In a previous post, we discussed the logic of expanding sales through delivery. Today, we’ll explore physical expansion—adding another location or scaling up. My shop is doing well—should I expand? How should I do it?: A realist’s guide to scaling a restaurant
1. The Question
“My small restaurant is doing well, and I want to expand. Should I open a second location? Or make this one bigger?”
2. Reframing the Question
Most small restaurants do everything in one place—cooking, managing, ordering, and selling. But when you expand, you’re not just cooking more. You’re scaling four functions: management, production, marketing, and purchasing. So think about expansion like this:
- If you specialize in management/purchasing: build a franchise -> Focus on building a logistics supply system and branding for franchisees.
- If you specialize in sales: build an online delivery or wholesale B2B business -> Out-sourcing production
- If you specialize in production: open a second shop or scale the current one
In this article, we’ll focus on the last one: expanding your main shop or opening a second one.
3. Why do so many restaurants fail after expanding?
The short answer: Because demand in the food business is unpredictable. Manufacturers can plan production by month. Restaurants can’t. Some days you’re slammed. Some days, it’s a ghost town. And that messes with your people, your prep, and your profit.
(1) Risk #1: Idle staff = wasted money
Let’s say your shop has 10 tables. 2 kitchen staff + 2 floor staff = you’re fine. Now you double it to 20 tables. You might think you only need twice the people. Wrong. You now need triple the staff to handle peak rushes.
Why? Because during lunch/dinner, 15 tables will order at once. Food must fly out fast, or complaints come flying back. → Revenue goes up a little. → Labor cost and fatigue go up a lot. And when sales dip? You’re stuck. You can’t just fire everyone. In Korea or the U.S., where labor costs are high, you’ll bleed cash fast just trying to hold onto your team.
(2) Risk #2: Dead inventory
A bigger shop = more prep in advance. More sauces sit. More sides sit. They separate. They oxidize. They go bad. You can’t predict demand, so you prep too much. That’s waste. That’s complexity. That’s money down the drain.
(3) Risk #3: The food stops tasting right
You’ve heard it: “The food’s not the same anymore… they lost their touch.” That’s not about losing passion. It’s about losing precision when scaling recipes. I’ve lived this. When my honey layer cake (Medovik) sold well, I started doubling, tripling the batch. Same recipe. Same steps. But the texture collapsed. Cream broke. Layers dried out.
Why?
- More mass = slower heat transfer
- Less air = weaker emulsification
- Texture breaks unless the method adapts
In other words, many business owners expand their shops and simply double the ingredients while keeping the recipe the same. However, since the chemical mechanisms that create flavor—such as heat transfer and emulsification—change just by using larger vessels, the recipe must be completely redesigned. Otherwise, you’ll hear people say, ‘The taste changed after they expanded.’ Scaling without adjusting technique ruins the food. It’s not the chef—it’s the recipe structure.
TL;DR: Bigger size = lower ROI
When you expand your main shop, ROI (return on investment) almost always drops.
- A small shop with $75,000 investment earning $15,000/year = 20% ROI
- A big shop with $750,000 investment earning $75,000/year = 10% ROI
And if you scale awkwardly (say, $230,000–$380,000 investment), you might not even hit 5% ROI. This is a magic of overhead cost when you can’t predict demand. (In Korea, $75K opens a small restaurant. $750K is a large-scale shop like Burger King. Anything in between often lacks scale benefits but still carries big risk.) Due to the nature of the industry, it is difficult to increase labor productivity in food service. Therefore, you must improve ROI by either making capital-intensive investments like ‘big shops’ or labor-intensive investments like ‘small shops.’ An intermediate scale is particularly risky; while you still need to hire low-productivity labor just to maintain basic functions, your ROI ends up being significantly lower.
4. So… when is expansion possible?
(1) Check 1: What type of food do you make?
There are two kinds of cooking:
| Type | Example | Good for scaling? |
|---|---|---|
| Physical assembly | Burgers, katsu, sandwiches | ✅ YES |
| Chemical integration | Pasta, stew, steak | ❌ NO |
- Assembly = Standardized process, Cheap labor, Fast output, Easy to train.
- Chemistry = On-demand cooking, Complex prep, Higher labor cost, Hard to automate → If your food is complex and Chemical integration is important, then scaling is hard.
(2) Check 2: How do you run your kitchen?
Fast food shops keep staff busy even at 2PM. They prep fries, toast buns, thaw patties. At 5PM? 3 minutes = burger goes out. → Efficient. Predictable. Trainable. -> Easy for scaling
But At a pasta pub?
- One guy’s overwhelmed
- Another is watching TikTok
- “Yo, get me more marinara!”
→ Wasted time. Uneven workload. → Not scalable unless you clone yourself.
(3) Common (but flawed) solutions
❌ Option 1: Hire a salaried manager
Pros: Total control Vs. Cons: They leave? You’re screwed.
This works only for simple concepts like BBQ or fish shops. Once cooking gets tricky? You can’t delegate quality.
❌ Option 2: Cook in Shop #1, deliver to Shop #2
Efficient? Yes. Legal? No. (Health code violation = business suspension risk.) Also, no real incentive for the second shop to perform.
Don’t grow one giant shop. Instead, open a second small shop. Why?
- Same recipes (1x batch = no texture or cooking method change)
- No over-prep, no inventory waste
- Local demand stays stable
- Brand travels well: “From Soho to Queens, the famous XYZ Sandwich has arrived!”
(5) How to manage Shop #2 without losing control?
You need a partner. But not just any partner. Use a shared ownership model like a German sausage company I trained with:
- Meister (head of production): 51%
- Business manager(Head of Sales & Accounting): 49%
- They share profit based on ownership. But They have different KPIs. They can buy or sell their shares based on performance
(6) Real-world contract logic: Use options like stocks
A call option means the owner can buy back shares if things go bad. A put option means the manager can sell his shares if goals are met or the owner doesn’t contribute for performance.
| Option Type | How it works |
|---|---|
| Call Option (owner’s power) | “If ratings drop below 4.0 for 3 months, I can buy back your shares at a set price.” |
| Put Option (chef’s exit strategy) | “If I hit targets and want out, I can sell my shares to you for a fixed amount.” |
This builds structure. Not emotion. You don’t have to stay friends. Just hit the contract. With a call and put option in place, neither the owner nor the second shop manager can freeload or disappear.
4. Final Logic Tree: Should You Expand?
[1] Has your revenue grown steadily for 12+ months?
└─ No → Don’t expand yet.
└─ Yes →
[2] Do you have a reliable person to open Shop # 2 ?
└─ No → Stay lean.
└─ Yes →
[3] Can you personally manage Shop #2?
└─ Yes → Okay. if food is simple.
└─ No →
[4] Do you trust your sous-chef?
└─ No → Too risky.
└─ Yes →
[5] Are you willing to share ownership?
└─ No → Bad idea.
└─ Yes →
[6] Ready to form a joint company?
└─ Yes → ✅ Expand with 51:49 model.
└─ No → Wait and prepare structure.
Don’t expand because you’re busy. Expand when your structure, team, and incentives are ready. Most restaurants fail after success. Because they scale the food, but not the logic. Make yours different. Plan like Toyota. Cook like a craftsman. Structure like a German sausage shop.
If you enjoyed this article, you can support the project – thank you!