Next on the Menu - The future of cafes on campus

Food on campus is one of the issues that raises the most debate with Canterbury students. Whereas other uni's student elections focus around party politics (some would say playing dress ups like the big kid politicians), at Canterbury some of the most passionate debate revolves around sandwiches. I think this is awesome, because the social element of university is a huge component of the value you get for being here. And central to that social experience on campus is the cafes and bars.

Providing food and beverage that pleases everyone is a lot harder than it looks, especially in a market as diverse as the student population. Balancing the demands of price sensitivity, nutrition, and a range of selection across the campus is a challenge.

But the feedback that has been given loud and clear is that this balance is not quite right at the moment. So, as you may remember from election promises (perhaps from every UCSA election ever?), this year's exec made a commitment to overhaul the food and beverage system on campus, and this process has been underway all year. There have been updates on the progress of this through Canta and the Redphone, however, this article is a more comprehensive guide to our work behind the scenes. I have tried to present a balanced view and answer the most commonly asked questions. I am aware that given the nature of the topic, there will be people who disagree with what is written here, but the aim of this is to keep you up to date and to give you another chance to contribute before decisions are made.

What is the status quo?

The UCSA has five cafes: Brasilia (in the UCSA, not currently open), Collective (College of Ed), Eng Café, Café 360 (beneath the Central Library) and Alibi (the law cafe). Options to open retail space in Kirkwood Village and the Undercroft are also being looked at. Obviously, the UCSA also operates two bars, The Foundry and Bentley's, but they are both out of action at the moment so we will put them to one side.

The status quo provision is that the UCSA employs its own food and beverage management and retail staff. It then buys in the product from a wide range of different external suppliers. Some of these suppliers operate on an ad hoc supply basis, and some (i.e. soft drink) are exclusively contracted. This system of having a wide range of suppliers requires significant co-ordination across all the food outlets. It can be challenging, and although it allows for variation, it does not allow for totally effective use of buying power.

The UCSA also has a commercial kitchen within the UCSA building, but only a limited amount of product (like the $2 rice) is actually made here - the rest is brought in. (The commercial kitchen is on restricted access at the moment due to safety concerns around the building.) Previously, there have been a number of different models used, including utilising the commercial kitchen to produce food onsite, and using different contracted suppliers. However, none of these changes appeared to significantly improve student feedback.

The UCSA does not own the cafes that it runs (the space is owned by the Uni). However, the UCSA is responsible for funding the fit out of these cafes, and any other design work within them.

What are the issues?

Obviously there are a lot of anecdotal issues with the food on campus, namely around price, selection, and the environment they are provided in. The UCSA exec members are aware of these issues, and are often approached by students about them, so we have aimed to capture this feedback through a series of student surveys. So, basically, the issues are what you have told us the issues are. This is a continuing process, however, it is interesting to present some of what we have found so far.

The Student Priorities Research Report, carried out earlier this year by an independent research company via a pretty rigorous process, indicated that students had serious concerns with food on campus. Students were asked to outline what their concerns were, and what they would prefer. Here is the summary of the results relating to food on campus;

"In general, the students wanted more choice from the food outlets, and they wanted cheaper food options (including the return of a grocery store where they could buy what they wanted to make their own meals). A number of students from across the groups also noted that there were few healthy eating options available on campus. Finally, students from across the groups also wanted more comfortable places to sit while eating, and more convivial surroundings to eat in."

To continue on with this process of gathering student feedback, the UCSA ran another (less scientific) online survey to gauge student opinions. This survey covered a wide variety of food-related topics. We thought we would summarise some of the more interesting findings here for you to have a look at.

This poll indicated that 54.7% of student respondents would expect to pay between $5-10 for lunch on campus. 40.3% would expect to pay between $0-5.

In terms of rating the food on campus, the majority indicated that the taste, quality, range of selection was slightly above an average rating. However, pricing was seen as being slightly above a "bad" rating.

Respondents indicated that they considered the most important factor in the UCSA cafes to be price sensitivity, followed by taste and range of selection. Social and environmental sustainability was rated as least important factor by 54% of respondents. However, 40% of respondents said they "cared a bit" about the environmental footprint of their food.

Café Environment

We believe that some of the issues that have arisen from student feedback are not solely due to the product offering, but also the environment and facilities of the current café spaces. We wanted to get a better understanding of these factors, hence, some results focus more on this aspect.

Interestingly, respondents' favourite café on campus was a dead heat between Café 360 (the one under the central library) and Café 101, which was in the Commerce building pre-earthquake and is now on the ground floor of the Psychology building. This first equal was followed by Eng Café, which took out 20.4% of the vote.

In terms of the current ambience/vibe of the cafes on campus, 43.6% of respondents rated this as being "good" currently, with a further 37.3% rating it as "average".

When it came to rating favourite cafes in the wider Christchurch area, the cafe rated highest by respondents was Coffee Culture, with 24.3 of the vote (a bit of a dumb question on our behalf as this is a chain of cafes). The next three highest-rated, all with almost an almost equal share of around 11%, were Café 360, C1 and Addington Coffee Co-op. This left 41.4% who selected "other", specifying a wide range of different places, ranging from McCafe, to Cup, to The Foundry.

Solutions

In parallel to gathering this information the UCSA assessed different options that could be utilised to address the issues students raised. This fell to the UCSA exec, Advisory Board, and management to assess different methods of providing food on campus. To do this, some key factors were used to guide the selection process:

• It needs to be priced affordably - i.e. not just cheap, but good value for money as well
• Sufficient variety and selection.
• It needs to be nutritious as well as tasting and looking good.
• There is still demand for the old favourites, e.g. burgers and pizza.
• It needs to be sourced locally as much as possible.
• The selection needs to be updating all the time to keep selection and imagery fresh.
• Ambience is important, i.e. a "student" look rather than a corporate food hall or army mess hall.
• The ability to demonstrate community best practice as per sustainability and fair trade.

As you can see, this is a wide and varied range of factors to cover. Our aim is not to produce five (or more) identical cafes trying to meet each one of these student needs. Instead, I think a better approach is to aim to create a campus wide mix of distinct and diverse spaces that create a unique and satisfying offering.

To satisfy these requirements, and achieve this goal, the UCSA looked at various different options of food and beverage provision: the status quo, franchises, independent owner/operators, and a food and beverage partner

Status Quo

The intention of this model is to retain purchasing (or start manufacturing) and retail of food and beverage within employees of the UCSA - essentially, taking what we do now, and altering and enhancing it to meet the requirements of students.

This is one of the top options. However, one of the big issues identified with it is that through the historic complaints from students, it's clear that status quo hasn't done us well. Previous execs and staff have made attempts to slightly change food and beverage provision with little success - as the old saying goes, if you keep doing the same thing, you cannot expect different results. There can be no doubt that the current staff that the UCSA has doing this now are hardworking and talented, and give their utmost to try and make things better for UC students. But there are constraining factors under the current model. Not least of these is the fact that the UCSA does not have the buying power of larger suppliers, or access to the capital funds required to provide the required regular upgrades to food and beverage facilities to keep them at a high standard. As a reference, a standard fit out of a café could sting you upwards of $250,000-$300,000, which could be four or five times the annual profit of that cafe.

Franchises

This would involve bringing in the likes of McDonalds, Subway, KFC, Burger King, Couplands etc. to campus in place of the cafes that we already have. Our student surveys have made it clear that students are interested in having some element of these franchises on campus, though this is countered by those students who would prefer to avoid the influence of a large corporate chain on campus.

The big issue here is that a lot of the franchises are not interested in being on campus. For some, it's because since February, they are not interested in the Christchurch market; but mainly it's because of the disrupted nature of the campus market, i.e. the fact that it's only busy 36 weeks of the year, and then, only between 10am and 4pm. This makes it really difficult for them to recoup costs and to retain staff.

This could be exacerbated by the financial requirements around franchises. Generally, the process here is that you would have to buy the franchise rights from the owner and then pay a percentage of the annual profits to this owner also. This creates significant pressure to be profitable.

Further, although with a franchise you can expect a quality and consistent product offering, you are tightly bound with regards to the products that can be provided. There is little flexibility around this, which can restrict variety and selection.

Independent owner operators

This would involve bringing in something similar to an independently-owned café to take the place of the cafes that we already have. This has worked well in terms of owners operating in the UCSA building, such as Kebab Masters.

Again, just as there are for franchises, there are issues with the nature of the student market. It's also difficult for the UCSA to make a financial return in this model, especially in a situation where the UCSA is not the landlord (i.e. anywhere outside the UCSA building). This means that there would be less money available for the UCSA to reinvest back into student services.

Food and Beverage partner

Obviously, UC's situation with cafes is not a unique one. Universities around New Zealand and the world have similar issues. If we look to other universities in New Zealand, there are not too many parallels, as no other students' association runs as many cafes, with most being owned by their respective universities. Having said that, a lot of the differences are not too material. For instance, Waikato Uni have a food and beverage partner (Spotless), who receive some positive reviews. As with everything food and beverage, we have had some nearly-horror stories relayed to us too.

So we looked to international examples of how other unis provide food and beverage on campus. A number of them have moved towards the option of contracting a large food and beverage provider by way of a services agreement. This company acts as a contractor, using their greater buying power to purchase products cheaper, and using systems developed through experience to try and be more efficient. As with any contractor, they provide what you contract them to provide. A blunt analogy would be that when you hire a builder to build you a house, they don't just go and do what they want, they follow your plan. A food and beverage partner does not take ownership of any cafes (the cafes would not be sold), nor do they take over control. They would only take over employment of staff, and operation of the cafes.

The UCSA has spoken to two of these contractors: Spotless and Compass.

What has happened so far?

The UCSA exec had this information presented to it, and on this basis decided to consider two options for progress forward: status quo, or a food and beverage partner. To reach this decision, the UCSA chief executive led an investigation into the different options (assisted by the president and Advisory Board chairman). Information was then relayed to the UCSA Advisory Board, who analysed this and made recommendations to the UCSA exec on which to progress. The executive considered these recommendations, either agreeing and directing the chief executive to action them, or sending them back for more explanation.

The option that required the most consideration (as we didn't know much about it), was that of contracting a food and beverage partner. Therefore, the two providers mentioned above were contacted, informed of the UCSA position, and asked to collect information and provide a proposal to the UCSA of what they could provide.

These proposals were considered by a panel of student reps, UCSA staff, UCSA Advisory Board members, and representatives from the University. It was identified that of the two providers, Compass was a better possible fit for the UCSA. Up until this stage there have been elements of commercial sensitivity involved, but the timing now means that getting UC students involved is the most important factor.

Why is the UCSA considering Compass?

One of the reasons for this is because rather than telling us exactly what they would do, Compass made it clear that they wanted to find out what it is that UC students want, and how they want it provided. Then they want to use their international experience (and money) to make this happen. They demonstrated and understood throughout the process that we don't want someone to come in and provide generic services; we want our cafes to be affordable, cool, and unique.

What we want are experts in food and beverage to come here, listen to what students want, and then help us provide it. And if they can't do this, then they are not an option. The last thing that we want is an international company coming in and telling us what we need.

Nothing has yet been decided over and above the detail above - no contract has been signed, nothing has been confirmed, and you can still have your say (even if you already have through the above surveys). So, the point of this article is to fill you in on the options, and let you know what the process has been so far.

What we are doing now is telling Compass what our non-negotiables are so that we can see whether there is a possibility of coming up with a contract that suits Canterbury students. We've done this by asking Compass a bunch of the questions we think that UC students want to know, then we have paraphrased the Compass responses from their proposal, and in some cases sought specific responses. The point of this is not to be a cheerleader for them; it is to find if there is anything that is going to be make a contract impossible straight away, and what their intentions are. If we carry on the builder analogy, it's like the builder has indicated that they have constructed things similar to what we want, and now the test is whether they can provide us with a custom design that matches our specific requirements.

COMPASS

Who is Compass?

Compass, a FTSE 100 listed company, is the world's largest food and beverage supplier, with a presence in over 55 countries. They first entered the New Zealand market in 1987, and now employ over 2500 FTE staff in the country, 230 of these in the Canterbury region.

As part of a larger global group, Compass, through their brand Chartwells, feed some of the world's leading tertiary institutions, including Harvard Business School, City University London, Bournemouth University, and the University of San Francisco. The team that would look after the UC contract would be New Zealanders who are Christchurch based, with a specific, on-campus manager.

What's Compass' aim, should they get the contract?

Compass' Mission for Canterbury: "The world's best food and beverage experience recognising the unique culture that sets the University of Canterbury apart."

What Glenn Corbett, the Managing Director of Compass Group (NZ) Limited has to say: "Our philosophy is based on building a deep, collaborative partnership that is based on mutually agreed business objectives. Central to achieving these objectives is a desire to genuinely understand and work with a variety of stakeholders including the differing student bodies, staff and faculty on campus.

Whilst our commitment sees a determination to bring the worlds latest thinking and best solutions to the University of Canterbury, most importantly we clearly recognise that this project is clearly focused on the University of Canterbury and its various constituents. The ultimate service we provide must resonate deeply with and be applauded by those people within the University environment."

What would they provide?

As part of the proposal, Compass aim to create a range of different food provision options across campus. These would be based out of the current sites of the UCSA cafes and potential new sites in the Undercroft.

They have indicated that they would commit to spending a significant amount to help improve the café environments as well, to make them more practical accessible and comfortable - i.e. if we signed up for a fixed-term contract, then they would contribute cash to improve the look and layout of the cafes.

Will Compass just be using big overseas suppliers? We like local suppliers.

Compass, as a big buyer, do use big suppliers to achieve economies of scale. However, they have existing relationships with a large number of Canterbury based suppliers, and have indicated in their proposal they already "support local Christchurch businesses" through current contracts with suppliers such as Aoraki Salmon, Quality Bakers, Pravillion, Fresh Connection, Angus Meats, and a number of others. In many examples, Compass use the same suppliers as UCSA but because of their size and buying power get the same product(s) for significantly less.

Upon hearing that there is some desire among students to have franchises on campus, Compass have indicated a willingness to work in with local Christchurch brands (think of the iconic places we have lost since the earthquake), as well as other national or international franchises to get them on to campus. The potential of doing this through Compass could help alleviate the issues that franchisers and small business operators have indicated (as discussed earlier). They are receptive to using a mixture of their own internal brands (Mondo Sub/Build Your Own Burgers), as well as the possibility of external brands, e.g. BK, Subway. That is, whatever we tell them we want.

As a big company they won't care what we think

Despite being a multi-national, should Compass become a UCSA contractor, this contract would make us one of their largest clients in New Zealand - so they would care. If they were investing in our uni, then it would make no sense for them to ignore what we think, and not listen to their biggest customer group: UC students.

They have also indicated in their proposal their desire for customer engagement through focus groups and surveys, both prior to any start and during their operation, to determine what UC students want, in order to give you the immediate option to give feedback on your experience. Examples of the engagement they have used before include a text based feedback system, online feedback, regular focus groups, and feedback meetings - in our case, with student reps and UCSA staff.

Can we see any proposed designs for our cafes?

Compass have drafted up what they think a hypothetical Kirkwood Village café might look like, so we can get an idea.

Insert Compass proposal pics for Ilam Shed.

What about social and environmental sustainability?

Compass would have to adhere to the guidelines that the UCSA sets down for them in regards to social and environmental sustainability. That means Fair Trade products wherever possible, as expressed in the UCSA constitution.

Compass themselves have an Environmental Management System that has achieved certification to the requirements of the ISO 14001. They are the first company in the industry to achieve this level of certification, and have achieved this across all their sites in New Zealand. As ripped from Wikipedia, the ISO 14001 environmental management standards exist to help organizations (a) minimize how their operations (processes etc.) negatively affect the environment (i.e. cause adverse changes to air, water, or land); (b) comply with applicable laws, regulations, and other environmentally oriented requirements, and (c) continually improve in the above.

We didn't really know what this meant, so we asked UC Sustainability office advocate Dr Matt Morris. He made it clear that while he was not familiar with Compass specifically, "IS014001 is a creditable standard. It has some flaws, including that it may not always be transparent enough, and the effects of the business in question on its surrounding communities isn't really taken into account." So obviously there are some more questions to be asked around this, but it's not an immediate fail. Which is nice.

What about the nice people who work for the UCSA now?

As part of this process the UCSA will be seeking a commitment from Compass over retention of UCSA retail staff who wish to remain staff members if Compass takes over as a service contractor.

Does Compass have any skeletons in the closet?

Obviously, the UCSA does not want get tied up with any organisation that could sully our reputation, or damage those they work with. So we asked Compass if they had any skeletons in their closet. To their credit, they were very open and frank about a scandal that took place in the British branch of their organisation back in 2006, where there were instances of bribery between Compass staff and UN officials. Here is what Compass told us:

"Firstly the United Nations bribery issue involved a very limited number of Compass Group employees in 2006. Most importantly all individuals implicated within this scandal have been held to account and were removed from the organisation.

We do not look to dispute these unfortunate events and continue to disclose these in our annual report. In 2010 this disclosure is included at note 29 on page 116 see www.compassgroup.com/annualreport10.

Furthermore the CEO of Compass Group also stood down and his replacement Richard Cousins has implemented an extremely robust Code of Ethics across the global business including an explicit "zero tolerance" approach towards bribery and corruption.

Our subsequent good standing as a corporate citizen can be measured by the fact that since this issue in 2006 Compass Group, despite operating in over 50 countries and employing over 420,000 employees globally has not been implicated in any other issues of this nature.

From a local perspective, Compass Group (NZ) Limited can assure the UCSA and their stakeholders that at no time in the past or present has the company been subject to any issues of any moral, ethical or corruption basis. In fact our senior management team, including our Group Legal Counsel for Asia Pacific has been conducting 6 monthly Visions and Values workshops and Competition Law toolkits across the New Zealand business for the last four years to ensure our policies and regulations are fully understood and adhered to by all employees."

So clearly, this is not good. However, it is also clear that they are not trying to hide this issue and they have been very open about it. So we would be keen to hear your thoughts on this.

Over to You

So there we have it. A description of the process so far and who we are dealing with. The process from here forward is to continue to take more feedback from students on all things food and beverage (in the last week there have been additional Facebook surveys and face to face surveys on campus). You can also go to canta.co.nz to comment on this story to let us know your thoughts, and provide input on this. Meanwhile, we will be presenting this feedback to Compass to see if we can work out a contract for food provision.

Time is of the essence, as the aim is to have some new and some revamped cafes for the start of the 2012 academic year, whether it is with Compass or not. It is all part of the UCSA aim to make life here at UC a little better every year. So get in and have your say!