A friend of mine owns about ten medical clinics.
They opened several in quick succession, and I was curious how they pulled it off without feeling like they were taking on too much risk.
I realized they must have known something I didn't. I asked him about this and why he felt so confident.
His answer was simple: they knew their numbers.
They knew exactly what staffing each location required. One provider/doctor, a set number of support staff, and a set number of front desk people.
From that, they could calculate their carrying cost, their ramp-up time to profitability, and the patient volume ceiling before needing to add a second provider.
Every new location was a known quantity, not a gamble.
They had their winning formula.
That conversation was my first real introduction to unit economics. Then last week, as I took a class at the International Franchise Association's annual conference specifically on unit economics, my understanding of that topic reached a whole new level.
You can imagine, for any new business that is trying to achieve profitability, if they don't figure that out and then they open a second or a third location, they're not doubling or tripling their profits.
They're doubling or tripling their loss.
And yet, even experienced franchisors sometimes scale before the prototype is truly proven.
The best franchisors don't just have a prototype. They pressure-test it until they can predict unit-level performance before a location opens. It defines what's required, in both revenue and expense, for a franchisee to become profitable.
When franchisees become profitable sooner, everything else follows: royalties flow, franchisee owners earn an income, goodwill builds in the brand, and selling new franchises becomes easier.
That virtuous cycle is what drives the value of the entire system.
But here's where it gets painful.
If the prototype isn't dialed in, if you haven't done the hard work of understanding what it actually takes for a single unit to succeed, then every new franchise you sell doesn't multiply your success.
It multiplies your leaks.
Whatever inefficiency exists in one location now exists in fifty. Whatever gap in staffing or margin or process is costing you in one market is costing you in every market.
As Shannon Waller, an expert on entrepreneurial teamwork who has coached alongside Dan Sullivan at Strategic Coach since 1991, shared on a recent RevOps Champions episode:
"Technology doesn't fix the mistakes that are already there. It just accelerates whatever behaviors exist."
The same is true for scale itself. Growth doesn't fix what's broken; it exacerbates it.
This is where a lot of scaling businesses, franchise or otherwise, get stuck. They assume that more locations, more reps, more systems will solve the problem.
If you haven't reflected on whether the underlying model actually works, you're not growing; you're compounding the same mistakes.
Shannon put it this way:
"We don't learn without reflecting. Otherwise, you're just repeating the same experience over and over again."
Reflection is exactly what unit economics demands. It forces you to slow down and ask: do we actually know what makes a single unit work? Not in theory. In practice. With real numbers.
And once you know that, once the prototype is proven, then you can scale with confidence instead of hope.
Whether you're a franchisor opening your next fifty locations, a B2B leader expanding into a new market, or any business adding headcount and complexity, the principle is the same.
Don't scale what you haven't proven.
And don't confuse motion with progress.
This is exactly why, when we're building a revenue system for a client, one of the first things we figure out is what numbers need to be visible, to whom, and at what level.
If a franchisor can't see unit-level performance across their system, they can't tell whether they're scaling a winning formula or scaling a losing one.
Here's to proving the model first,
Kristin
Kristin Dennewill
|