by tmt19 | Nov 24, 2025 | Team Project, Uncategorized
How Data Visualization Revealed the Real Issues Behind the Instability in the Performance of ChocoStory
Launched in 2018 in Verdun (Beirut), ChocoStory quickly gained popularity: a prime location, strong foot traffic, and the owners’ network. The store combines walk-in chocolate items products with experiences like chocolate workshops and a museum.
However, when we first examined ChocoStory’s performance, one thing was immediately clear: growth wasn’t steady. Sales would surge, only to drop sharply right after, and this pattern kept repeating every year.
That raised a key question. Why did the business grow in some periods but lose momentum just as quickly? This pointed to structural issues rather than simple seasonality.
Our approach is simple but powerful: use data to understand how market dynamics, customer preferences, and internal costs shape ChocoStory’s inconsistent performance. We used a series of visuals that helped us walk through the timeline and understand what was affecting the numbers.
- Understanding the Swings in Performance
The first step was mapping both sales and net profit from their opening in 2018 until the present.
This revealed a cycle of volatility that repeats year after year, showing how heavily the business relied on peak seasons. Net profits follow the exact same pattern as Sales, almost like a shadow, just consistently lower. Profitability relied entirely on sales peaks rather than efficient operations, meaning any drop in demand immediately pushed the company into a loss.
- How External Events Influenced the Numbers
Looking across the years, it became clear that ChocoStory’s performance was closely tied to what was happening around it.
- The early period was steady, but the situation changed fast.
- Covid-19: Foot traffic reliance backfires; digital gap hurts.
- Port Explosion: Supply chain chaos; no quick adaptation.
- Relocation: Short-term dip. strong rebound; smart move.
- War 2023: Instability returns; resilience tested.
Disruptions will happen, but their impact depends on how equipped the business is to handle them. Too often, ChocoStory reacted slowly or only partially.
- What the Cost Structure Revealed
At first glance, ChocoStory’s expenses looked normal, but when they were broken down into the direct and indirect costs stacked barchart, a different reality emerged. Before 2021, direct costs (workshop materials, chocolate ingredients, packaging, etc.) were relatively stable. Indirect costs, however (rent, utilities, electricity, etc.), fluctuated heavily, with not enough revenues to break even.
The total expenses vs net profit line chart showcased two lines behaving in a symmetrical pattern. When expenses rose, profits dropped. Likewise, when expenses fell, profits increased. This approximate symmetry highlighted a deeper issue: ChocoStory had almost no safety margin. With indirect costs absorbing such a large share of total expenses, the business was operating with a net profit loss. It was only after the 2021 relocation that the gap between the lines narrowed down, and ChocoStory began breaking even. However, they were unable to sustain an upward profit trend beyond break even.
4. Rethinking the Product Portfolio
ChocoStory offers a wide range of chocolate items. There are 206 products, compared to just 28 service offerings.
At first glance, this creates the impression of a product-led business, assuming they generate enough profits compared to operational weight. Yet, comparing the revenue generated by each proves otherwise:
Based on that chart, it becomes clear that products generated around LBP 4.5B only, while services reach LBP 11B. The highest revenue contributors were the services (workshops and museum) indicating that ChocoStory operates more as an experience-driven destination and less like a traditional chocolate shop.
- Visibility and Online Presence
We reviewed the platforms because visibility on social media affects how easily customers find and engage with the business. We looked at posting activity across Instagram, Facebook, and Threads from 2018 to 2025 and compared yearly posts with yearly sales. Activity varied widely. In 2021, only five posts were published during the relocation period, which aligned with the lowest sales in the dataset. Posting increased again in 2023 and peaked in 2024, but sales did not return to 2019 levels, when posting was more moderate. We also noted that ChocoStory was not active on TikTok, despite it being a major discovery platform for local experiences.
Our wider analysis showed a clear gap in engagement by content type. A workshop-and-museum video reached more than 784,000 views, while a seasonal product post received 37 likes. This showed that experience-focused content resonated far more than product photos. Taken together, the results suggest that visibility shifted across the years, and that content type mattered more than posting frequency.
A Clearer Path Forward
ChocoStory’s main challenge isn’t the chocolate, it’s not understanding its customers. Our team recommended concentrating on the audiences that naturally fit the workshop experience, especially children between 4 and 14. Schools and camps can create a steady flow of visits throughout the year. Simplifying the product list can reduce operational strain and help redirect attention to the experiences that matter most.
During our visit, the ChocoStory team confirmed that these insights aligned with their own observations. They plan to reduce the number of products, strengthen communication around the workshops, and develop a more structured marketing plan.
This analysis showed how much can be learned from placing data into clear visuals. Trends that look confusing in raw numbers become understandable once they are visualized. ChocoStory faced several disruptions from outside events, but many challenges also came from how the business was structured. With a clearer view of what drives performance, the company can now build on its strengths and create more stable growth.
by kfk16 | Nov 24, 2025 | Team Project
Remote and hybrid work have transformed the modern workplace. After the pandemic normalized virtual collaboration, employees and companies embraced flexibility as the new standard. Surveys in 2024 and 2025 show that over 95% of workers prioritize remote or hybrid arrangements, often valuing flexibility even more than salary increases. But beneath the convenience and autonomy of at-home work, a more complicated reality is emerging. Flexibility does not always guarantee improved well-being. In fact, for many, it comes with hidden psychological and behavioral costs that organizations rarely acknowledge. Drawing on a dataset of 8,000 employees representing diverse industries and experience levels, this project investigates how work arrangement Remote, Hybrid, or Onsite shapes employee mental health, work habits, stress levels, and productivity. The results reveal a striking paradox: while remote work offers meaningful advantages, it also introduces new risks that can significantly undermine well-being when not properly supported.
Remote Work: Freedom on the Surface, Strain Beneath It
At first glance, remote work appears to be the ideal solution for work–life integration. Without commutes and with flexible scheduling, remote employees theoretically gain more personal time and autonomy. However, the data tells a different story. Remote workers consistently reported the highest levels of stress, isolation, overwork, and dissatisfaction, despite the very flexibility that was supposed to reduce these pressures.
Finding 1: Remote Employees Work More Hours and Feel the Least Balanced
The dataset shows a significant gap in weekly working hours across arrangements:
Remote: 47.8 hours
Onsite: 41.6 hours
Hybrid: 40.2 hours
Remote workers are effectively performing an extra full workday every two weeks. This pattern is a classic example of boundary erosion, where the absence of physical separation between home and work leads to unstructured, extended workdays.
Work life balance scores reinforce this:
Remote: 2.36
Onsite: 2.97
Hybrid: 3.63
Remote workers report the worst balance, while hybrid employees report the best.
Finding 2: Remote Workers Experience Far Higher Stress
Stress levels differed dramatically across groups:
50% of fully remote employees report high stress
Only approximately 20-21% of onsite and hybrid employees report high stress
Remote workers are 2.5 times more likely to be highly stressed.
Finding 3: Mental Health Conditions Peak Among Remote Workers
Beyond stress, employees were asked whether they experienced anxiety, depression, burnout, or no conditions.
The results were stark:
Remote: 84.5% reported at least one mental health condition
Onsite: 67.5%
Hybrid: 53%
Remote employees were far more likely to experience psychological strain especially anxiety and depression while hybrid workers reported the healthiest outcomes across the board.
Finding 4: Remote Workers Are More Isolated and Less Healthy
Social connection is a major predictor of mental health and here remote workers struggle significantly:
Isolation rating:
Remote: 3.54
Onsite: 2.82
Hybrid: 2.43
Nearly 28% of remote workers rated isolation as “extremely high” (5/5), compared to negligible rates for others.
Physical well-being also diverged:
29% of remote workers reported no regular physical activity
55% of hybrid workers exercised daily, compared to 27% of remote workers
Remote staff reported slightly worse sleep quality as well
Finding 5: Satisfaction and Productivity Are Lowest for Remote Workers
Despite the popularity of remote work as a preference, those actually working remotely express the lowest satisfaction:
Only 19% of fully remote workers are satisfied
50% are unsatisfied
59% of hybrid workers report satisfaction
Productivity changes follow the same pattern:
46% of remote workers reported productivity decreases
Only 20-22% of onsite and hybrid employees reported decreases
46% of hybrid employees reported productivity increases the best outcome of any group
Hybrid work consistently delivers both performance and well-being advantages.
Finding 6: Employer Support Matters and Remote Workers Get the Least
A key moderating factor is company support for remote work:
Remote employees rated employer support 2.47/5
Onsite and hybrid rated support 3.0-3.55
Among remote workers:
Those with access to mental health resources showed lower stress and higher satisfaction
45% reported receiving no employer support, creating a major well-being gap
Recommendations: Designing Remote Work for Real Well-Being
Based on the patterns in the data, organizations should prioritize:
- Boundary Protection
- Mental Health Support
- Reducing Isolation
- Manager Training
Conclusion: Flexibility Needs Structure
Remote work is not inherently harmful but without structure, boundaries, and support, it can become a breeding ground for stress, isolation, and declining well-being. Hybrid work often provides the right balance enough flexibility for life, enough connection for mental health, and enough structure for productivity. As organizations continue redefining the future of work, investing in the systems that make remote work sustainable is not optional it is essential for protecting employee well-being and unlocking the true benefits of flexibility
“Flexible work arrangements are rising, but without adequate support they can lead to increased stress and mental-health challenges; therefore organizations should invest in structured remote-work policies and mental-health resources.”.
by fae35 | Mar 13, 2025 | Uncategorized
In today’s world, the intersection of environmental health and economic development is more crucial than ever. A deep dive into global data reveals a powerful link between CO2 emissions, mortality rates, access to clean fuels and technologies, and women’s empowerment. These factors work together in influencing health outcomes and shaping sustainable futures for communities across different regions.
Exploring the Data: The Link Between CO2 Emissions and Mortality Rates
The graphs shown in the dashboard above illustrate how CO2 emissions are closely tied to mortality rates. Regions with higher CO2 emissions tend to experience higher mortality rates, primarily due to poor air quality and the associated health risks. For example, the Least developed countries, East Asia & Pacific, and the Middle East & North Africa show the highest levels of CO2 emissions, correlating with elevated mortality rates. This data raises a critical question: How can we reduce CO2 emissions to save lives?
Access to Clean Fuels and Technology: A Game Changer
Another significant factor in improving mortality rates is access to clean fuels and technologies. In regions where there is greater access to renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, the mortality rates tend to be lower. This is because cleaner energy options reduce harmful emissions and promote healthier environments. As seen in the chart, Australia and North America have made strides in improving access to cleaner energy, which contributes to healthier populations.
Women’s Empowerment: A Hidden Key to Progress
Perhaps the most surprising link in this data is the relationship between women’s empowerment, business & law index scores, and environmental outcomes. The graph shows that some regions where women have more opportunities in business and law tend to have lower CO2 emissions. This suggests that when women are empowered to make decisions in the business and policy sectors, it can lead to better environmental policies and practices, ultimately reducing CO2 emissions and improving public health. The data indicates that empowering women is not just a moral imperative but an essential component of tackling climate change and improving health outcomes.
Conclusion:
These findings are clear: reducing CO2 emissions, increasing access to clean energy, and empowering women are not isolated goals—they are interconnected. By addressing these issues together, we can create a more sustainable and healthier world for everyone. The data shown in the charts serves as a wake-up call to policymakers and business leaders that creating a cleaner, more equitable future is not only necessary but possible.
NB: To explore the latest updates on indicators, click on them to access the WHO indicators main page for detailed insights.
