I have noticed that there’s no real official measure for how relevant a burger is in a particular city. Instead, various people from the industry have put together a range of “real” indicators of burgers’ impact and a general ballpark number that they feel corresponds with the prevalence of a burger in a particular city. They are usually based on a direct observation of the availability of various burger joints, and they are often just basic judgments. Obviously I like those more than a certain hypothetical “Big Mac Index,” so I felt like I should take a shot at one too.
Taking cues from the research I did around some listing I came across about the best mobile casino to play on anywhere in the world, I approached this subject in two ways. First, I did some research on restaurant industry employment and ate at a bunch of local fast-food joints. Second, I gathered restaurant employees to try to rank the cities based on the best burger joints they eat at when they want to treat themselves. All these perspectives, individually, have some relevance to the relevance of the Big Mac Index, but when grouped together, I think they provide a greater overall picture of how relevant a burger really is.
It is probably a good idea to divide these perspectives in two. First, a restaurant employee’s opinion of the impact of a burger is extremely personal. It is very subjective. Also, it does not usually include information that might have a direct bearing on a place’s attractiveness. The Big Mac Index does include that, because it assumes the employees are ranking based on an objective metric (that is, they have jobs). Also, the Big Mac Index applies to national chains (in contrast to the dining establishments described in the restaurant labour perspective). Second, restaurant employees generally serve fast-food, whereas many fast-food restaurants serve a range of fast-food products. The Big Mac Index doesn’t always necessarily apply to fast-food businesses.
Nevertheless, to build a broad-stroke view, I believe the restaurant labour perspective should include restaurant employees’ views. In the restaurant labour perspective, fast-food employees are considering several things when they choose fast-food. For example, fast-food employees probably think of their employment as a social good. Also, fast-food employees generally think about job satisfaction. Finally, fast-food employees may be motivated by positive perceptions and attraction of the restaurant or the products that they work at. Of course, restaurant employees’ views are very subjective and prone to changing over time.
Nevertheless, my general view of the restaurant labour perspective is that they will probably rate fast-food restaurants based on an objective measure of their burger availability and appeal. On the specific metric they may look at several factors: how cheap they are, how popular they are, how important they are to the city, and how they rank in the rankings of other restaurants. Of course, restaurant employees may apply different metrics to fast-food restaurants.
I must say that this was one of the more enjoyable information-pursuit terraces I’ve ever followed.