Use weighted scoring: Pass Management and Expediting 40%, Timing Calls and Command 35%, Expo Leadership 25%. Score 1-5 on ticket flow thinking, pass command presence, systematic expediting approach, and pass-kitchen dynamics capabilities with specific behavioural indicators.
Common misunderstanding: Many managers use equal weighting across all interview criteria instead of prioritising Aboyeur-critical capabilities. Pass management and timing call accuracy are more predictive of Aboyeur success than general kitchen knowledge - weight your scoring accordingly.
Common misunderstanding: Some interviewers rely on gut feeling rather than systematic scoring. Aboyeur assessment requires objective evaluation of leadership presence, coordination thinking patterns, and systematic approach to brigade management - use structured criteria to compare candidates fairly.
Implement detailed 1-5 scale with specific criteria: 5=exceptional coordination leadership, 4=strong with minor development needs, 3=adequate requiring guidance, 2=below standard needing significant development, 1=inadequate coordination capability.
Common misunderstanding: Vague scoring descriptions that don't differentiate Aboyeur performance levels. Each score must have specific behavioural indicators: Score 5 shows 'innovative coordination solutions with natural authority', Score 3 shows 'basic coordination understanding requiring guidance on complex scenarios'.
Common misunderstanding: Using generic performance scales instead of coordination-specific criteria. Aboyeur scoring must evaluate systematic coordination thinking, leadership presence under pressure, communication adaptability with different team personalities, and natural authority rather than general interview performance.
Establish minimum thresholds: overall score 3.5/5.0, coordination skills minimum 3.5, leadership presence minimum 3.5, no category below 3.0. Use multi-source evaluation combining formal responses, scenario performance, and team interaction observation.
Common misunderstanding: Setting unrealistic minimum thresholds that eliminate viable Aboyeur candidates. Balance ideal coordination leadership with market availability - someone scoring 3.5 overall with strong development potential may succeed better than someone scoring higher without natural authority or coordination instincts.
Common misunderstanding: Relying solely on interview responses without considering scenario performance and practical coordination assessment. Strong Aboyeur evaluation requires observing actual leadership behaviour, coordination decision-making under pressure, and natural authority in kitchen environment - not just articulated responses.