How to Use the Executive Chef Performance Review Template
Recording your performance reviews in Pilla means every assessment, objective, and development conversation is captured in one place. Instead of paper forms that get filed and forgotten, you build a continuous record that connects to one-to-one notes, tracks progress against objectives, and gives both you and your executive chef a clear reference point. When strategic decisions or compensation discussions come up, the evidence is already documented.
Key Takeaways
- Metrics to Review checklist ensures you gather group food cost, site consistency, head chef retention, and guest satisfaction (food) data before writing anything
- Previous Objectives Review documents what was achieved, partially achieved, not achieved, or blocked since the last review
- Technical Competencies assessment covers multi-site oversight, brand consistency, head chef development, strategic planning, and supplier management with Exceeds/Meets/Below descriptors
- Behavioural Competencies assessment covers leadership, strategic thinking, communication, and delegation
- Compliance and Standards confirms EHO ratings, food safety systems, staff welfare, and documentation
- Key Achievements and Development Areas use specific evidence, dates, and measurable outcomes
- Objectives for Next Period sets SMART targets covering operational performance and career development
- Overall Assessment selects Exceeds, Meets, or Below expectations as a holistic rating
- Meeting Notes and Review Summary capture the review conversation and agreed next steps
Article Content
Why structured executive chef performance reviews matter
Your executive chef shapes the culinary identity of your entire operation. A well-written performance review helps them understand how their strategic leadership, financial stewardship, and creative direction are assessed — and connects their performance to the business outcomes that matter to ownership and the board. Unlike operational check-ins, a formal review evaluates patterns, impact, and trajectory across the full period.
This template walks you through a complete performance review: gathering evidence, assessing competencies, documenting achievements and development areas, setting objectives, and recording the review meeting. Each section is designed to produce a fair, evidence-based assessment that both you and your executive chef can reference throughout the next review period.
Metrics to Review
Metrics to Review
Review objectives set at the last performance review. Note which were achieved, partially achieved, not achieved, or blocked.
Before writing any assessment, gather data on each of these metrics. Tick each one as you collect the information. Having the numbers in front of you prevents vague feedback and ensures your assessment is grounded in evidence.
Group food cost — Pull food cost data across all sites for the full review period. Compare actual against target and track the trend. A group food cost that's consistently on or below target indicates strong financial management. One that's creeping up may indicate supply chain issues, head chef discipline, or portion control problems. Break it down by site to see where performance is strong and where it's slipping.
Site consistency — Assess food quality consistency across all sites. Use mystery diner reports, guest feedback scores, and your own observations. An executive chef's primary value is ensuring that guests receive the same standard regardless of which site they visit. If one site is excellent and another is mediocre, that's a consistency failure regardless of the top-line average.
Head chef retention — Track head chef turnover during the review period. An executive chef who retains strong head chefs is developing talent, managing relationships, and creating an environment where senior chefs want to stay. High turnover suggests leadership problems, unrealistic expectations, or insufficient development support.
Guest satisfaction (food) — Review food-related guest satisfaction data across all sites. This includes review scores, post-visit surveys, complaint data, and social media mentions. Look at the trend over the review period and compare between sites. Guest satisfaction for food is the ultimate measure of whether the executive chef's vision is translating into the guest experience.
Customisation tips:
- For groups with significantly different concepts across sites, weight site consistency differently — a fine dining site and a casual concept shouldn't be identical, but both should hit their own standard
- For new executive chefs, add a baseline quality assessment — what was the food quality when they started versus now?
- For groups expanding into new sites, add new-site launch quality as a specific metric
- Don't evaluate food cost in isolation — a low food cost with declining satisfaction scores is a warning sign, not a success
Previous Objectives Review
Review objectives set at the last performance review. Note which were achieved, partially achieved, not achieved, or blocked.
Pull up the objectives from the last performance review. For each one, document whether it was:
- Achieved: They met or exceeded the target — note the evidence
- Partially achieved: Progress made but not complete — note what was done and what remains
- Not achieved: No meaningful progress — understand why before judging
- Blocked: External factors prevented progress — capex not approved, headcount frozen, site openings delayed
Be honest about blocked objectives. If you promised equipment investment that the board declined, or committed to headcount that finance froze, that's not their failure. Acknowledging organisational gaps builds trust and makes the review feel fair.
If this is their first review and no previous objectives exist, note that and use this section to document the baseline you're measuring from going forward.
Technical Competencies
Technical Competencies
Record your rating and evidence for each technical competency. Use specific examples and data.
Assess each competency based on observed behaviour over the full review period — not just the last two weeks. Tick each competency as you assess it.
| Competency | Exceeds expectations | Meets expectations | Below expectations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multi-site oversight | Maintains exceptional food quality across all sites, visits are strategic and impactful, sites perform equally well in their absence | Keeps adequate oversight of all sites, addresses quality issues when identified, maintains reasonable presence | Quality varies significantly between sites, some sites receive insufficient attention, absence leads to noticeable quality drops |
| Brand consistency | Food at every site is unmistakably from the same brand, maintains standards without stifling individual site character | Maintains reasonable consistency across sites, addresses major deviations, brand identity is recognisable | Significant inconsistency between sites, guests experience noticeably different standards, brand identity is fragmented |
| Head chef development | Actively develops head chefs into future leaders, provides structured mentoring, creates clear progression pathways, retains top talent | Supports head chefs adequately, provides feedback and guidance, maintains reasonable retention | Head chefs feel unsupported or micromanaged, high turnover, development is ad hoc or absent |
| Strategic planning | Drives culinary strategy proactively, anticipates market trends, aligns menu development with business goals, contributes to board-level discussions | Plans menus and operations adequately, responds to strategic direction, contributes to business planning | Reactive rather than strategic, menus stagnate, doesn't connect food direction to business goals |
| Supplier management | Negotiates excellent group-level deals, cultivates strategic partnerships, drives quality and cost improvements through supply chain | Manages suppliers adequately, maintains reliable supply, addresses issues as they arise | Supplier relationships are neglected, costs are higher than necessary, quality inconsistencies in supply |
Avoiding common rating errors:
- Recency bias: Check your notes from six months ago. Did they execute a brilliant menu launch that's now overshadowed by a recent food cost overrun?
- Halo effect: Exceptional creative talent doesn't mean exceptional financial management. Rate each competency separately.
- Central tendency: Not everyone "meets expectations." If they're outstanding at head chef development, say so. If their multi-site oversight is weak, say that too.
Customisation tips:
- For groups with diverse concepts, add concept differentiation as a competency — maintaining distinct culinary identities across different brands
- For groups in rapid expansion, weight new site launch capability more heavily
- For executive chefs who also handle group purchasing, add procurement strategy as a separate competency
Record your rating and evidence for each technical competency. Use specific examples and data.
For each competency, record your rating (Exceeds, Meets, or Below) with specific evidence. Use dates, numbers, and examples rather than general impressions.
Example phrases:
"[Name] reduced group food cost from 32% to 29.5% during the review period while maintaining guest satisfaction scores across all five sites — representing approximately [amount] in annual savings."
"[Name]'s multi-site oversight is inconsistent — Site A and Site C received regular visits and maintained high standards, while Site B was visited only twice in three months and quality declined noticeably."
"[Name] developed two head chefs to the point where they successfully opened new sites independently — one on 1st March and another on 15th May — with both sites achieving 4+ food ratings within their first month."
"[Name]'s strategic planning has been reactive rather than proactive during the review period — the spring menu change was three weeks late and didn't reflect current market trends or seasonal availability."
Behavioural Competencies
Behavioural Competencies
Record your rating and evidence for each behavioural competency. Use specific examples.
Assess each behavioural competency across the full review period.
| Competency | Exceeds expectations | Meets expectations | Below expectations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership | Inspires head chefs and brigade, creates a culture of excellence and development, addresses issues directly and fairly, leads by example | Manages head chefs competently, maintains reasonable team morale, handles standard management situations | Leadership is inconsistent, head chefs feel unsupported or micromanaged, avoids difficult conversations |
| Strategic thinking | Thinks beyond day-to-day operations, anticipates challenges, connects culinary decisions to business outcomes, contributes valuable insight at board level | Understands the business context, plans adequately, makes reasonable strategic connections | Focuses exclusively on operations, doesn't contribute to strategic discussions, misses opportunities |
| Communication | Communicates brilliantly at all levels — from commis to board; written reports are clear and useful; manages expectations proactively | Communicates adequately, keeps relevant parties informed, handles standard reporting | Poor communication between sites, board reports are late or incomplete, head chefs feel uninformed |
| Delegation | Empowers head chefs with appropriate authority, trusts their decisions, focuses their own time on strategic value-add | Delegates standard tasks appropriately, maintains reasonable balance between hands-on and strategic | Micromanages head chefs, can't let go of operational details, creates bottlenecks, or delegates everything and disengages |
Record your rating and evidence for each behavioural competency. Use specific examples.
Record your rating and evidence for each behavioural competency using specific examples.
Example phrases:
"[Name] successfully navigated the departure of Site C's head chef by stepping in personally for two weeks while recruiting and onboarding a replacement — maintaining food quality throughout and mentoring the new hire to full effectiveness within a month."
"[Name]'s communication with the board has improved significantly — quarterly food reports are now data-rich, actionable, and delivered on time, compared to ad hoc updates at the start of the review period."
"[Name] tends to micromanage Site A's head chef, which is undermining their confidence and development — three separate conversations with the head chef during the period revealed frustration at insufficient autonomy."
Compliance and Standards
Compliance and Standards
Record any compliance concerns, training needs, or positive observations.
Confirm each compliance area has been assessed. Any gaps must be addressed immediately — compliance is pass/fail, not a development area to work on gradually.
EHO ratings — What are the food hygiene ratings across all sites? Have any sites been inspected during the review period, and what were the results? An executive chef is ultimately responsible for food safety across the group. Any rating below 5 requires an immediate action plan. Track whether previous EHO actions have been resolved.
Food safety systems — Are HACCP plans current and being followed across all sites? Are temperature checks, cleaning schedules, and food safety documentation complete and accurate? Is there a consistent food safety culture, or do standards vary between sites? The executive chef should be auditing these systems regularly, not just relying on head chefs.
Staff welfare — Are working hours reasonable across all sites? Are break times being observed? Is the kitchen environment safe — proper ventilation, equipment maintenance, PPE availability? The executive chef sets the culture around staff welfare, and their standards cascade through every kitchen.
Documentation — Are supplier agreements, allergen matrices, recipe specifications, and training records current and complete across all sites? Good documentation protects the business legally and operationally. An executive chef who neglects documentation creates risk that may not surface until something goes wrong.
Record any compliance concerns, training needs, or positive observations.
Record any compliance concerns, training gaps, or positive observations. If any area is below standard, document the required action and timeline for resolution. Note any compliance training completed or audits conducted during the review period.
Key Achievements
Document 3-5 specific achievements with evidence, dates, and measurable outcomes.
Document 3-5 specific achievements with evidence, dates, and measurable outcomes. Achievements should be things that went beyond basic job requirements — moments where this executive chef created particular strategic value.
How to write strong achievement statements:
- Be specific: dates, numbers, sites, outcomes
- Show impact: financial value, quality improvement, talent developed, problems solved
- Use their contribution, not the team's: what did they do?
Example phrases:
"[Name] reduced group food cost from 32% to 29.5% during the review period, representing approximately [amount] in annual savings, through supplier renegotiation and menu engineering across all sites."
"[Name] developed and launched two new site openings — [Site D] on 1st March and [Site E] on 15th May — both achieving 4+ star food ratings and hitting food cost targets within their first month of trading."
"[Name] redesigned the spring/summer menu across all sites, increasing average food satisfaction scores from 4.2 to 4.6 and driving a 12% increase in dessert covers through a reimagined pastry section."
"[Name] retained all five head chefs during the review period — the first full review period with zero head chef turnover in the group's history."
"[Name] negotiated a group-wide supply agreement with [supplier] that reduced protein costs by 8% while improving quality consistency across all sites."
Customisation tips:
- For executive chefs managing expansion, new site launches are significant achievements worth detailed documentation
- For executive chefs who inherited underperforming operations, acknowledge the turnaround trajectory even if absolute numbers aren't yet outstanding
- Quantify financial impact wherever possible — boards respond to numbers
Development Areas
Document 2-3 development areas with specific evidence and improvement actions.
Document 2-3 development areas with specific evidence. Each development area should link to a concrete improvement action — not just a label.
How to write constructive development feedback:
- Focus on behaviour and outcomes, not personality
- Use specific evidence: dates, observations, data
- Connect each area to an action or opportunity
- Be direct but fair — vague feedback helps nobody
Example phrases:
"[Name]'s multi-site oversight is uneven — Site B received significantly less attention during the review period, with only two visits in three months, and food quality declined accordingly."
"[Name] needs to strengthen their contribution to commercial discussions — board meeting participation has been limited to operational updates rather than strategic food-related insights."
"[Name]'s head chef development programme lacks structure — while individual mentoring is strong, there's no documented development pathway, making it difficult to assess readiness for new site openings."
"[Name]'s relationship with the Site A GM has created friction that's affecting operational coordination — food cost disagreements have escalated rather than being resolved collaboratively."
"[Name]'s documentation standards have slipped — allergen matrices at two sites were found to be out of date during EHO preparation, suggesting insufficient quality assurance across the group."
Objectives for Next Period
Write SMART objectives for the next review period. Include both operational targets and development goals.
Set 3-5 SMART objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) that connect to both the development areas above and their strategic interests.
Operational target examples:
"Maintain group food cost at or below 30% across all sites for the full review period, with no individual site exceeding 32%."
"Achieve food satisfaction scores of 4.5/5 or above across all sites by end of Q2, with a maximum variance of 0.3 between the highest and lowest performing site."
"Retain all head chefs during the review period, with each head chef having a documented development plan reviewed quarterly."
Development goal examples:
"Develop and present a 12-month culinary strategy to the board by end of Q1, covering menu direction, supplier strategy, and talent pipeline."
"Implement a structured head chef development programme by end of March, with documented competency frameworks and quarterly progression reviews."
"Complete a formal financial management course by end of June to strengthen commercial contribution at board level."
Connecting objectives to career progression:
| Current role | Typical next step | What to assess |
|---|---|---|
| Executive Chef | Culinary Director / Operations Director / Own venture | Strategic vision, commercial acumen, multi-brand capability, board-level communication, industry influence |
If they want to grow within the group, include multi-brand or group-level strategy objectives. If they're considering their own venture, discuss succession timelines honestly. Set targets that are ambitious but realistic — if current group food cost is 31%, achieving 29% in one period requires specific actions, not just aspiration.
Overall Assessment
Select the overall performance rating based on the full assessment.
Record the discussion from the review meeting, including their response and any context they provide.
Select the overall performance rating based on the full assessment. This is a holistic judgement, not a simple average of individual competency ratings.
Exceeds expectations — Consistently performs above the standard required at executive chef level. Demonstrates strategic leadership, generates measurable financial value, develops strong head chefs, and maintains exceptional food quality across all sites. This executive chef is a genuine competitive advantage for the group.
Meets expectations — Reliably performs the role to the required standard. Manages food quality and costs adequately across sites, maintains reasonable head chef relationships, and contributes positively to the business. Development areas exist but don't undermine overall effectiveness. This is solid, dependable performance at executive level.
Below expectations — Performance falls short of the required standard in one or more significant areas. Development areas are affecting food quality, financial performance, team retention, or strategic direction. Improvement is needed with clear support and timelines.
Be honest. Rating everyone as "Meets expectations" helps nobody. If they're exceptional, recognise it — especially with compensation and authority. If they're struggling, name it — with the support plan to address it and a clear timeline for improvement.
Meeting Notes
Record the discussion from the review meeting, including their response and any context they provide.
Schedule at least 60 minutes for the review conversation — 45 for discussion, 15 for buffer. Meet in a private, comfortable setting away from any kitchen or operational environment.
How to conduct the meeting:
Give them the written review to read for 10-15 minutes. Don't hover — get them a drink and let them absorb it privately. When they've read it, ask: "What are your thoughts? Does this feel fair?" Then listen. Don't defend immediately — understand their perspective first.
If they raise valid points, amend the document. If you noted "Site B received insufficient attention" but they explain they were managing a critical head chef departure at Site C that consumed their time, that context matters — add it. If you disagree, explain your reasoning calmly with data.
This is a conversation between senior professionals. Respect their expertise, acknowledge the complexity of the role, and treat disagreements as discussions rather than corrections.
What to record: Their response to each section, any context they provided that changes your assessment, points of agreement and disagreement, and their reaction to the objectives set.
Review Summary
Summarise agreed actions, amendments made during the meeting, and next steps.
Summarise the agreed outcome: amendments made during the meeting, final objectives confirmed, next steps, and when objective check-ins will happen.
Both parties should sign and date the final document. Give them a copy. The signature means "I have read and understood this review" — not necessarily "I agree with everything."
Follow-through matters: Schedule brief objective check-ins in your regular one-to-ones. "How's the head chef development programme coming together?" and "I noticed Site B's food cost is trending down — what changed?" keep objectives alive rather than letting them gather dust until the next formal review.
Be transparent about how this review connects to compensation, equity, and strategic decisions. If performance reviews influence bonus structures, equity participation, or operational scope, say so — now, not at the next review. An executive chef who understands the link between their performance and their rewards stays motivated and aligned.
What's next
Performance reviews are most effective when they connect to ongoing one-to-one conversations. The evidence you need for a fair review should already exist in your one-to-one notes.
- Read our Executive Chef one-to-one guide for how to run the strategic conversations that feed into this review
- Check out our Executive Chef onboarding guide if you're reviewing someone still in their first 90 days
- See our Executive Chef interview questions for hiring the right person in the first place