If you swim into shark-infested waters and get bitten, it isn’t the shark’s fault. The shark is simply behaving according to its nature. It’s doing what it’s designed to do: detect weakness, strike when the moment is right, and survive. The ocean is its domain. You, on the other hand, chose to enter its territory.
In our world, college and university dining follows the same logic. The sharks in this analogy are the food service contractors. They aren’t villains. They are highly evolved, instinct-driven entities that have a primary purpose: to feed themselves. They are accountable to their shareholders, not your students. Expecting them to prioritize your institution’s mission over their own financial survival is like expecting a shark to go vegan
Understanding the Shark’s Nature
Food service contractors aren’t inherently bad. They are sophisticated, profit-driven machines that follow the terms, conditions, and provisions they build into the contract. If your agreement rewards bottom-line growth and/or expense reduction over student satisfaction, they may curtail menus and hours of operation, compromising the student experience. If you agree to let them use meal plan equivalencies and meal plan DB excessively in retail locations, they could quietly profit from higher food costs and meal plan breakage (lower meal plan participation). If you don’t ensure program compliance and audit or verify reports, they might take advantage of the information gap.
It’s not malice. It’s instinct. They are doing exactly what their business model demands.
That’s why it’s naïve when institutions express shock that their food service partner stops investing in quality, service, or staffing after the honeymoon period. You can’t fault the shark for biting. It’s built to bite. You can only fault yourself for maybe swimming too close without adequate protection (representation).
Why Colleges Keep Getting Bitten
Over the last 35 years, I have watched countless colleges swim confidently into these waters, smiling as the contractor waves a check for millions in upfront capital. The institution sees relief from deferred maintenance and a promise of shared goals. What they often fail to see is the fine print that, unbeknownst to the University, transfers risk, effectively eliminates the school’s negotiating leverage (checkmate) restricts flexibility, and binds them to a predator that will feed off their own students’ meal dollars.
A 10-year contract could promise at least $10 million in capital, but the payback schedule, combined with other provisions, could result in an investment buyout obligation that, in some cases, far exceeds the original investment. It’s not free money.
Who’s to Blame When the Bite Comes?
Every time a school calls us after being frustrated by their contractor, revenue down, problematic food quality and consistency, student and parent complaints up, and financial transparency gone, I ponder the same question: Have they finally had enough?
They’ve been patient. They’ve been understanding. They’ve believed the promises and tolerated the excuses. But deep down, they know the truth.
The mistake isn’t partnering with a contractor. The mistake is assuming that they will act against their fundamental business model and nature. Contractors will always structure agreements that maximize their return on investment. They’re supposed to. That’s how they survive.
The real fault lies in ignoring the warning signs, thinking it will be different this time, accepting the bait, and believing that “partnership” means shared priorities.
Redesigning the Ecosystem
At Porter Khouw Consulting, we guide our clients in designing a better ecosystem. Through strategic planning, SOCIAL ARCHITECTURE™, and our Success Fee Guarantee, we help colleges rewrite the rules of engagement.
We align contracts so that contractors thrive only when the institution does. If meal plan participation increases, if students are happier, if financial performance improves, then everyone wins. But if the contractor under-delivers, they don’t get rewarded for mediocrity.
This isn’t about punishment. It’s about creating an incentive framework that handsomely rewards your management company for delivering an exceptional program (one you defined initially) every meal period, every day.
How Institutions Invite Trouble
When a college signs a contract without an independent consultant, it’s like jumping into the ocean without checking the tides. The water looks calm, the deal looks friendly, but beneath the surface is a well-honed predator that might understand leverage, when it comes to the complexities of a food service management agreement, far better than you might.
Common mistakes include:
- Accepting “free” capital, signing bonuses, etc., without calculating and being prepared for the true cost of amortization and payback
- Agreeing to “cost-plus” terms that remove the incentive to control expenses
- Allowing vague KPIs that can’t be audited and are not directly tied to program execution
- Failing to require transparent reporting or independent performance reviews
- Granting advance payments of meal plan monies
- Letting the contractor design or heavily influence policy such as meal plan design, hours of operation, methods of service, menu variety and selection, pricing, and participation requirements
These aren’t random accidents. They are predictable outcomes of swimming in the wrong place without protection. That’s why having a skilled and totally independent, zealous advocate who is a subject matter expert, someone whose sole job is to protect your interests, shouldn’t be optional.
Changing the Game: SOCIAL ARCHITECTURE™
When we help an institution reimagine its dining experience through SOCIAL ARCHITECTURE™ and abundance thinking, we focus on more than just operations and numbers. We view dining as the emotional and social core of the campus, the most powerful tool a university has, daily, to connect students, foster belonging, and boost fall-to-fall student retention and enrollment. Contractors see dining as a profit center. We see it as a community-building and reinforcement engine.
When residential life becomes a hollow promise due to a mediocre residential dining program, the entire ecosystem weakens. Retention can drop. Housing occupancy can decline. Emotional well-being suffers. Food insecurity increases. And the program can become more profitable for the contractor.
Building the Right Contract: The Power of Strategy and Oversight
The right contract is your shark cage. It doesn’t eliminate the predator. It keeps everyone safe.
At PKC, we build performance-based agreements that:
- Tie management fees to measurable outcomes
- Protect the institution’s capital investment and policy control
- Require regular audits, transparency, and true financial reporting
- Structure agreements so that you cannot be checkmated and forced to capitulate
- Define what success looks like and what happens when it isn’t achieved
That’s how you turn a contractor-school relationship into a managed ecosystem. You start navigating by design. And while you’re focused on teaching, housing, and enrollment, PKC can stand quietly on the shore, your lifeguard, keeping an eye on the fins.
The Hard Truth About Blame
If you get bitten, it’s not the shark’s fault. Blame wastes energy. Strategy builds resilience.
The strongest institutions are those that learn to read the water, understand the currents, and choose partners who align with their mission. The weakest are those who keep pretending the shark is a friend simply because it smiles while circling.
The Lesson
Leadership isn’t about eliminating risk. It’s about managing it intelligently. Know what drives your partners, define your ecosystem clearly, and never forget whose ocean you’re in.
Because in this business, the moment you forget that sharks are sharks, you stop leading and start bleeding.
And when that happens, it helps to know that someone’s still watching the water. PKC could be your lifeguard.
