Use weighted scoring with customer service 40%, drink quality 35%, and teamwork 25% whilst evaluating performance across behavioural interview, practical trial, and team integration using consistent criteria. Establish minimum threshold requirements and clear performance descriptors for objective candidate comparison and bias prevention.
Common misunderstanding: Scoring based on gut feeling
Many managers rely on personal impressions instead of clear scoring criteria. Subjective scoring leads to unfair decisions and missed talent.
Let's say you are choosing between two bartender candidates. One seems friendly but the other has better technical skills. Without clear scoring criteria, you might pick based on personality rather than job requirements.
Common misunderstanding: Overvaluing technical skills
Some managers give too much weight to drink-making ability whilst ignoring customer service and teamwork skills. Great bartending needs all these skills together.
Let's say you are scoring a candidate who makes perfect cocktails but struggles with customer chat and team coordination. Technical perfection alone doesn't make a successful bartender in a busy venue.
Implement 5-point scale scoring for each competency area with detailed performance descriptors whilst weighting practical trial performance 60% and interview discussion 40% for balanced assessment. Use establishment-specific criteria that reflect your service style and customer expectations for accurate capability evaluation.
Common misunderstanding: Using generic scoring for different venues
Managers often use the same scoring system for all bar types. Different venues need different skills and should score them differently.
Let's say you are hiring for a busy sports bar using scoring criteria designed for a quiet wine bar. Speed and efficiency matter more than detailed wine knowledge in the sports bar environment.
Common misunderstanding: Making scoring too complicated
Some managers create complex scoring systems with too many categories. Complicated systems confuse assessors and reduce consistency.
Let's say you are using a scoring sheet with 25 different criteria and subcategories. Assessors get overwhelmed and scoring becomes inconsistent. Simple, clear criteria work better for fair evaluation.
Establish clear performance indicators for drink preparation, customer service, and pressure management whilst using standardised scenarios and identical assessment tasks for fair candidate comparison. Document specific behavioural examples for each scoring level and maintain consistent evaluation environment across all interviews.
Common misunderstanding: Different tasks for different candidates
Some managers change trial activities between candidates. This makes fair comparison impossible and creates unfair advantages.
Let's say you are testing one candidate on beer service but another on cocktail making. The beer task is easier, giving that candidate an unfair advantage. Use identical tasks for fair scoring.
Common misunderstanding: Scoring personality over performance
Some managers score based on whether they like a candidate's personality rather than job performance. Personal preferences don't predict bartending success.
Let's say you are choosing between a quiet, skilled bartender and a chatty one with weaker technical skills. Score based on service delivery, problem-solving, and customer interaction quality - not personal likability.