Multi-unit & franchise
One standard across every store, and a number to prove it
Why 'store 4 feels weaker' is so hard to act on
When each location trains its own way, the records are not comparable, so a district manager is left with impressions and whatever they saw on the day they visited. Any improvement plan built on that is aimed at a guess.
Shared station definitions fix the comparison problem at the root. If every store's fry station is scored against the same checklist items, then a lower average at store 4 means something specific, and the most-missed item report usually names the actual cause.
Locations are a real boundary
Multi-unit access control usually goes wrong in one of two directions: either everyone can see everything, or the separation is a filter in the interface that anyone can work around. In CrewSharp the store boundary is enforced in the database itself, underneath the application.
- A GM scoped to one store cannot read another store's roster, evaluations or plans.
- Roles are per location. Someone can be a trainer at one store and a viewer at another.
- District managers can be granted read access across several stores without edit rights.
- Reports roll up per location so coverage and trends can be compared side by side.
- Stations and checklists can be shared across the group so the comparison is fair.
Pricing that scales the way you do
Per active store, per month, with unlimited people at every one. Adding a location adds one line; archiving one removes it. Because there is no per-employee component, a 60-person store and a 20-person store cost the same, which means nobody is quietly incentivised to keep part-timers off the system.
Existing customers keep the rate they signed up at when list prices change, and volume pricing for larger groups is a conversation. See full pricing.
Common questions
Can I run the same training standards across all my locations?
Yes. Station definitions and checklists can be shared across the group, so every store is scored against the same items and the numbers are genuinely comparable. Individual stores can still hold what is specific to them.
Can a GM see other stores?
Only if you grant it. Locations are a real boundary enforced in the database, not a dropdown filter in the interface. A GM scoped to one store cannot read another store's roster, evaluations or plans, and permissions are granular enough to give a district manager read access across several without giving them edit rights.
How is multi-location pricing handled?
Per active store, per month. Add a location and the bill goes up by one; archive one and it goes down. There is no per-employee component, so a large store costs the same as a small one, and volume pricing for bigger groups is a conversation rather than a hidden tier.
Can I compare training coverage between stores?
Yes, that is the main reason multi-unit operators use it. Station averages, coverage and score trends are reportable per location, which turns 'store 4 feels weaker' into a specific station with a specific most-missed item.
What about franchise brand standards?
Make the brand's standards the actual scored checklist items. Once they are what a trainer scores against on the floor, compliance stops being an audit-day exercise and becomes a number you can look at any week.
Start with two stores and compare them
Set the same stations up at both, run a couple of weeks of evaluations, and see whether the numbers match your instinct about which one is stronger.
14 days free. No card to start. Cancel in one click.