Table of Contents

The Demand

Before your next menu review, find one item that underperforms despite strong margin and ask whether the fix is a better item or a better frame — a second comparable item that makes the underperformer feel distinctive by contrast, the way a second steak makes the chicken the unique choice. Build the product first. Then decide, in that order, whether the menu’s choice architecture is amplifying something genuinely worth choosing or manipulating a Guest into an order that won’t hold up against their own satisfaction.

The Work

Name the underperforming, high-margin item you will examine:

The similarity hypothesis test:

What is currently competing against this item on the menu — is there a dissimilar item making it look like the safe, unremarkable choice:

What comparable item could you add or feature to make this item feel like the distinctive choice:

Engineering the choice vs designing the experience:

Is this item genuinely excellent on its own merits, or does it depend on the frame to get ordered at all — answer honestly:

If a Guest orders it because of the frame, does the eating experience confirm the choice or contradict it:

Road 1 or Road 2 use of the mechanism:

Are you engineering the frame around a product that’s already excellent, or engineering the frame to move a product that isn’t:

The one change — to the product, or to the menu architecture around it — you will make this month, and in which order: