Sense market brief

Growing Sense within Multi-Location Restaurant Groups

Restaurant Segment Notes

Prepared by Jason Smircich

These are working notes based only on public information. I don't know Sense's business from the inside, so rather than jump to recommendations, I tried to think through one customer segment the way I'd approach a new territory: form a few hypotheses, identify what I'd need to learn, and validate those assumptions through customer conversations.

01

Why this segment?

My starting hypothesis is that multi-location restaurant groups are worth exploring because the hiring motion seems repeated, local, and time-sensitive. That combination often creates operational friction, especially when one team is supporting dozens or hundreds of locations.

I wouldn’t assume the answer is more software. The first thing I’d want to understand is exactly where the recruiting process slows down—from candidate response, scheduling, and store-manager follow-up to reporting back to the business.

Why I’d look here first

  • Hiring demand appears recurring, not occasional.
  • Speed to candidate response likely matters.
  • Central teams may be supporting many locations at once.
  • Candidate communication probably needs to be mobile-first.
02

What companies fit?

Operating profile

I’d start with operators large enough that recruiting consistency matters, but still close enough to store operations that staffing pain is visible.

Recruiting structure

The best fit likely has some centralized TA or recruiting operations team supporting location-level hiring managers.

System environment

I’d look for companies with an ATS or HR platform already in place, where the gap may be engagement and follow-through rather than basic applicant capture.

Operators I’d start with

  • Flynn Group
  • Sun Holdings
  • Dine Brands
  • Bloomin’ Brands
  • First Watch
  • Cracker Barrel
  • Restaurant franchise operators with 25+ locations

Examples based on public information. These simply illustrate the type of operator I’d begin researching; I would validate actual fit against Sense’s customer data, integrations, sales motion, and product strengths.

03

Who buys?

Economic Buyer

Initial assumption
A senior TA or HR leader may own the business case.
What I’d want to understand
I’d want to understand which hiring problem is visible enough to justify budget.
Questions I’d expect
They may see this as an ATS/workflow problem that should already be solved.

Champion

Initial assumption
A TA or recruiting ops leader may feel the daily friction most clearly.
What I’d want to understand
I’d want to understand where recruiters lose time and where candidates disappear.
Questions I’d expect
They may worry about rollout effort or whether location teams will actually use it.

Technical Stakeholders

Initial assumption
HRIS, IT, security, and ATS admins would likely shape feasibility.
What I’d want to understand
I’d want to understand the existing system map and where Sense would sit.
Questions I’d expect
They may worry about another vendor, another integration, or unclear ownership.

Business Stakeholders

Initial assumption
Operations or finance may care if hiring gaps show up in the business.
What I’d want to understand
I’d want to understand how staffing issues affect store execution.
Questions I’d expect
They may need a clear link between recruiting workflow and operating results.
04

Where might Sense create value?

ProblemApplicants express interest but do not move quickly to the next step.
→
Possible Sense capabilityMobile-first engagement, screening, and scheduling workflows.
→
Business outcomeMore applicants reach interviews while intent is still fresh.
ProblemRecruiters spend time on repetitive outreach and status follow-up.
→
Possible Sense capabilityAutomated journeys and two-way candidate communication.
→
Business outcomeRecruiters can focus more time on qualified candidates and hiring manager alignment.
ProblemLocation-level hiring needs vary, but corporate teams need consistency.
→
Possible Sense capabilityConfigurable workflows, candidate matching, and reporting layered around existing systems.
→
Business outcomeBetter visibility into bottlenecks without forcing every location into a manual workaround.
05

What would I want to validate?

Customer

  • I’d want to learn which restaurant customers already get the clearest value from Sense.
  • I’d listen for how they describe the problem in their own words.

Buying Process

  • I’d want to understand who usually feels the pain first.
  • I’d also want to know who can quietly slow the deal down.

Current Workflow

  • I’d want to understand where candidates typically disappear.
  • I’d map which steps are owned by corporate versus the store.

Technical Environment

  • I’d look at the ATS and HR systems already in place.
  • I’d try to understand whether the gap is technology, process, or adoption.

Business Metrics

  • I’d want to know which metric makes the hiring issue visible.
  • I’d connect recruiting friction to operating pain where possible.

Pilot Success Criteria

  • I’d test what would count as proof in one region, brand, or role family.
  • I’d avoid assuming expansion until the first use case is clearly working.
06

What assumptions am I making?

My working assumptions today:

  • Restaurant hiring is still operationally messy.
  • I’d start by understanding how quickly candidates receive a response today.
  • Multi-location operators likely value consistency, but not at the expense of local reality.
  • The ATS may not solve every engagement or follow-up gap.
  • Sense may be a particularly good fit if the biggest bottlenecks are engagement, scheduling, and follow-through.

I would validate these assumptions through customer conversations before recommending any GTM investment. I could easily be wrong on several of these assumptions. That's exactly why I'd want to validate them early.

07

How I would spend my first 30 days

Listen

  • Shadow enterprise sales calls.
  • Interview ten customers.

Understand

  • Review win/loss data.
  • Study active opportunities.

Validate

  • Test restaurant ICP assumptions.
  • Map buying committee dynamics.

Prioritize

  • Focus on the highest-confidence opportunities.
  • Decide what not to pursue yet.