How to Use the Aboyeur Interview Template

Why structured aboyeur interviews matter

The aboyeur is the communication backbone of any kitchen. They stand at the pass, calling orders, coordinating timing between stations, checking plate presentation, and managing the flow between kitchen and front-of-house. A weak aboyeur creates cascading failures: dishes sit dying under heat lamps, tables receive courses out of sequence, and chefs lose confidence in the pass. A strong aboyeur makes the entire brigade look better than they are.

This template ensures you assess every candidate consistently across the competencies that predict aboyeur success: kitchen experience, communication clarity under pressure, attention to detail, organisational thinking, and conflict resolution. The 30-minute format keeps things focused whilst the weighted scoring system helps you make objective decisions about a role where subjective "presence" can dominate hiring conversations.

Using the same questions and scoring criteria for every candidate also protects you legally. Aboyeur hiring can be particularly susceptible to bias around communication style and confidence level, so structured assessment keeps you focused on capability rather than personality.

Pre-Interview Preparation

Before the candidate arrives, work through this checklist to ensure you're set up for a productive interview.

Review candidate CV and application form - Look for any previous pass experience, expediting roles, or positions that required coordinating multiple people under time pressure. Note whether they've worked in brigade kitchens before. If they're coming from a different role (senior CDP, front-of-house supervisor), consider what transferable coordination skills they bring.

Prepare interview area near kitchen pass - The aboyeur's world is the pass. Interviewing near it gives candidates context for the role and lets you gauge their natural comfort in that environment. If the kitchen is active, even better - you'll see how they react to the energy and noise.

Have scoring sheets and pen ready - Document responses as you go. Aboyeur candidates often give answers that sound confident but lack substance, and you'll want specific notes to compare candidates fairly.

Ensure 30 minutes uninterrupted time - Brief your team. An aboyeur interview disrupted by actual service calls sends the wrong message and makes fair assessment impossible.

Review kitchen service flow and expediting requirements - Refresh yourself on the specific coordination challenges of your operation. How many stations? What's the typical ticket time? Where do timing bottlenecks occur? This context shapes how you evaluate their answers.

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining operations, add "Review current plating standards and presentation requirements"
• For high-volume kitchens, add "Confirm candidate understands cover counts and service pace"
• For hotels with room service, add "Review multi-outlet coordination requirements"

Candidate Details

Record the candidate's full name exactly as they prefer to be called. This becomes your reference for all subsequent documentation.

Document when the interview took place. This is essential when comparing multiple candidates interviewed over several days and for any follow-up correspondence.

Kitchen Experience

Why this question matters:

The aboyeur sits at the intersection of every station in the kitchen. Without genuine understanding of how kitchens work - timing, mise en place, the rhythm of service - they cannot anticipate problems or coordinate solutions. Someone who's never worked the line won't understand why the fish section needs that extra 90 seconds, or why calling away starters before mains are fired causes the grill chef to panic. Kitchen experience isn't optional for this role - it's foundational.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific pass or expediting experience ("I ran the pass for a 120-cover bistro during the head chef's days off, coordinating four stations")
• Shows understanding of how different stations interact and affect timing ("I learned that the sauce section sets the pace for everything else - if they're behind, I need to slow my calls")
• Demonstrates progression through kitchen roles that built coordination awareness ("I started on larder, moved to fish, then grill - by the time I reached the pass, I understood what each section needed")
• References specific kitchen systems they've used (KDS, ticket rails, verbal call-back systems)
• Explains how their kitchen background helps them spot problems before they escalate ("When I see a chef reaching for a pan they shouldn't need yet, I know they're getting ahead of themselves on timing")

Red flags to watch for:

• Vague claims about "managing kitchens" without specific examples of pass work or coordination
• No understanding of how brigade systems operate or how stations depend on each other
• Experience limited entirely to front-of-house with no appreciation of kitchen timing realities
• Cannot describe what happens during a typical service in concrete terms
• Dismissive of the coordination complexity ("It's just calling orders, isn't it?")
• Claims to have "run" kitchens but cannot describe specific coordination challenges they faced

Customisation tips:

• For candidates with front-of-house backgrounds, probe specifically for kitchen-side experience or training
• For fine dining kitchens, ask about experience with complex plating and multi-course tasting menus
• For high-volume operations, focus on their experience managing pace and throughput under sustained pressure

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Strong expediting or pass experience with clear examples of coordinating multiple stations during busy service
• 4 - Good: Relevant kitchen coordination experience across multiple roles with solid understanding of service flow
• 3 - Average: Some kitchen experience demonstrating basic understanding of how stations work together
• 2 - Below Average: Limited kitchen exposure with gaps in understanding brigade coordination
• 1 - Poor: No kitchen experience and unrealistic understanding of what the pass role involves

Communication Under Pressure

Why this question matters:

When service hits full pace, the aboyeur's voice is the only thing holding the kitchen together. Unclear calls create confusion. Hesitant calls create delays. Aggressive calls create resentment. The aboyeur needs to project authority without hostility, adapt their communication style for different personalities on the line, and remain perfectly clear when fifteen things are happening simultaneously. Poor communication from the pass doesn't just slow service - it erodes the entire brigade's confidence and creates an atmosphere where mistakes multiply.

What good answers look like:

• Gives a specific, detailed example of communicating during a genuine pressure moment ("During a fully booked Saturday, our grill chef fell behind on a 12-top. I calmly reassigned two covers to the senior CDP, called the timing adjustment to all stations, and briefed front-of-house on a 5-minute delay - all within about 30 seconds")
• Describes adapting communication style for different people ("The pastry chef responds best to quiet, direct instruction. The grill team need energy and volume. I adjust naturally")
• Shows awareness that communication includes listening, not just calling ("I check back after every call. If I don't hear a clear 'yes chef', I know something's wrong and I follow up immediately")
• References specific techniques for maintaining clarity ("I never call more than two tables at once. I repeat ticket modifications twice. I use the chef's name before the instruction")
• Demonstrates post-service communication habits ("After every service, I do a quick debrief with each section about what worked and what I could call better")

Red flags to watch for:

• Relies on volume alone to communicate ("I just shout louder until they hear me")
• Cannot give a specific example - only speaks in generalities about "staying calm"
• Shows no awareness that different team members need different communication approaches
• Describes communication as one-directional (calling out) without mentioning listening or confirming
• Gets visibly flustered when you press for details about high-pressure moments during the interview itself
• Blames miscommunication on others without reflecting on their own role ("They just don't listen")

Customisation tips:

• For open kitchens, probe their comfort with guests overhearing kitchen communication
• For kitchens with multi-language teams, ask how they ensure understanding across language barriers
• For operations where the aboyeur also coordinates with front-of-house runners, test their ability to switch communication registers

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Clear, calm communicator under pressure with specific examples of adapting style for different team members and situations
• 4 - Good: Effective communication skills demonstrated through concrete examples, with minor development areas
• 3 - Average: Adequate communication ability with basic examples, though lacks sophistication in adapting to different contexts
• 2 - Below Average: Struggles to describe clear communication approaches or relies on volume and repetition alone
• 1 - Poor: Poor communication skills evident even during the interview, with no relevant examples of pressure communication

Attention to Detail

Why this question matters:

The aboyeur is the last quality checkpoint before food reaches the guest. A dish with a smeared plate rim, a missing garnish, or the wrong sauce goes out because the aboyeur missed it. In fine dining, this destroys the experience. In high-volume, it creates returns that back up the entire kitchen. The aboyeur who lets substandard food through the pass isn't just failing at quality control - they're telling the brigade that standards don't matter, which degrades performance across every station over time.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific quality checks they perform before sending ("I check every plate against the spec photo - garnish position, sauce consistency, portion size, plate cleanliness. It takes me about 3 seconds per plate but catches 90% of issues")
• Gives examples of catching errors that others missed ("The fish looked perfect but the skin side was slightly undercooked. Most people wouldn't notice through the sauce, but I knew the texture wasn't right and sent it back")
• Shows a system for maintaining attention during long services ("I reset my focus every hour. After 200 covers, you start letting things slide if you don't consciously recalibrate")
• Demonstrates understanding that detail extends beyond food presentation ("I track which tables have allergies, which have special occasions, which have been waiting longer than they should")
• References creating standards documentation or training others on quality checkpoints

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot describe specific quality standards they've maintained - speaks only in general terms about "checking plates"
• Prioritises speed over quality consistently ("You can't check every plate during a busy service")
• No examples of actually catching errors or maintaining standards under pressure
• Shows impatience with the topic, suggesting they view detail as secondary to pace
• Cannot articulate what they specifically look for when checking a dish before it leaves the pass
• Describes quality control as someone else's responsibility ("That's the chef's job")

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, ask about managing presentation standards across multi-course tasting menus where consistency over 8+ plates is essential
• For high-volume operations, explore how they balance speed with quality when running 300+ covers
• For kitchens with complex allergen requirements, test their approach to tracking and verifying dietary modifications

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Exceptional eye for detail with specific examples of systematic quality control and catching errors others missed
• 4 - Good: Good attention to quality demonstrated through concrete examples of maintaining standards during service
• 3 - Average: Notices obvious issues and describes basic checking processes, though lacks systematic approach
• 2 - Below Average: Misses details frequently or cannot describe meaningful quality control practices
• 1 - Poor: Poor attention to detail with no evidence of quality checking habits or standards awareness

Organisation and Prioritisation

Why this question matters:

During peak service, an aboyeur might be tracking 30 active tickets, managing timing across 6 stations, monitoring 4 tables with dietary requirements, coordinating a VIP request from front-of-house, and dealing with an equipment issue on the grill section - all simultaneously. Without robust organisational systems, this becomes chaos. The aboyeur who can't prioritise effectively creates a kitchen where everything feels urgent and nothing gets done properly. Strong organisational skills are what separate an aboyeur who merely calls orders from one who actually controls the flow of service.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific systems for tracking orders ("I group tickets by table proximity and course timing. I use a colour-coded mental model - green tickets are flowing, amber need attention within 2 minutes, red are critical")
• Explains how they prioritise when everything seems urgent ("VIP tables and large parties get priority tracking. After that, it's longest-waiting first, but I adjust if a section is struggling")
• Shows evidence of building systems to stay organised ("I introduced a ticket timing system where I mark fire times on every docket so I can see at a glance which tables are running behind")
• Demonstrates ability to shift priorities quickly ("When the fish delivery was late, I immediately restructured the order queue to push fish dishes back and bring forward meat courses, then briefed front-of-house to steer recommendations")
• References pre-service organisation habits ("I review every booking 30 minutes before service - party sizes, special requirements, VIP notes - so I'm not discovering surprises mid-service")

Red flags to watch for:

• No discernible system for managing multiple priorities ("I just keep it all in my head")
• Cannot explain how they decide what takes priority when multiple issues compete
• Describes reactive behaviour only, with no evidence of proactive planning or anticipation
• Shows rigidity when priorities change ("I follow the ticket order strictly, that's the only fair way")
• Overwhelmed by the complexity of the question itself, which suggests they'd be overwhelmed by the role
• No examples of pre-service preparation or anticipatory organisation

Customisation tips:

• For operations with KDS systems, ask about their experience with digital order management and how they use technology to stay organised
• For kitchens running complex tasting menus, test their approach to managing course-by-course timing across multiple tables
• For hotels with room service alongside restaurant covers, explore how they manage competing service channels

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Highly systematic and organised with specific examples of managing complex service flow and building coordination systems
• 4 - Good: Good organisational skills demonstrated through concrete examples of managing multiple priorities during service
• 3 - Average: Basic organisation with standard approaches to tracking orders, though lacks sophisticated prioritisation methods
• 2 - Below Average: Disorganised approach with limited evidence of systems for managing complexity
• 1 - Poor: Cannot manage multiple priorities and shows no organisational methodology

Conflict Resolution

Why this question matters:

The pass is where kitchen frustrations concentrate. Chefs get told their food isn't good enough. Front-of-house gets told they'll have to wait. The aboyeur delivers the messages nobody wants to hear, and they're the first target when tempers flare. An aboyeur who avoids conflict lets standards slip. One who escalates conflict destroys team cohesion mid-service. The role demands someone who can address issues firmly and fairly without derailing the flow of service - and who can manage the tension between kitchen and front-of-house without taking sides.

What good answers look like:

• Gives a specific example of resolving kitchen-service tension ("The floor manager demanded faster food for a complaint table. The grill chef was already maxed out. I acknowledged the urgency, quietly reprioritised two other tables, and got the complaint table's food out 4 minutes early without crushing the grill section")
• Describes addressing quality issues diplomatically ("When I had to send a dish back to a senior CDP, I didn't announce it to the whole kitchen. I stepped to their section, explained what needed fixing, and offered to adjust timing on their other orders while they replated")
• Shows awareness of timing in conflict resolution ("During service, I deal with the immediate issue only. Real conversations about recurring problems happen after service, when everyone's calmer and I can listen properly")
• Demonstrates fairness and consistency ("I hold everyone to the same standard. If the head chef's dish needs fixing, it goes back just like anyone else's")
• References building relationships that prevent conflicts from escalating ("I make sure every chef knows I'm on their side. When they trust that my calls are fair, they don't fight me on quality sends-back")

Red flags to watch for:

• Avoids conflict entirely ("I just let the head chef deal with any problems")
• Takes an aggressive approach ("They need to hear it straight - if the food's not right, I tell them loudly so they know I mean it")
• Cannot describe a specific conflict they've resolved - only speaks theoretically
• Shows favouritism in how they handle disputes ("I'd approach a junior differently than a senior chef" in a way that means holding seniors to lower standards)
• Blames front-of-house consistently for tensions without acknowledging kitchen's role
• Describes conflicts where they clearly made the situation worse but doesn't recognise it

Customisation tips:

• For kitchens with strong brigade hierarchies, ask how they navigate authority when the sous chef disagrees with their quality call
• For open kitchens, probe their approach to handling tension where guests can see and hear
• For operations with high staff turnover, ask about managing conflict with team members they're still building relationships with

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Diplomatic and solution-focused with specific examples of resolving tensions while maintaining service flow and team relationships
• 4 - Good: Handles tension professionally with concrete examples of managing disagreements between kitchen and service
• 3 - Average: Can manage basic conflicts with reasonable approaches, though may lack subtlety in more complex situations
• 2 - Below Average: Avoids or escalates conflict without effective resolution strategies
• 1 - Poor: Cannot handle conflict constructively, with evidence of worsening tensions or avoiding necessary confrontations

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

An aboyeur can describe brilliant coordination systems in an interview and completely fall apart when the kitchen gets loud. Practical trials reveal the things interviews cannot: voice projection, natural authority at the pass, reaction speed when multiple stations need attention, and whether they actually check plates or just wave them through. A 30-minute trial during prep or a simulated service scenario shows you more about someone's pass presence than an hour of conversation.

What to observe:

Called orders clearly and confidently - Listen for voice clarity, appropriate volume, and natural authority. Do they project without shouting? Do they use the standard call-response format? Is there hesitation or uncertainty in their delivery?

Tracked ticket times accurately - Give them a set of tickets to manage. Watch whether they monitor timing proactively or only react when something is obviously late. Do they have a visible system for tracking progress?

Coordinated multiple tables effectively - Observe how they manage overlapping orders. Do they batch similar requirements? Do they sequence courses logically? Can they hold the full picture while managing individual details?

Checked plate presentation before sending - Watch their quality control habits. Do they actually look at every plate? How quickly do they spot issues? Do they send back substandard food, or let it go to avoid confrontation?

Communicated well with kitchen and service - Observe their interaction style with both sides. Do they adapt their communication? Do they listen as well as direct? How do they handle questions or pushback?

Stayed calm during busy periods - Introduce pressure gradually and watch for composure. Does their voice change? Do their quality checks become rushed? Do they maintain organisational systems or abandon them?

Setting up an effective trial:

• Schedule during a quiet prep period so they can learn your setup, then introduce simulated service pressure
• Brief your team to interact naturally - not to help or hinder, just to respond as they normally would
• Prepare 10-15 test tickets with varying complexity, dietary requirements, and timing challenges
• Have someone play the front-of-house role, making requests and asking for updates
• Observe from a position where you can see their organisation methods and plate-checking habits

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Natural expeditor with excellent control of the pass, clear communication, and instinctive quality checking
• 4 - Strong: Met all requirements comfortably with good coordination and communication throughout
• 3 - Adequate: Basic requirements met with some coaching needed on timing or communication
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with coordination, lost track of orders, or failed to maintain quality checks
• 1 - Inadequate: Cannot meet minimum standards for pass management

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond skills and experience, cultural fit determines whether an aboyeur will command respect and thrive in your kitchen. Select all indicators that genuinely apply based on your observations throughout the interview and trial.

Shows leadership presence at the pass - Did they project natural authority during the trial? Do they command attention without demanding it? Would your current brigade respond to their direction?

Maintains calm under pressure - Did their composure hold when you introduced complications? Do they regulate the kitchen's energy or feed into panic?

Commands respect from kitchen and service - Based on their examples and trial performance, would both chefs and front-of-house staff trust their calls?

Shows attention to food quality - Did they demonstrate genuine care about what leaves the pass, or did quality feel like a box-ticking exercise?

Interest in kitchen operations - Do they want to understand your specific operation, or are they just looking for any coordination role?

Positive attitude toward demanding role - Do they understand that the pass is relentless during service, and are they energised rather than daunted by that?

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for aboyeur success. Communication carries the highest weight because the role lives and dies by the aboyeur's ability to convey the right information to the right person at the right time.

Communication carries the highest weight because every aspect of the aboyeur role depends on it - calling orders, coordinating timing, managing quality sends-back, and bridging kitchen and front-of-house. Rate 1-5 based on interview responses and trial observation, then multiply by 0.35.

Organisation determines whether the aboyeur can manage the complexity of a full service without losing control. Rate 1-5 based on their described systems, trial performance, and ability to manage competing priorities, then multiply by 0.30.

Attention to detail drives quality control at the pass. An aboyeur who misses presentation issues or timing errors undermines the whole brigade's work. Rate 1-5 based on their quality-checking habits and specific examples, then multiply by 0.20.

Cultural fit affects whether the brigade will accept the aboyeur's authority and whether they'll stay in a demanding role. Rate 1-5 based on the cultural fit assessment indicators, then multiply by 0.15.

Add all weighted scores together for the final result. Maximum possible is 5.0.

Interpretation:

• 4.0 and above: Strong hire - offer position with confidence
• 3.5 to 3.9: Hire with development plan - good candidate who may need coaching on specific areas
• 3.0 to 3.4: Consider second interview - potential but significant questions remain about pass readiness
• Below 3.0: Do not proceed - significant concerns that training cannot address

Customisation tips:

• Fine dining operations might increase Attention to Detail to 0.25 and reduce Organisation to 0.25
• High-volume kitchens might increase Organisation to 0.35 and reduce Attention to Detail to 0.15
• Open kitchens might increase Communication to 0.40 and reduce Cultural Fit to 0.10

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional candidate with natural pass presence; move quickly before they accept elsewhere
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Solid choice who meets your coordination and communication requirements
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Potential but need more information, particularly around trial performance or specific competency areas
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Issues with communication clarity, organisation, or authority that probably can't be resolved quickly
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit for pass work; don't proceed regardless of hiring pressure

Additional Notes

Record any observations, concerns, or follow-up actions that don't fit elsewhere. This might include:

• Specific reference check questions to ask about their pass management
• Training needs if hired (e.g., adapting to your KDS system or plating standards)
• Availability constraints discussed, especially around peak service periods
• Notable strengths to leverage from day one
• Concerns to monitor during probation, particularly around authority and team dynamics

What's next

Once you've selected your aboyeur, proper onboarding is essential for retention and rapid effectiveness. See our guide on Aboyeur onboarding to ensure your new hire learns your service flow, builds relationships with the brigade, and starts commanding the pass confidently from their first week.