Can A Voice-AI Kiosk: Win the Next Meal Occasion—or Just Cut the Cost of Taking an Order?

 

The Grocerant Guru® Consumer Test: Will Square’s new voice-AI kiosk make customers more likely to choose a restaurant, spend confidently, and come back—or will it simply help operators take orders with fewer employees?

Square says its new voice-AI kiosk can deliver the speed of self-service without sacrificing the hospitality of a good server. That is the promise. The Grocerant Guru® wants proof.

Here is the consumer test: Will customers order more confidently, discover meals they actually want, spend more wisely, receive better service, and return more often—or will Square simply help restaurants do more with fewer employees?

The survey numbers cited in the announcement should give operators pause. According to Technomic survey data referenced in the press release, 35% of consumers find kiosk ordering unappealing, while 46% say voice AI in the drive-thru is unappealing. Meanwhile, ordering at the counter with an employee remains the most popular method, at 46%.

Those numbers expose the central challenge: Just because technology can take an order does not mean consumers want to give one to a machine.

Square and its restaurant customers must prove that voice AI improves the experience where it matters most: convenience, menu discovery, order accuracy, perceived value, and customer loyalty. They must also demonstrate that labor savings translate into a better overall operation—not longer waits, frustrated customers, or lost opportunities for meaningful human interaction.

The ultimate test is simple: Does Square’s kiosk give consumers a compelling reason to choose that restaurant again? If the measurable benefits accrue primarily to the operator while customers receive no meaningful improvement, that is labor optimization—not consumer innovation.

The Grocerant Guru® bottom line: Consumers do not reward restaurants simply for adopting AI. They reward restaurants that make the next meal easier to find, worth the price, and satisfying enough to repeat.

What Square Is Bringing to the Ordering Experience

Square, the Oakland-based point-of-sale provider owned by Block, has introduced a kiosk designed to let restaurant customers order by voice, touchscreen, or a combination of both.

The device features a 21.5-inch display and built-in voice AI trained on the restaurant’s menu. According to the announcement, customers can ask questions about spice levels, allergens, and popular food pairings. The kiosk can also detect when a customer approaches and welcome them to begin ordering.

James Schonzeit, Square’s head of food and beverage, says the objective is to combine the efficiency of self-service with the guidance customers receive from a good server. Thomas Templeton, Block’s head of hardware, argues that voice makes some menu questions easier to handle than navigating multiple touchscreen menus.

The concept has merit. Traditional kiosks can require customers to tap through several screens to identify ingredients, explore options, or customize an order. A conversational interface could make those tasks more natural.

But the critical distinction is between a technology that works and a technology customers want to use.

Square says customers can turn off the voice feature, continue ordering by touch, and request employee assistance when the AI cannot answer a question. Those options matter because consumer preferences differ. A commuter seeking speed may welcome voice ordering, while another customer may prefer a touchscreen or a conversation with an employee.

Choice is part of hospitality. Forcing every customer into one ordering method is not personalization.

1. Voice AI Could Make Menu Discovery Easier

Square’s kiosk is designed to answer questions using the restaurant’s menu information. That could reduce friction for customers who need help understanding ingredients, flavors, or combinations.

Consider three potential applications.

Quick-service restaurants: A customer deciding between two sandwiches could ask which is spicier, what comes with each, or which side complements the meal. A well-designed system could reduce uncertainty and help customers make a confident choice.

Convenience stores: A shopper selecting a freshly prepared sandwich, hot snack, or ready-to-eat meal could benefit from clearer ingredient information and suggestions for combining food and beverages. That could help transform an individual purchase into a more complete meal occasion.

Grocery delis: A customer choosing among prepared entrees, sides, and heat-and-eat options could use conversational guidance to assemble dinner for one person or an entire family. Better discovery could make the deli more useful as a destination for tonight’s meal.

These are potential applications, not proven outcomes from Square’s new kiosk.

Accuracy is essential, especially when customers ask about allergens. AI should use verified restaurant information, avoid guessing, and refer customers to a trained employee when an answer cannot be confirmed. A confident but incorrect answer can damage trust and create serious safety concerns.

The larger opportunity is to make menus easier to understand and meals easier to assemble. That is more valuable than simply moving the ordering process from a counter to a screen.

2. Hospitality Is More Than Taking an Order

Square’s goal of combining speed and hospitality is strategically sound. However, hospitality means more than a friendly greeting followed by a completed transaction.

A good employee can explain a menu, recognize a special request, resolve a problem, recommend a relevant item, and help a customer feel understood. Voice AI may replicate some of these functions, but it cannot assume every customer wants the same experience.

Consider three distinct meal occasions:

·       The commuter wants a fast, predictable transaction and may appreciate voice ordering if it reduces screen navigation.

·       The family ordering dinner may need ingredient clarification, substitutions, multiple meals, and reassurance that every item is correct.

·       The customer exploring a new menu may value an employee’s recommendation, an explanation of an unfamiliar flavor, or help understanding portion sizes.

One ordering interface will not necessarily serve all three equally well.

Square’s decision to preserve touchscreen ordering and provide an option to turn off voice is therefore important. Customers should be able to choose how they order rather than being forced into a technology experience they do not want.

For operators, the question is whether AI allows employees to spend more time helping customers and preparing food—or simply removes opportunities for employees to create a better experience.

Technology should strengthen hospitality, not redefine hospitality downward to mean merely completing a transaction.

3. Labor Savings Need a Sales-and-Service Scorecard

Square’s kiosk is priced at $1,999, with a reported $99 monthly software fee per device. The announced price includes a mount for counter, wall, or floor installation.

Those figures offer a starting point for evaluating the investment, but they do not establish whether the system will pay for itself.

At the announced pricing, one kiosk would cost $3,187 over its first 12 months: $1,999 for the hardware plus $1,188 in software fees. That excludes any additional installation labor, maintenance, downtime, or other operating expenses.

Restaurants need to determine whether the kiosk creates incremental economic value.

They should measure:

1.       Order throughput: Are more customers served during peak periods, and do actual wait times decline?

2.       Labor productivity: Are employees freed to perform higher-value tasks, or must they spend time troubleshooting the kiosk and assisting customers?

3.       Order accuracy: Do modifications, substitutions, and special requests reach the kitchen correctly?

4.       Average check: Does the system increase purchases without making customers feel pressured?

5.       Repeat business: Do customers return because the experience is genuinely better?

A restaurant might process more kiosk transactions while losing opportunities to connect personally with customers. It might also increase order volume only to create kitchen bottlenecks that erase the gains at the front counter.

The appropriate metric is not how many customers speak to a machine. It is whether the entire operation becomes more productive while customers receive better service.

Operators should also distinguish between shifting orders from employees to kiosks and generating genuinely incremental sales. Moving an existing transaction to a different interface does not automatically create new revenue.

4. The Real Opportunity Is Meal Building, Not Just Order Taking

The most promising application of voice AI may be helping customers decide what to eat.

Foodservice operators increasingly compete for meal occasions that cross traditional channel boundaries. A consumer deciding what to eat may consider a restaurant, a convenience-store prepared meal, a grocery deli entree, takeout, or delivery.

Consumers do not necessarily organize these choices according to industry categories. They want food that fits the occasion, budget, schedule, and appetite.

Imagine a customer asking, “What can I get for lunch that is spicy, filling, and under $12?” If the restaurant’s menu data supports that request, the kiosk could narrow the choices and make ordering easier.

Another customer might ask which available entree pairs well with a particular side. The system could help build a more complete meal without requiring the customer to navigate several screens.

These examples illustrate the potential rather than verified capabilities or results of Square’s announced product.

For operators, the strategic lesson is clear: Design technology around consumer needs rather than merely digitizing an existing menu.

A screen that reproduces a paper menu has limited strategic value. An interface that helps customers solve the problem of what to eat could have considerably more value.

The same principle applies to grocery delis and convenience-store foodservice. Make meals easier to discover, assemble, purchase, and enjoy.

5. Upselling Must Deliver Value, Not Just Add Items

Square says its voice AI will not proactively upsell customers initially, although upselling will remain part of the on-screen ordering process. The company is also working toward allowing operators to customize the voice.

These details matter because the way a recommendation is presented influences how customers perceive the experience.

A relevant suggestion can improve a meal. An irrelevant prompt can slow the transaction and undermine trust.

Consider three examples:

·       A sandwich customer receives a suggestion for a side and beverage that create a convenient lunch combination at a clear price.

·       A family ordering several entrees sees an appropriate bundle that reduces the cost of assembling dinner.

·       A customer ordering a spicy entree receives a suggestion for a complementary side or beverage that fits the flavor profile.

The commercial objective should be to help customers discover something they genuinely want—not simply maximize the number of items added to an order.

Operators should track attachment rates, average checks, promotion redemption, customer satisfaction, and repeat visits together. An increase in average check is less impressive if it comes with longer waits, abandoned orders, or declining customer loyalty.

The best recommendation delivers value to the customer while generating profitable sales for the operator.

6. A $1,999 Kiosk Is Not Automatically the Right Investment for Every Operator

Square says the device is intended for businesses ranging from single-location coffee shops to large restaurant chains.

The announced price may make the hardware accessible to a broad range of operators, but the total investment involves more than purchasing a screen.

Independent restaurants must consider the software subscription, installation, available space, menu-data quality, employee training, and time required to maintain the system. They must also determine whether customer volume and ordering patterns justify the expense.

A high-volume quick-service restaurant with recurring lunchtime queues may have a different business case from a neighborhood restaurant where customers value conversation and personal menu guidance.

For a small operator, the question is not whether a competitor has installed a kiosk. It is whether the technology solves a specific operational or consumer problem at a cost the business can justify.

Large chains may have more resources to test different configurations and compare results across locations. Smaller businesses may need a disciplined pilot before committing.

Technology adoption is not a strategy by itself. Consumer relevance and profitable execution are the strategy.

7. The Industry Needs Evidence, Not Just a Better Demonstration

Square’s kiosk combines a large 21.5-inch display with voice-enabled ordering. It can detect when a customer approaches and offer a welcome. If the AI cannot answer a question, the system is designed to bring an employee into the interaction.

These features may make ordering more approachable. But a polished demonstration cannot substitute for real-world performance.

Restaurant operators should pilot the system in comparable locations and evaluate results against an established baseline. They should also examine performance across different dayparts, menu categories, customer types, and levels of restaurant busyness.

The evaluation should include customers who prefer touchscreens, those who try voice ordering, and those who still want to order with an employee.

Operators should ask:

·       Did customers complete orders faster?

·       Were fewer orders abandoned?

·       Did order accuracy improve?

·       Did the system increase profitable sales?

·       Were employees able to spend more time helping customers and preparing food?

·       Did customers report a better experience and indicate that they would return?

Square expects the experience to improve as AI develops and customers become more comfortable with it. That may happen, but operators should not treat future improvements as present-day results.

The technology must earn its place through evidence.

The Grocerant Guru® Bottom Line

Square’s voice-AI kiosk addresses a legitimate challenge: how to combine operational efficiency with a better ordering experience. Its ability to answer menu questions, support both voice and touch, and involve an employee when necessary could make it more useful than a conventional self-service terminal.

Yet the consumer research cited in the announcement signals a warning. Some diners do not find kiosks appealing, and even more express reservations about voice AI in the drive-thru. Those attitudes should shape the rollout rather than be dismissed as resistance to change.

The broader foodservice opportunity is not to replace every human interaction with artificial intelligence. It is to use technology where it improves convenience, discovery, accuracy, and value while preserving human assistance where consumers want it.

Restaurants, grocery delis, and convenience stores all compete for the same underlying prize: becoming a relevant, trusted answer to the consumer’s next meal occasion.

Square may have created a useful new tool. The market will decide whether it creates a better meal experience.

Three Grocerant Guru® Insights

1. Labor savings are not consumer value.

Square must demonstrate that voice AI does more than reduce the cost of taking an order. Faster transactions, fewer errors, easier menu navigation, and better service must translate into a demonstrably better customer experience. If the savings never benefit the consumer, operators should not confuse internal efficiency with customer value.

2. Menu discovery is the real opportunity.

Consumers are not simply looking for a way to place an order; they are trying to decide what’s for dinner, lunch, or their next snack. Voice AI could help customers navigate flavors, ingredients, meal combinations, and price points. The competitive advantage belongs to operators that use AI to make choosing a meal easier—not merely to automate checkout.

3. Repeat business is the ultimate scorecard.

A kiosk can process transactions, but only consumers determine whether the experience deserves another visit. Restaurants must measure customer satisfaction, order accuracy, profitable add-on sales, repeat visits, and loyalty alongside labor productivity. Consumers are dynamic, not static. Technology must evolve with their expectations, not force them to adapt to the operator’s preferred way of doing business.

The Grocerant Guru® challenge: Don’t ask how many orders Square’s AI can take. Ask how many customers it can win, satisfy, and bring back. That’s the difference between installing technology and building consumer relevance.

For international corporate presentations, educational forums, or keynotes contact: Steven Johnson Grocerant Guru® at Tacoma, WA based Foodservice Solutions.  His extensive experience as a multi-unit restaurant operator, consultant, brand / product positioning expert and public speaking will leave success clues for all. For more information visit www.GrocerantGuru.com , www.FoodserviceSolutions.us or call    1-253-759-7869