,
NY: The Cornell Hotel Restaurant Administration Quarterly Publications.
Scheaffer, R., Mendenhall, W., Ott, R. (1996). Elementary Survey Sampling. Duxbury
Press, Albany, NY.
Sell the Sizzle: Marketing with the Menu. (1995, September 1). Restaurant Business,
94 (13), S18.
Sheridan, M. (2001) Essential reading: Designing menus to suit a restaurant. Restau-
rants & Institutions, 111 (22), 87.
Platinum Clubs of America: Year 2000. (2000). Club Leaders Forum. Saint Louis,
MO: John Sibbald Associates.
York, B. (2002). Private club trends in the USA–A statistical review. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 14 (3), 147-151.
Received: October 2003

Revised: February 2004
Accepted: November 2004

Antun 2005

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antun 2005

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Florida Atlantic University]

On: 15 November 2014, At: 14:12

Journal of Nutrition in Recipe

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J071v03n03_07

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

ABSTRACT. The menu is a key factor in influencing the guest’s first

John M. Antun is Assistant Professor, University of Tennessee (E-mail: antun@

KEYWORDS. Menu analysis, menu design, menu merchandising,

have created this situation by providing only fairly mundane reading

Statement of the Problem

This study examines the dinner menus of 61 successful restaurants

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Awards in Dining–Being the Best

Numerous restaurants claim to offer the best . . . seafood/beef/pizza

restaurant industry needed an objective organization to establish crite-

business. In 1990 the Distinguished Restaurants of North America

The Restaurant Industry

National restaurant sales, industry wide, are projected to reach over

For the purposes of this study, the National Restaurant Association’s

taurant segment is defined by “waiter/waitress service is provided, and

Private clubs make up a unique segment of the hospitality industry.

Operators need to realize the complexity of the message they send to

Imagination centers on creativity, originality and coordination of

• Menus pass many hands. Make them soil- and water-resistant.

Creativity in design always adds appeal. Don Shula’s restaurant in

One of the intricacies of menu design is its impact on merchandising

printing (Menu Design, 1978, p. 1).

Though researchers do not totally agree on one best way to determine

common elements. Effective menu analysis, for making menu pricing

Can Menu Variables Affect the Bottom-Line?

1. Round prices upward to improve gross profit.

3. Enhance value perception–use marketing resources to boost value,

4. Target sell–know which items yield the most profit.

Menus of the Future

The technology already exists today to offer programmable screen

The primary research questions addressed in this study were related

to pricing differences between restaurant operations and private clubs.

most popular in restaurants and private clubs.

The task of selecting a representative random sample of the entire pop-

America awarded restaurants: both awards and organizations met the

The “Platinum Clubs of America” is an award given to top clubs

Letters were written and sent to each of the sample establishments in

CHART 1. Poultry Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants

CHART 2. Fish Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants

CHART 3. Pork Menu Prices for Private Clubs and Restaurants

CHART 4. Lamb Menu Prices for Private Clubs and Restaurants

CHART 5. Beef Menu Prices at Private Clubs and Restaurants

Statistical tests were conducted to determine if the prices on restau-

ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATIONS

CHART 6. Types of Entrée Preparation in Private Clubs and Restaurants

BEEFPRIC LAMBPRIC PORKPRIC FISHPRIC POULPRIC

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

BEEFPRIC LAMBPRIC PORKPRIC FISHPRIC POULPRIC

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Received: October 2003

You might also like