In Shakespeare’s tragedy "Romeo and Juliet," the fair maiden tells her lover that his name—Montague—is not important; rather, it is the type of person he is that matters.
In the second act, Juliet says to Romeo, “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” For the purposes of the play, the line is a noble and heartfelt sentiment, and it does capture the very essence of the romance.
But in the world of business journalism, names do matter. Anyone who doesn’t believe that should try explaining it a source whose name has been misspelled or who has been given the wrong title in a news article or feature.
In the foodservice industry, people can be very particular about what they call things. With monikers come connotations: “quick-serve” suggests cheap fast food, while “fast casual” carries with it the idea of something a little more upscale. Coming up with just the right word or phrase for a concept can keep ad executives up at night. I’ve seen it even in the way people describe this industry we cover. When I began writing about foodservice, the term most often used was “institutional.” It certainly fit; most cafeterias, except for those in the B&I sector, were found in what are known as institutions. The founders of Restaurants & Institutions felt strongly enough about the nomenclature that they used it in the magazine’s title, even though many people in the industry bristled at the idea behind the name: stark, bland, low-quality, lacking imagination.
To appease those people, the term “non-commercial” was adopted. It is accurate even if it in not “sexy.” In reality, it has been little better than institutional. When I joined Nation’s Restaurant News in 1995, I crafted the term “on-site.” In my mind it was accurate—foodservice operations on the site of facilities whose main function was not serving food—but it still lacked something and has never really taken over. Fifteen years after that term was coined, there are people who still refer to this industry as “institutional.” I don’t know that we’ll ever come up with one term that clearly captures the essence of what our readers do.
A similar situation can occur when one segment of the industry “borrows” a concept from another segment. The name by which the concept is known becomes the default, whether or not it fits in every case. I believe that is what has happened with the idea gaining much traction in healthcare these days: room service.
Several years ago, operators looking to upgrade the quality—certainly the perception—of hospital foodservice came up with the notion of offering patients food at almost any time of day. Instead of passing our paper menus a day or more in advance and then delivering pre-selected meals at set times each day, these hospitals would treat patients like they were in a hotel. They would have the option of calling down to the foodservice department and ordering their meals at almost any time of day from a restaurant-style menu. It would be just like hotel room service.
The idea caught on and the name, of course, stuck. It certainly connoted high-quality food and a pampered guest—who doesn’t enjoy ordering food without ever having to leave comfortable surroundings? It was a great marketing tool for hospitals, especially those that could afford to offer it throughout the facility.
But was it accurate? Maybe, maybe not, but who cared?
Well, at least a few hospital foodservice directors did care. That was made clear to me several months ago when we conducted a focus group of operators to find out what they thought of our annual hospital census questionnaire. During the course of the teleconference, one director questioned the use of “room service.” She noted, quite correctly, that in the purest sense patient foodservice IS room service.
What she suggested in its place was a term that accurately describes what hospitals are really trying to do: offer meals “on demand.”
I’ve thought off and on for the past few months about that comment, as we went through several changes of our own here at FoodService Director. The conversation came back to me this week while I was editing Associate Editor Becky Schilling’s fine piece on Nancy Geffre, our Foodservice Director of the Month for September. Nancy’s hospital, in Sioux Falls, S.D., has a room service program.
So, we’ve decided to take this opportunity to bring a little more accuracy to the industry. Beginning with the September issue of FSD, we will refer to hospital room service programs by the term “on-demand.” We will follow it up with a qualifier such as “also called room service.” We’ll see what kind of feedback we get from industry professionals before making it permanent.
So we’d love to hear from you. Is “on-demand” an acceptable term for patient room service, or are we making something out of nothing? Or, do you agree that room service isn’t right, but there is a better term than “on demand?”
This is a chance to strike a blow for accuracy, or to take us to task for being hypersensitive. We’ll take the strongest argument and champion it to the industry at large.
While you’re at it, if you have a better idea than “non-commercial” or “on-site,” I’d love to hear it.