Week 62 The Future is here

I’m new to tech. My baseline understanding is solid but basic. I know how to use my phone, use a computer, sync photos, handle general functionality. But I’m not deep into productivity apps, and I’m probably on the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to understanding AI tools or even how to best leverage something like ChatGPT.

That said, I want to get better. As we grow the franchise IP company, I know efficiency matters. If we’re going to scale Beignet Spot the right way, I need to understand how technology compounds leverage.

As I’ve been reading more—founders, tech books, podcasts—just trying to absorb the language and thinking in that sector, I came across something interesting: Jevons Paradox. The idea is that when technological efficiency increases, we assume we’ll just do the same work in less time. But what actually happens is total productivity increases. We don’t work less. We do more.

That got me thinking.

At the store level, I don’t necessarily see a massive reduction in hours. A QSR is operationally bound to its hours. We’re busiest on weekends. There’s no “four-hour workweek” version of Saturday brunch.

Maybe at the IP level, AI allows us to launch another concept faster than planned because we execute the current one more efficiently. That’s possible. But at the store level, the impact feels different.

From a moral capitalist standpoint, the last part of that theorem—overall productivity increases—isn’t just about technology. It’s about ideology. It’s about how founders and CEOs choose to respond.

If the market collectively decided: “We’ll use AI to increase productivity but reduce hours worked,” maybe that becomes the norm. Maybe we don’t cut people entirely. Maybe we train them on AI, amplify their output, and then reduce work hours while maintaining strong margins.

But I don’t think that’s what happens.

The real driver is fear. If my competitor cuts labor aggressively and boosts margins using AI, and I don’t match that move, I risk falling behind. That pressure creates a race to optimize, not a movement toward balance. It’s FOMO at the executive level.

Instead of: “Let’s all become more efficient and more fulfilled,” it becomes: “If I don’t cut deeper, I lose.”

And that’s where it gets complicated.

As a business owner, I understand the onus of efficiency. Margins matter. But as we grow this brand, I’m constantly asking: how do we create joy and community? We talk about serving two communities—our external guests (and in the IP context, our franchisees) and our internal team who makes the machine run.

So what role does AI play in that?

There are absolutely jobs that should be transformed by AI. Back-office functions, scheduling optimization, inventory forecasting, data analysis, marketing automation—those make sense. If AI removes friction and admin burden, that’s a net positive.

But does it translate into a shorter workweek in restaurants? I’m not convinced.

We’ve seen restaurants go Tuesday through Sunday. Chick-fil-A is the only major brand that consistently operates six days a week at scale and dominates. Could AI efficiencies push more brands to pull back a day? Possibly at the privately owned level. But in publicly traded environments, shareholder pressure makes that unlikely.

Maybe the real opportunity isn’t cutting a day. Maybe it’s using AI to free leaders from chaos so they can focus on people. On training. On hospitality. On culture.

If AI absorbs low-value administrative load, managers spend more time coaching. Owners spend more time in strategic thinking. Teams feel more supported. That’s a different kind of efficiency—one that enhances experience instead of stripping labor.

The broader question is whether society will ever collectively rethink “more” as the default. In SaaS and white-collar sectors, AI is already reshaping team sizes and output expectations. In QSR, the shift may be slower and more operationally constrained. But it’s coming.

For me, as we implement our tech stack, the real question isn’t just how much margin we can gain. It’s whether we can design a system where AI increases profitability and strengthens community at the same time.

Because if we’re not careful, AI will simply amplify whatever philosophy we already have.

If we’re margin-first at the expense of people, it will accelerate that.

If we’re people-first but disciplined about execution, it will amplify that too.

The technology is neutral. The philosophy behind it isn’t.

That’s the tension I’m sitting with as we move forward.