Roster building & demand planning
How this is scored
How a plan gets built across locations, roles and qualifications — templates, staffing requirements, forecasting from sales or occupancy, and whether the product proposes a roster or only draws one.
0 — A shared calendar of shifts; no templates, no roles or qualifications, and no notion of how many people a shift needs.
3 — Shift templates and a weekly grid per location, with roles attached, but staffing needs and qualifications are the planner's memory rather than the system's.
5 — Templates, roles and qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts, multiple locations and departments, and coverage gaps shown before publication.
8 — Demand-based planning from a named data source (POS revenue, footfall, occupancy or bookings), automatic roster proposals the planner can accept or adjust, labour cost shown against budget while planning, and cross-location staff sharing.
10 — Planning closes the loop: forecast, proposed roster and actual hours compared in one place, the proposal explains which rule or demand figure drove each assignment, and the vendor documents the forecasting method rather than calling it AI.
The Operations Director
Fully automated scheduling with over- and under-capacity display is sold as an add-on, and a revenue book plus connectable cash registers and booking systems exist, so the raw ingredients for demand-based planning are on the pages. Nothing captured states that the plan actually draws on POS or occupancy data, shows labour cost against budget while the plan is still editable, or documents the method behind the automation — I read "automatisierte Dienstplanung" as a claim, not a method. We found no public information on roles, qualifications, open shifts, staffing requirements per shift or cross-site staff sharing, though the Enterprise tier speaks of management across locations and structures. 2 3