A pilot unit before your first franchise: testing without the founder

A successful existing business is not proof that an independent partner can operate its business model. Founders often resolve problems behind the scenes, know what customers want and make up for missing procedures. Before building a franchise network, run a pilot: put someone else in charge of a selected unit and monitor where the business still needs your personal intervention.

1. Define what the pilot must prove

The purpose of a pilot is not to create the most impressive presentation possible for prospective franchisees. It must establish whether the business concept can be replicated using the people, information and support that will actually be available to a franchisee. The test is whether the business can be transferred to others, not whether the founder can solve every problem in time.

You can use an existing company-owned unit for the pilot, temporarily placing someone else in charge. You do not necessarily need to open a new location straight away. However, record the limitations: an established team, long-standing customers and reliable supply arrangements can conceal problems that a new partner would face.

Before you begin, draw up a short test plan covering:

• which day-to-day decisions the manager must make independently;
• which information and tools they will have available;
• when they can request support;
• which events you will record;
• which findings will determine whether you approve or postpone expansion.

Choose the test period to reflect the business cycle. It must include more demanding conditions, not just quiet days. If demand is seasonal, do not present results from one favourable period as evidence for the whole year.

2. Remove the founder from day-to-day operations, not their responsibilities

Give the manager the authority they need to run the unit properly. If the founder has to approve every order, rota or solution to a routine problem, you are testing the wait for approval, not independent operation.

At the same time, stepping back does not mean abandoning legal obligations or safety oversight. Define the circumstances in which immediate intervention is mandatory, such as a risk to health, a suspected regulatory breach or a serious threat to property. Do not risk harm simply to prove that the unit can operate independently.

Support should follow an agreed process. If the manager calls the founder, record the question, the reason for the call, the time spent and the solution. The same applies if the founder spots a problem and resolves it themselves. Otherwise, invisible support creates a false impression that the model works without it.

For example, a supplier is late and the founder secures an emergency delivery through a personal phone call. Record whether a future franchisee would have access to the same solution. If not, you need to find a repeatable alternative procedure or openly acknowledge the model’s limitation.

3. Measure dependence on the founder

Turnover alone does not tell you whether the test has succeeded. A unit may achieve good results because the founder is doing extra work behind the scenes every day. Focus instead on the obstacles to operating the concept independently.

A simple log with five fields is useful: event, available guidance, manager’s decision, support required and outcome. Include cases where the manager did not need help but wasted time unnecessarily because the information was unclear.

When reviewing the log, distinguish between three types of problem:

• Missing information: the manager did not know where to find the information they needed.
• Unclear authority: they knew the options but did not know which decisions they were authorised to make.
• Dependence on the founder: the solution required the founder’s personal relationships, experience or access.

Assign an action and a responsible person to each problem. Extra guidance will not solve a problem caused by unsuitable equipment or a supplier the manager cannot access. Nor will further training help if the manager lacks the necessary authority.

After making changes, repeat the affected part of the test. A problem is only demonstrably resolved when someone else can carry out the procedure without encountering the same obstacle.

4. Turn the findings into an expansion decision

Slovenia has no dedicated franchise law, mandatory government franchise register or specific statutory franchise disclosure document. Nor does a pilot constitute any special legal authorisation to expand. It is a business-readiness check, not a substitute for meeting the legal requirements for operating the business.

Any future contractual relationship is subject to the general rules of the Slovenian Obligations Code (Obligacijski zakonik, OZ), including the principle of good faith and fair dealing. Depending on the nature of the arrangement, the Companies Act (Zakon o gospodarskih družbah, ZGD-1), industrial property and competition rules, and sector-specific regulations may also be relevant. When disclosing confidential know-how, take account of the Trade Secrets Act (Zakon o poslovni skrivnosti, ZPosS).

If an independent external partner runs the pilot, do not rely on simply labelling the arrangement a ‘trial’. Set out in writing the terms governing use of the brand and know-how, costs, responsibilities and how the arrangement will end. Have a lawyer assess the substance of the relationship.

The final report should clearly distinguish what has been tested from what remains untested. Do not present the success of your own pilot unit to a prospective franchisee as a guarantee of their success. Explain the test conditions and significant limitations. If the founder still performs key tasks, postpone expansion or adjust the scope of the support offered accordingly.

Practical conclusion: before granting your first franchise, check whether someone else can reliably run a unit with the resources available. Record every intervention by the founder, address the causes of dependence and repeat the test.