The cost pressure has not yet peaked.

There’s a quiet assumption floating around workplace dining that cost pressure has reached its ceiling. Labor has tightened, food costs spiked, energy went wild, and now things will stabilise.

That assumption is optimistic.

The pressure isn’t easing although we are seeing some changes in where the pressure is coming from.

Labour availability remains structurally constrained. Wage inflation continues at similar rates in many markets and ingredient pricing is volatile rather than continuously high, which is often harder to manage.

Expectations from employees? No softening here across the regions.

What’s different now is that cost pressure is no longer just an operator problem. It’s at a sufficient level to be showing up in design decisions, outsourcing strategies, and commercial models.

We’re seeing more clients re-examining self-operation versus outsourcing. Not because one is cheaper in headline terms, but because risk has become harder to price. Integrators being pushed either into principal arrangements they don’t like or to the side because their value in risk management has diminished.

Others are reducing footprints, not to save capital, but to simplify service and labour models. Some are rethinking service frequency rather than menu quality.

The mistake some make is treating workplace dining as a static amenity.

In reality, it’s a system under constant stress. Decisions made in 2026 will likely be tested much harder than those made five years ago.

Designs that assume stable staffing will struggle.

Commercial models that rely on narrow margins will break first.

Operator selection based primarily on price will become increasingly painful.

Clients on the front foot are asking different questions:

What level of service genuinely supports culture and retention?

Where does flexibility matter more than scale?

Which risks should sit with the operator, and which should stay client-side?

How does the model interface with HR, Real Estate and FM?

The main challenge isn’t really about innovation and newness its about resilience and robustness, although of course the former can help deliver the latter.