How to Use the Bar Supervisor Interview Template

Why structured bar supervisor interviews matter

Bar supervisor is the first management step for many bartenders, and it's where you find out whether someone can make the leap from doing the work to leading the work. A brilliant bartender who can't delegate, can't hold the team accountable, or crumbles under the pressure of running a Friday night service without backup is a costly mistake. You lose a good bartender and gain a bad supervisor.

This template assesses candidates across the five competencies that separate successful bar supervisors from those who struggle: shift leadership, technical bartending ability, team coordination, stock and cash accountability, and customer handling. The 45-minute format gives enough time to probe each area without dragging the process out, and the weighted scoring system ensures you're comparing candidates on what actually matters.

Structured interviews also protect you from hiring bias. Without a consistent framework, it's easy to favour the candidate who reminds you of yourself or who interviews confidently but can't actually run a shift. This template keeps the focus on evidence and behaviour.

Pre-Interview Preparation

Before the candidate arrives, work through this checklist to set yourself up for a productive interview.

Review candidate CV and bartending experience - Look specifically for progression from bartender to any supervisory responsibility. Note the types of venues they've worked in (high-volume nightclub, cocktail bar, hotel bar, pub) because each requires different supervisory skills. Check how long they stayed in each role - a bartender who moves every six months may not have had time to develop genuine leadership skills.

Prepare interview area - Choose somewhere away from the bar floor. Bar supervisors need to demonstrate communication skills, and that's hard to assess when a blender is running three metres away. If you're planning a practical trial later, confirm the bar is available.

Have scoring sheets and pen ready - Score as you go rather than trying to remember five answers and scores at the end. This is especially important for bar supervisor candidates because you're assessing a dual skillset (bartending and leadership) and it's easy to let strong performance in one area cloud your judgement of the other.

Ensure 45 minutes uninterrupted time - Tell your team you're unavailable. A bar supervisor candidate who sees you constantly interrupted will question whether management roles in your venue are respected.

Review bar shift requirements and team structure - Know what the role actually involves in your venue. How many staff on a busy night? What's the service style? What systems do they need to know? This helps you tailor follow-up questions.

Customisation tips:

• For cocktail bars, add "Review current cocktail menu and preparation standards"
• For high-volume venues, add "Note peak covers and average team size per shift"
• For hotel bars, add "Review room service and lobby bar responsibilities"
• For venues with food service, add "Note kitchen communication 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.

Supervisory Experience

Why this question matters:

Bar supervisor is fundamentally different from bartending. You need someone who can watch the whole bar operation while also being behind the bar themselves. A supervisor who gets tunnel vision making cocktails while three team members stand around without direction is worse than having no supervisor at all - at least then the bartenders know nobody's in charge and they need to self-manage.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific shift leadership responsibilities ("I ran Friday and Saturday closes with a team of four, responsible for cashing up and closing procedures")
• Gives examples of delegating tasks during service ("I'd assign one person to well drinks and speed rail, another to cocktails, and float between to fill gaps")
• Shows awareness of the difference between doing and leading ("The hardest part was stepping back from the bar to check on the floor, check wait times, and support the team rather than just serving customers myself")
• Mentions specific numbers - team size, covers, revenue targets - that demonstrate genuine accountability
• Describes handling situations where they had to direct a peer or more experienced bartender ("I had to ask a senior bartender to pick up the pace during service, which was uncomfortable but necessary")

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes bartending achievements but no actual supervisory examples - they may have had the title without the responsibility
• "I was basically already supervising anyway" without concrete evidence of what that looked like
• Cannot describe how they divided responsibilities during a shift
• Only talks about telling people what to do, not about supporting them or developing them
• Blames team failures on the team rather than accepting supervisory responsibility
• No awareness that supervising requires different skills than serving

Customisation tips:

• For candidates stepping up from bartender for the first time, ask about informal leadership - training new starters, running shifts when the supervisor called in sick
• For candidates from high-volume nightclubs, probe whether their experience translates to a more service-focused environment (or vice versa)
• For external hires, ask specifically about your bar's service style to assess transferability
• For promoted internal candidates, ask how they'd handle the dynamic of supervising former peers

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Strong shift leadership experience with specific examples of managing teams, delegating effectively, and taking accountability for shift outcomes
• 4 - Good: Solid supervisory experience with clear examples of leading others, though may lack breadth across different situations
• 3 - Average: Some team leading experience - may have stepped up informally or covered supervisor shifts, but limited regular responsibility
• 2 - Below Average: Limited leadership experience; mostly talks about their own bartending performance rather than leading others
• 1 - Poor: No supervisory experience and no evidence of informal leadership or readiness to step up

Bartending Skills

Why this question matters:

A bar supervisor who can't hold their own behind the bar loses credibility with their team instantly. Your bartenders won't respect direction from someone who can't make a decent Negroni or doesn't know the difference between a bourbon and a rye. Beyond credibility, supervisors need to step in during rushes, cover breaks, and train new starters - none of which is possible without solid technical skills.

What good answers look like:

• Demonstrates breadth of knowledge across spirits categories ("I know my way around classic cocktails, can work with most spirit categories, and I've done some training on wine and beer pairing too")
• Mentions specific techniques and why they matter ("Proper dilution makes a huge difference to a stirred drink - I always taste-test my Martinis to check the balance")
• Shows awareness of their own knowledge gaps and how they address them ("I'm strongest on classic cocktails and whiskey, but I've been building my tequila and mezcal knowledge through tastings and reading")
• Discusses how they keep skills current ("I follow industry trends, attend brand training sessions, and try to visit other bars to see what they're doing")
• Can talk about training others, not just their own skills ("I created a speed test for new bartenders covering our twenty most-ordered drinks")

Red flags to watch for:

• Claims expertise across everything without specifics - genuine bartenders know their weak spots
• Cannot name specific cocktails, techniques, or spirit categories when pressed
• Only mentions pouring pints and making simple mixed drinks in what should be a supervisor-level candidate
• Dismisses product knowledge as unimportant ("People just want their drink fast, they don't care what's in it")
• No interest in continuing to develop their own skills
• Cannot explain how they'd train a new bartender on drink standards

Customisation tips:

• For cocktail bars, dive deep into technique - ask about specific builds, garnishes, and how they'd approach creating a new menu
• For high-volume pubs, focus on speed, consistency, and cask ale knowledge
• For hotel bars, explore their knowledge of classic cocktails, table service, and premium spirit ranges
• For wine bars, assess their wine knowledge alongside cocktail skills
• For craft beer-focused venues, test their knowledge of styles, serving temperatures, and glassware

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Expert-level drink knowledge with breadth across categories; can demonstrate techniques and train others confidently
• 4 - Good: Strong bartending competence with good knowledge across core areas; capable of handling any standard request and most advanced ones
• 3 - Average: Adequate drink-making skills for a standard bar operation; knows the classics but limited depth on advanced techniques or product knowledge
• 2 - Below Average: Basic skills only; would struggle to make cocktails beyond the simple and well-known, limited product knowledge
• 1 - Poor: Insufficient bartending knowledge for a supervisory role; would lose credibility with the team

Team Coordination

Why this question matters:

A busy bar shift is controlled chaos, and the supervisor is the person who keeps it from tipping into actual chaos. When the queue is six deep, three cocktail tickets are waiting, and someone needs a toilet break, the supervisor must read the situation and make calls in real time. Poor coordination means longer wait times, stressed bartenders making mistakes, and customers walking out or complaining.

What good answers look like:

• Describes reading the room and adjusting on the fly ("When I see the queue building, I'll pull the barback onto simple serves and move my strongest cocktail maker to the station with the most tickets")
• Mentions pre-shift briefings or position assignments ("Before every shift I run a five-minute briefing - who's on what station, what the specials are, any bookings or events to be aware of")
• Shows awareness of individual team members' strengths ("I know which bartenders are fastest on cocktails and which are better at engaging customers at the bar, so I position accordingly")
• Gives a specific example of a challenging service and how they managed it ("We had a private function for 40 arrive at the same time as the bar was already full. I called in the off-duty barback, moved one bartender to serve the function exclusively, and covered the main bar myself")
• Discusses communication methods during busy periods ("I use a whiteboard behind the bar for real-time updates, and I call out changes to the team clearly rather than just hoping they notice")

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes doing everything themselves rather than coordinating others ("I just made sure I worked harder and faster")
• Cannot explain how they'd handle a situation where the bar is overwhelmed - no plan beyond "work harder"
• Only talks about telling people what to do, not about reading the situation and adapting
• No examples of pre-shift planning or preparation
• Blames bad service on the team rather than their own coordination ("If the bartenders were better, we wouldn't have had a problem")
• Cannot describe how they prioritise when multiple things need attention simultaneously

Customisation tips:

• For multi-bar venues, ask about coordinating across different bar areas
• For venues with table service, explore how they balance bar and floor service demands
• For late-night venues, ask about coordination during shift changeovers when energy levels dip
• For event-heavy venues, ask about switching between standard service and large group arrivals

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Expert at organising teams during busy periods; gives specific examples of reading situations, adapting plans, and keeping service flowing smoothly
• 4 - Good: Good shift coordination skills with clear examples of managing team positions and adapting to changing demands
• 3 - Average: Can manage basic shift coordination; understands the need for planning but limited examples of handling pressure situations
• 2 - Below Average: Struggles with multi-tasking and prioritisation; tends to default to doing the work themselves rather than coordinating
• 1 - Poor: Cannot coordinate a team effectively; no evidence of planning, delegation, or real-time adaptation

Stock and Cash Handling

Why this question matters:

Bar supervisors are the first line of defence against shrinkage, waste, and cash discrepancies. A bar that consistently loses 3-4% on spirits pour costs because the supervisor doesn't monitor free-pouring accuracy costs thousands over a year. Cash tills that are regularly out without investigation signal to the team that nobody's watching, which invites further losses - both deliberate and careless.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific systems they've used ("I did a line check every morning, counted the speed rail against the previous day's sales, and flagged any spirits that were down more than expected")
• Mentions cash handling routines ("I reconciled the till at end of every shift and was expected to be within £5 - I was usually within £2")
• Shows understanding of common shrinkage causes ("Over-pouring is the biggest issue I've seen, especially on busy nights when bartenders free-pour to save time. I introduced jigger use for premium spirits which cut our pour cost by 2%")
• Discusses how they've addressed discrepancies ("When I noticed our vodka usage was consistently higher than sales suggested, I tracked it over a week and found one bartender was giving away drinks to friends. I reported it to the manager with the evidence")
• Demonstrates proactive stock management ("I set up a par level system so we never ran out of key products but weren't over-ordering and tying up cash in stock")

Red flags to watch for:

• Dismissive about cash accuracy ("Tills are always a bit out, it's normal") - this signals they won't challenge discrepancies
• Cannot describe any stock control procedures they've used
• No awareness of common causes of shrinkage or how to identify them
• Claims they've never had a stock or cash discrepancy - either dishonest or never been given real responsibility
• Takes a purely punitive approach to mistakes ("If someone's till is out, they should pay the difference") rather than investigating root causes
• No understanding of the relationship between pour cost and profitability

Customisation tips:

• For cocktail bars with high-value ingredients, ask about cocktail costing and waste tracking
• For cash-heavy venues, probe their experience with large floats and end-of-night banking procedures
• For venues using stock management technology (Orderly, Beverage Metrics), ask about tech experience
• For bars that primarily do card transactions, shift focus to wastage and portion control rather than cash handling
• For venues with high-value wine and spirits, ask about cellar management and stock security

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Proven accuracy with stock and cash; can describe specific systems, has identified and resolved discrepancies, understands the financial impact of poor control
• 4 - Good: Reliable stock and cash handling with good examples of routine procedures and some experience addressing issues
• 3 - Average: Basic competence; follows procedures when they exist but limited experience creating systems or investigating problems
• 2 - Below Average: Some accuracy issues or limited experience; needs significant support to manage stock and cash effectively
• 1 - Poor: Cannot be trusted with cash or stock; no experience, no awareness, or a dismissive attitude toward accountability

Customer Service

Why this question matters:

Bar supervisors handle the complaints and situations that bartenders can't or shouldn't resolve. When a customer claims they've been overcharged, when someone's had too much to drink and needs cutting off, or when a group is becoming disruptive, the supervisor is the one who steps in. Getting this wrong creates liability issues, negative reviews, and potentially dangerous situations. Getting it right turns potential disasters into loyalty moments.

What good answers look like:

• Gives a specific complaint resolution example with a clear outcome ("A customer said their cocktail tasted wrong. Instead of arguing, I tasted it, agreed the balance was off, remade it myself, and explained what had happened. They appreciated the honesty and came back the following week")
• Describes handling intoxicated customers with confidence and care ("I've had to refuse service many times. I always take them aside rather than embarrassing them in front of their group, explain that I'm looking out for their wellbeing, and offer to call them a taxi")
• Shows awareness of licensing laws and responsible service ("I know that as the supervisor on duty, I'm personally responsible for serving intoxicated customers. I brief my team at the start of every shift on their obligation to flag anyone they're concerned about")
• Demonstrates de-escalation skills ("When a group started getting rowdy, I approached the person who seemed most reasonable rather than the loudest one, and asked them to help me keep things calm. It worked because they felt respected rather than threatened")
• Talks about proactive customer service, not just complaint handling ("I make a point of checking in with guests, remembering regulars' names and usual orders, and catching problems before they become complaints")

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes confrontational approaches to difficult customers ("I told them to leave or I'd call the police")
• Cannot give a specific example - only speaks in hypotheticals about what they "would" do
• No awareness of licensing responsibilities around serving intoxicated guests
• Takes complaints personally rather than professionally ("Customers are always trying it on")
• Relies entirely on security or management to handle difficult situations - a supervisor needs to be the first response
• Describes giving away free drinks as their primary complaint resolution tool without considering whether the complaint was valid

Customisation tips:

• For late-night venues, spend more time on handling intoxicated customers and de-escalation
• For premium venues, explore how they balance firm boundaries with maintaining an upscale atmosphere
• For venues with regulars, ask about building long-term customer relationships
• For venues with a door team, ask about how they coordinate with security
• For venues serving food, explore their approach to food-related complaints alongside drinks

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Expert at handling all customer situations; gives specific examples of complaint resolution, de-escalation, and proactive service; understands licensing responsibilities
• 4 - Good: Handles complaints professionally with good examples; confident in most difficult situations though may lack experience with the most challenging scenarios
• 3 - Average: Can manage basic customer issues; understands the importance of good service but limited evidence of handling truly difficult situations
• 2 - Below Average: Avoids difficult customer situations or handles them poorly; relies on others to resolve escalated issues
• 1 - Poor: Makes customer situations worse; confrontational, dismissive, or unable to handle any form of complaint or conflict

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

A bartender who interviews well as a supervisor may freeze when they actually need to coordinate a team while making drinks. The practical trial reveals whether they can genuinely operate at both levels simultaneously - leading the team while contributing behind the bar. Many supervisor candidates revert to "just bartending" under pressure because that's their comfort zone, and you need to see that before you hire.

What to observe:

Delegated tasks appropriately - Did they assign stations, allocate tasks, or did they try to do everything themselves? A supervisor who makes every drink personally isn't supervising. Watch whether they delegate based on team strengths or just randomly.

Maintained quality drink standards - When they did make drinks, were they consistent? Did they use jiggers or measured pours? Did they taste-check cocktails? Quality standards that slip when the supervisor is busy tell you those standards won't be maintained during real service.

Communicated clearly with team - Did they call out orders, acknowledge requests, and keep the team informed? Watch for clear, calm communication versus shouting, ignoring, or mumbling. The best supervisors maintain a running commentary that keeps everyone aware of what's happening.

Handled service pressure well - How did they react as things got busier? Did they stay calm and adapt, or did they become flustered and revert to just bartending? Watch their body language - tension, frustration, and panic are all visible even when someone is trying to hide them.

Maintained bar cleanliness and organisation - Did they clean as they went? Did they notice when the bar needed tidying and act on it, or did they leave a trail of mess? A supervisor who doesn't maintain standards during a trial won't maintain them during a real shift.

Setting up an effective trial:

• Schedule during a moderately busy service - not dead quiet, not the busiest night of the week
• Brief your team to work normally and respond naturally to the candidate's direction
• Give them a clear role: "You're running this section of the bar for the next 30 minutes"
• Don't hover - observe from a distance where you can see their interactions without influencing them
• Note specific moments, not general impressions - "At 8:15 they noticed the ice well was low and asked someone to refill it" is more useful than "they seemed organised"

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Strong leadership with excellent bar skills; delegated effectively, maintained quality, and kept the team coordinated throughout - a natural supervisor
• 4 - Strong: Good supervision and bartending; managed the dual role well with only minor moments of defaulting to bartender mode
• 3 - Adequate: Basic competence demonstrated; could supervise with development but showed tendencies to focus on bartending over leading
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with the dual role; either supervised but couldn't keep up behind the bar, or bartended well but forgot to lead
• 1 - Inadequate: Not suited for supervisor role; couldn't manage the balance between making drinks and leading the team

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond skills and experience, cultural fit determines whether a bar supervisor will stay and thrive in your team. Select all indicators that genuinely apply based on your observations throughout the interview and trial.

Shows natural leadership - Did they demonstrate confidence without arrogance? Do they seem like someone your bartenders would want to work under? Leadership at this level is about earning respect through competence and fairness, not through authority.

Demonstrates passion for drinks - Do they light up when talking about cocktails, spirits, or beer? A supervisor who's genuinely interested in the product will push standards higher and inspire the team. One who sees drinks as just a commodity won't drive quality.

Works well under pressure - Did the trial reveal someone who thrives when it gets busy, or someone who merely copes? The best bar supervisors find their groove during rushes rather than dreading them.

Shows attention to detail - Did they notice small things - a smudge on a glass, an incorrect garnish, a messy back bar? Supervisors who don't see these details won't address them in their team.

Interest in team development - Do they talk about wanting to help bartenders improve? A supervisor who sees team development as part of their role will build a stronger bar over time than one who just focuses on getting through the shift.

Positive about shift work - Bar supervisor roles involve weekends, late nights, and bank holidays. Candidates who are already reluctant about the hours will become a scheduling headache.

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for bar supervisor success. Leadership and bartending carry equal weight because this role demands both in equal measure - you can't compromise on either.

Leadership carries 30% of the total because a supervisor who can't lead isn't supervising. Rate 1-5 based on supervisory experience, team coordination answers, and trial observations of their ability to direct others. Multiply by 0.30.

Bartending also carries 30% because credibility and capability behind the bar are non-negotiable. Rate 1-5 based on their drinks knowledge, technical skills, and trial performance making drinks. Multiply by 0.30.

Customer service carries 25% because supervisors are the escalation point for difficult situations. Rate 1-5 based on their complaint handling examples, awareness of licensing responsibilities, and de-escalation approach. Multiply by 0.25.

Cultural fit carries 15% because it affects retention and team dynamics. Rate 1-5 based on the cultural fit assessment indicators and your overall impression of how they'd fit your team. 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 support in specific areas
• 3.0 to 3.4: Consider second interview - potential but significant questions remain
• Below 3.0: Do not proceed - significant concerns that training cannot address

Customisation tips:

• For cocktail-focused bars, consider increasing Bartending to 0.35 and reducing Customer Service to 0.20
• For high-volume late-night venues, consider increasing Customer Service to 0.30 and reducing Bartending to 0.25
• For venues with a strong training culture, you might reduce Bartending to 0.25 and increase Leadership to 0.35
• For small teams where chemistry matters most, increase Cultural Fit to 0.20 and reduce one other category by 0.05

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional candidate who demonstrated both leadership and bartending skills convincingly; move fast before they accept elsewhere
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Solid choice who meets your requirements and would strengthen your bar team
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Potential shown but need more information - perhaps strong in leadership but untested in your bar style, or vice versa
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Issues identified that probably can't be resolved through training; only reconsider if no other candidates
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit for the supervisory role; 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 previous employers about their supervisory performance
• Training needs if hired (cocktail knowledge, stock management systems, licensing training)
• Availability constraints or notice period discussed
• Notable strengths to leverage from day one
• Concerns to monitor during probation (reverting to bartender mode, confidence with team direction)

What's next

Once you've selected your bar supervisor, proper onboarding is essential for setting them up to lead effectively. See our guide on Bar Supervisor onboarding to ensure your new hire transitions from bartender to supervisor smoothly and starts running shifts with confidence from week one.