After collecting and analyzing our data, we used a SWOT Analysis to categorize it into strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. With this information, we were able identify which weaknesses needed addressing and which threats would be detrimental to the feasibility of any possible interventions. The strengths and opportunities gave us some ideas of ways to address the causes of the high turnover. Here are the seven interventions we felt were necessary:

​

• Onboarding and/or periodic training (includes disaster/safety, roles and expectations, a guided tour, introductions) so employees have the opportunity for improvement and know that the restaurant is investing in them

• New approach to hiring/monitoring managers (behavioral interview techniques and/or hiring from within, 360 feedback system on manager performance) so that managers maintain a healthy work environment

• Regular team meetings with After Action Reports to improve communication and coordination

• Establish and clarify performance achievements and time milestones that lead to raises/bonuses so employees know that their efforts are rewarded fairly

• Offer professional development opportunities based on roles and make them consistent (50% paid English lessons, training for chefs to make new dishes, cross-train during downtime) to incentivize employees to remain employed with the restaurant

• A team lead or a checklist (that must be initialed as tasks are completed) during downtime to make sure people know what they should be doing

• Encourage ownership to keep track of increased costs related to turnover vs costs during steady states of employment so that realistic expectations can be set for bridging gaps and setting goals

​

Before recommending our interventions, we decided to analyze our interventions using a Multicriteria Analysis (Van Tiem et al., 2012). We rated each intervention on their necessity, potential efficacy, affordability, and feasibility. Then we conducted a final interview with the owner and the assistant manager and distributed a survey to the employees with the intent to more accurately rate the interventions on these criteria. We adjusted our ratings according to these new findings.

​

Finally, after rating our interventions on each criterion, we arrived at their average scores. These scores helped us prioritize the interventions. Our Intervention Priority Chart (Watkins et al., 2012) identified interventions that address the causes of the high turnover rate and explained each intervention type, why the interventions were relevant, and their strengths and weaknesses that informed our Multicriteria Analysis.

​

Our top three interventions were:

​

1. A team lead or a checklist (that must be initialed as tasks are completed) during downtime to make sure people know what they should be doing

   • Rationale: ​Several employees stated that many people do not do anything during downtime, which is time that should be used productively. A checklist during downtime that staff would need to initial as they complete tasks would help provide structure and productivity to downtime. It could help with the high turnover rate, as this issue was a common complaint among staff.

   • Intervention type: This intervention falls under the “Design”category, more specifically under “interventions that standardize.”

   • Strength: It would not require much financially and would be simple to implement as the owner had already made some lists for some departments. It just needed to be done everywhere and used more consistently. In addition, since the employees overwhelmingly see each other as family, they may be intrinsically motivated to help out their “family.”

   • Weakness: The ongoing need to enforce it. It would take time for it to become a standard.

2. New approach to hiring/monitoring managers (behavioral interview techniques and/or hiring from within, 360 feedback system on manager performance) so that managers maintain a healthy work environment

   • Rationale: Poor management was a cause of several employees leaving the restaurant (or otherwise feeling that the work environment was toxic under her leadership). We felt it was necessary since several employees enjoyed working at the restaurant and felt incentivized and motivated but were demoralized by the poor management at the time that they quit.​

   • Intervention type: It is both a “Design” intervention and a “Capacity and Capabilities” intervention. It suggests designing a model for manager selection to make sure that they have the capacity to manage employees without creating a toxic work environment that contributes to a high turnover rate.

   • Strength: It could create a more positive work environment.

   • Weaknesses: People show their best faces when interviewing, so it might not be able to identify toxic personalities easily. It also doesn’t account for the dynamics between individuals that have yet to meet each other.

3. Onboarding and/or periodic training (includes disaster/safety, roles and expectations, a guided tour, introductions) so employees have the opportunity for improvement and know that the restaurant is investing in them

   • Rationale: Most employees stated that they received no formal training when they started working at the restaurant and one employee indicated a lack of safety training. Many employees also indicated that there is confusion about roles and expectations.​

   • Intervention type: This intervention falls under the “Information” category. It is relevant because an onboarding process would help to define roles and expectations, make new employees feel welcome, and ensure that employees stay safe while working.

   • Strengths: It could be a very effective way to target most of the “information” issues at the restaurant. It could also prevent employee injuries and protect the restaurant from lawsuits related to employee safety. In addition, employees would appreciate knowing that management is investing in them, which may positively impact attrition.

   • Weakness: Time and monetary costs - no onboarding existed, so materials would need to be created, and someone woud need to be trained to help onboard employees. Additionally, time would need to be spent onboarding all future employees.

​

Finally, we presented our findings to the restaurant owner and they found the information to be revelatory. In December 2023, they were considering implementing some of the interventions.