How to Use the Maitre d' Interview Template

Why structured maitre d' interviews matter

The maitre d' is the soul of the dining room. They set the tone the moment a guest walks through the door and maintain it throughout every course, every interaction, every evening. A great maitre d' makes guests feel that they're the most important people in the room. A mediocre one makes them feel processed. In fine and premium dining, this distinction directly affects whether guests return, whether they recommend you, and whether they'll pay the prices your menu demands.

This template assesses candidates across the five competencies that define maitre d' excellence: front of house leadership, the ability to build lasting guest relationships, commitment to uncompromising service standards, skill at developing a service team, and composure when handling problems. The 45-minute format provides enough depth to assess whether a candidate has the presence, skill, and instinct that this role demands.

Maitre d' candidates are typically experienced hospitality professionals who present themselves beautifully. That's precisely the problem - charm and polish are their stock in trade, so you need structured assessment to see past the performance to the substance beneath.

Pre-Interview Preparation

Before the candidate arrives, work through this checklist to ensure you're ready for a thorough assessment.

Review candidate CV and fine dining experience - Look for sustained tenure in premium or fine dining environments. Note the calibre of restaurants they've worked in - Michelin-starred, AA rosette, or comparable. Assess whether their experience matches the level of service your restaurant aspires to. A maitre d' from a high-end hotel restaurant faces different challenges than one from a small chef-led fine dining room.

Prepare interview area - This interview should reflect the standards you expect from the role. A polished, quiet space with proper water service signals that you understand the level at which this person operates. The environment is part of the assessment - watch whether they notice and respond to the setting.

Have scoring sheets and pen ready - Five questions plus a practical trial requires disciplined documentation. For a maitre d' role, also note intangible observations - their posture, eye contact, warmth, and the way they carry themselves through the interview space.

Ensure 45 minutes uninterrupted time - Tell your team you're unavailable. A maitre d' candidate will judge your operation's standards by how the interview itself is conducted.

Review restaurant service standards - Know your current service sequence, wine service expectations, and guest experience standards inside out. You need to assess whether the candidate can elevate what you have, not just maintain it.

Customisation tips:

• For Michelin-level restaurants, add "Review current Michelin criteria and guest feedback on service"
• For hotel fine dining, add "Understand the hotel's service philosophy and how the restaurant fits within it"
• For restaurants launching a fine dining concept, add "Prepare vision for service standards and guest experience"
• For restaurants with an established maitre d' culture, add "Note current team dynamics and service traditions to discuss"

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.

Front of House Leadership

Why this question matters:

A maitre d' commands the dining room. Not through authority or instruction, but through presence - the way they move through the space, the way the team responds to a glance, the way guests feel anchored by their calm confidence. This isn't something you can train quickly. It comes from deep experience leading floor teams in high-pressure, high-expectation environments where a single misstep ruins an evening worth hundreds of pounds per table.

What good answers look like:

• Describes running a dining room with specific scale and complexity ("I've led a team of twelve across an 80-cover fine dining room with a seven-course tasting menu, two private dining rooms, and a chef's table. Every element of service was coordinated to within minutes - the timing had to be precise because the kitchen needed each table moving together")
• Shows understanding of leading through presence rather than instruction ("During service, I rarely need to give verbal instructions. My team know the signals - a look toward a table means water needs topping, a nod toward the pass means food is ready to run. We developed this shorthand because fine dining demands subtlety. You can't shout instructions across a dining room where guests are paying £200 a head")
• Demonstrates the balance between front-of-house and back-of-house leadership ("I work closely with the head chef to choreograph each service. We do a joint briefing - I cover guest details, dietary requirements, and VIPs; they cover the menu, any changes, and kitchen timing. The front and back of house need to operate as one team, not two separate operations")
• Gives an example of handling a complex service ("We hosted a 30-cover private event alongside full restaurant service. I split the team, personally oversaw the private event, and kept contact with my senior waiter running the restaurant floor. The timing was challenging - the private group wanted speeches between courses, which threw our kitchen timing off. I negotiated adjustments with the chef in real time without the guests ever sensing a problem")
• Shows how they maintain authority while remaining warm ("Authority in fine dining doesn't come from being stern or distant. It comes from competence. My team follow my lead because they know I can do every job in the dining room - I've waited tables, worked the pass, managed the bar. They also know I'll protect them if something goes wrong")

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes leadership in casual or high-volume terms - the maitre d' role demands a different register
• Cannot describe the level of detail involved in running a fine dining service
• Leadership is described purely in operational terms with no mention of atmosphere, pacing, or guest experience
• No experience running a team above five or six people during service
• Cannot describe how they coordinate with the kitchen - a maitre d' who works in isolation from the back of house creates a fractured experience
• Describes a controlling or micromanaging style - fine dining teams need trust and autonomy within clear standards

Customisation tips:

• For Michelin-starred restaurants, probe their experience maintaining consistency at the level inspectors expect
• For hotel restaurants, explore how they manage the intersection of hotel guest expectations and restaurant standards
• For restaurants with sommelier service, ask about coordinating wine service within the broader dining experience
• For restaurants with open kitchens or chef's tables, discuss managing the guest experience when the kitchen is visible

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Extensive fine dining floor leadership with commanding presence; describes running complex services with precision, grace, and natural authority
• 4 - Good: Strong FOH management experience with clear evidence of leading at a high level; may lack the breadth or complexity of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Some floor management experience at a decent level; understands the role but limited evidence of genuine fine dining floor leadership
• 2 - Below Average: Limited leadership scope; describes managing a floor but without the sophistication or presence the maitre d' role demands
• 1 - Poor: No FOH leadership experience at the required level; cannot describe running a dining room with the precision and poise the role requires

Guest Relations

Why this question matters:

The maitre d' is the bridge between a restaurant and its most valuable guests. Regular guests who spend thousands annually, VIPs whose presence validates your restaurant, and new guests who could become either. The ability to build and maintain these relationships - remembering preferences, anticipating needs, making each guest feel uniquely valued - is what separates a maitre d' from a floor manager. This directly affects covers, average spend, and reputation.

What good answers look like:

• Describes building long-term guest relationships with specific examples ("I maintained a guest book with detailed notes on our top 50 regulars - their preferred tables, dietary restrictions, wine preferences, anniversary dates, even the names of their children. When Mr and Mrs Richardson arrived for their tenth anniversary, their favourite Champagne was already chilling at their usual table. They've been coming every month for six years")
• Shows proactive rather than reactive guest management ("I contact our key regular guests before major holidays to offer priority reservations. I also follow up personally after any visit where something wasn't perfect. Last month, I called a regular who'd had an unusually quiet evening - it turned out their son had just left for university and they weren't themselves. That follow-up meant more to them than any complimentary drink ever could")
• Demonstrates the art of reading guests ("A good maitre d' knows the difference between a couple celebrating and a couple in trouble before a word is said. Pace of conversation, body language, whether they're looking at each other or the room. I adjust the service rhythm accordingly - a celebration gets more attention and energy; a quieter dinner gets more space and discretion")
• Discusses handling VIPs and public figures ("I've hosted numerous high-profile guests. Discretion is paramount - they choose our restaurant partly because we don't react to their fame. I brief the team beforehand: no photos, no staring, treat them exactly like any other valued guest while ensuring their privacy. The best compliment I ever received from a public figure was 'this is the only restaurant where I feel normal'")
• Shows the commercial impact of their guest relations ("Over three years, I built our regulars programme from 30 to 120 active guests. Those regulars now account for 40% of our covers. The average spend of a managed regular is £40 higher than a new guest because they trust our recommendations and order with confidence")

Red flags to watch for:

• Guest relations described purely as greeting people warmly - this is entry-level hospitality, not maitre d' craft
• Cannot describe a specific guest relationship they've built and maintained over time
• Name-drops famous guests to impress rather than describing how they managed the relationship
• No system for tracking guest preferences - relies on memory alone, which fails at scale
• Describes guest relations as a front-of-house task rather than a strategic business function
• No understanding of the commercial value of strong guest relationships

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants building a regulars programme from scratch, explore their experience creating guest relationship systems
• For hotel restaurants, ask about managing the dual identity of hotel guests and external diners
• For restaurants with a strong wine programme, discuss how they use wine knowledge to deepen guest relationships
• For restaurants with high-profile clientele, probe their approach to discretion, security, and privacy management

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Expert at building lasting guest relationships; describes specific long-term relationships, systems for tracking preferences, and measurable commercial impact
• 4 - Good: Strong guest engagement skills with clear examples of personalised service and relationship building; may lack the depth or scale of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Adequate guest handling with some examples of going beyond basic service; limited evidence of strategic guest relationship management
• 2 - Below Average: Limited guest focus; describes greeting and seating guests but without the relationship depth the role demands
• 1 - Poor: Cannot build guest relationships; no examples of personalised service, preference tracking, or genuine guest connection

Service Standards

Why this question matters:

A maitre d' defines what excellence looks like in the dining room. Every movement, every interaction, every detail is a reflection of their standards - from the angle of a wine glass to the timing of a course, from the crumb of bread on a tablecloth to the warmth of a farewell. When standards are genuinely embedded, every guest receives the same exceptional experience regardless of which waiter serves them or how busy the night is. When they're not, the restaurant's reputation becomes unpredictable.

What good answers look like:

• Describes standards with granular specificity ("My service sequence has forty-seven touchpoints from greeting to farewell. Each one has a defined standard. For example, water should be poured within ninety seconds of seating, the glass held at the base, filled to two-thirds, and the bottle returned to the table with the label facing the host. It sounds obsessive, but consistency in these details is what creates the feeling of effortless service")
• Shows how they embed standards in the team ("I train each new team member through shadowing, then supervised service, then independent service with observation. At each stage, I use a detailed checklist that covers everything from posture to plate clearing technique. Standards aren't a document - they're practised until they're automatic")
• Gives an example of maintaining standards under pressure ("During a 90-cover Saturday with two private tables and a visiting food critic, our senior waiter went home ill mid-service. I immediately redistributed the sections, personally took over the critic's table, and maintained pre-service quality throughout. The team knew I'd accept nothing less, and they delivered")
• Discusses how they handle the balance between rigidity and warmth ("Standards aren't about being robotic. The sequence is the skeleton - what brings it to life is genuine warmth, reading the guest, and knowing when to adjust. A couple on a first date needs more space and less formality than a group of friends celebrating. The standard is the framework; the art is in the adaptation")
• Mentions continuous improvement ("I do a silent walkthrough every evening before service, checking every table against our standard - cutlery alignment, glass polish, napkin fold, candle position. I also debrief with the team after every service: what went well, what we need to tighten. Standards aren't maintained through inspection alone - they're maintained through culture")

Red flags to watch for:

• Standards described in vague terms ("We always aim for excellence") - a maitre d' should be able to describe their standards in precise detail
• Describes standards as someone else's responsibility to maintain ("The head waiter handles the detail")
• Cannot explain their service sequence or what distinguishes their standards from a good restaurant manager's
• Standards only apply during busy services or when certain guests are present - true standards are consistent
• No mention of how they train or embed standards in the team - suggests standards depend on their personal presence
• Confuses formality with quality - stiffness and coldness dressed up as "high standards"

Customisation tips:

• For Michelin-aspiring restaurants, focus on the level of detail that inspectors look for
• For modern fine dining that balances formality with warmth, discuss their approach to relaxed excellence
• For restaurants with wine service expectations, explore their sommelier service standards
• For restaurants transitioning to higher service levels, discuss their experience elevating standards in an existing team

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Exceptional standards with systematic approach; describes precise service touchpoints, embedding through training, and maintaining under pressure with continuous improvement
• 4 - Good: High service standards maintained with clear examples of attention to detail and team training; may lack the obsessive precision of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Adequate attention to standards with some relevant examples; understands the importance but limited evidence of the granularity fine dining demands
• 2 - Below Average: Inconsistent standards; describes general service quality but without the specificity or systematic approach the role requires
• 1 - Poor: No focus on service quality at the maitre d' level; cannot describe detailed standards or how to maintain them

Team Development

Why this question matters:

A maitre d' shapes the service team in their image. The warmth of a greeting, the precision of plate placement, the instinct for when to approach a table and when to hold back - these are taught, not inherited. A maitre d' who can't develop their team will either do everything themselves (unsustainable) or accept lower standards (reputation-damaging). The best maitre d's create teams where every waiter delivers service that feels like the maitre d' served them personally.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a comprehensive development approach ("I run a four-week induction for every new team member. Week one is observation only - they shadow me and our strongest waiters. Week two is guided service with me nearby. Week three is supervised independent service. Week four is full service with detailed feedback sessions. Nobody touches a guest's table until I'm confident they'll represent our standards")
• Gives a specific example of developing someone's service instinct ("One of my waiters was technically perfect but lacked warmth - she did everything correctly but guests didn't connect with her. I worked with her on what I call 'the two-second pause' - that brief moment after approaching a table where you make eye contact, smile genuinely, and read the guest's energy before speaking. Within a month, her tables' satisfaction scores improved noticeably and guests started requesting her by name")
• Shows they develop the whole person, not just technical skills ("My senior waiter wanted to become a maitre d' himself. I gave him responsibility for managing pre-service briefings, then private dining coordination, then full section leadership on quieter evenings. I also encouraged him to study wine formally and visit other restaurants with me to observe different service styles. He's now maitre d' at a one-Michelin-star restaurant")
• Discusses how they maintain team motivation in a demanding environment ("Fine dining service is physically and mentally demanding. I invest in my team's wellbeing as much as their skills. We have a team meal before every service where we sit together properly, I rotate rest days so nobody works more than five consecutive days, and I organise quarterly team visits to other restaurants so they stay inspired by what's possible")
• Mentions developing wine and food knowledge, not just service skills ("A maitre d's team needs to be knowledgeable, not just skilled. I run weekly tasting sessions covering our wine list, and I coordinate with the head chef on monthly menu knowledge sessions. When a waiter can speak about a dish's ingredients, provenance, and suggested pairings with genuine confidence, it transforms the guest experience")

Red flags to watch for:

• Development described only in terms of corrections - "when they do something wrong, I fix it" - no proactive investment
• Cannot name a specific individual they've developed or describe the process
• Training focused exclusively on procedures with no mention of hospitality instinct, warmth, or guest reading
• "I only hire experienced people so I don't need to train much" - this avoids the development question entirely
• No mention of ongoing development for experienced team members - development doesn't stop at competence
• Describes a team that depends entirely on them - true development creates capability that persists in their absence

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants building a new service team, focus on their experience hiring and developing from scratch
• For restaurants with experienced teams needing elevation, discuss how they'd raise standards without alienating established staff
• For restaurants with sommelier positions, explore how they develop wine service alongside food service
• For restaurants with high staff turnover, discuss their approach to rapid onboarding without compromising standards

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Strong mentor who elevates team standards; describes comprehensive development programmes, specific individuals developed, and creating a team that maintains excellence independently
• 4 - Good: Good at developing service skills with clear examples of training and individual growth; may lack the systematic depth of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Some training experience with basic competence in developing waiters; limited evidence of the depth or sophistication fine dining team development demands
• 2 - Below Average: Limited development focus; manages the team's performance but doesn't actively invest in their growth
• 1 - Poor: Does not develop staff; no evidence of training, mentoring, or building team capability

Problem Resolution

Why this question matters:

In fine dining, problems are felt more acutely because expectations are higher. A wrong dish in a casual restaurant is an inconvenience; in a fine dining room, it disrupts a carefully choreographed experience that guests are paying a premium for. A maitre d' must handle these moments with such grace that the recovery itself becomes part of the exceptional experience. The best maitre d's turn a disaster into a story guests tell positively - "You won't believe how they handled it."

What good answers look like:

• Describes a recovery that elevated the experience ("A guest discovered a hair in their starter. Before they could even flag it, I noticed their expression change. I was at the table within seconds, removed the plate with a calm apology, offered to personally oversee their replacement dish, and sent over an amuse-bouche from the chef with a handwritten note while they waited. By the time their starter arrived, the mood had shifted from disappointed to impressed. They told their friends about the recovery, and three of those friends booked within the month")
• Shows they maintain composure and dignity under pressure ("A guest once accused my team of stealing from their coat. I handled it calmly - checked with the team, reviewed the cloakroom procedure, and offered to check CCTV. It turned out the item had slipped into their coat lining. Throughout, I never became defensive or made the guest feel foolish for the accusation. I treated it as a legitimate concern deserving a thorough response")
• Demonstrates diplomatic handling of kitchen issues ("When the kitchen sent out a dish that wasn't to standard, I intercepted it before it reached the table. I spoke to the head chef directly, explained why I'd pulled it, and waited for a replacement. This takes confidence - not every maitre d' is willing to push back on the kitchen. But my guests' experience is my responsibility, and serving a substandard dish isn't an option")
• Shows post-problem follow-up ("After any significant service issue, I follow up the next day with a personal call or handwritten note. For the couple whose anniversary dinner was disrupted by a noise complaint from an adjacent table, I called them, apologised, and offered to host their next dinner in our private dining room at no extra charge. They've become one of our most loyal regular couples")
• Discusses prevention alongside recovery ("The best problem resolution is prevention. I do a risk assessment before every service - checking the reservation book for potential conflicts (competing parties, known difficult guests, tight turnarounds on high-value tables), briefing the team on VIP requirements, and confirming every dietary restriction with the kitchen personally")

Red flags to watch for:

• Recovery described as giving things away for free without any elegance or personalisation
• Cannot describe handling a situation that genuinely tested them - only routine issues
• Becomes visibly uncomfortable when discussing difficult guest interactions
• Blames the kitchen, the team, or external factors rather than owning the guest experience
• No evidence of following up after a problem - handles the moment but doesn't close the loop
• Describes confrontational or defensive behaviour when guests are unhappy

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants with extensive wine programmes, discuss handling errors with expensive bottles or wine service complaints
• For restaurants with tasting menus, explore how they manage problems that affect the sequence and pacing
• For restaurants with high-profile guests, ask about handling complaints from guests whose dissatisfaction could become publicly visible
• For restaurants with private dining, discuss managing problems during events where the stakes are particularly high

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Expert at turning negative situations into positive experiences; describes specific, elegant recoveries with clear outcomes; demonstrates prevention, composure, and follow-through
• 4 - Good: Handles difficult situations gracefully with good examples of professional resolution; may lack the artistry or boldness of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Can resolve basic issues; understands the importance of graceful recovery but limited evidence of handling genuinely challenging situations at the fine dining level
• 2 - Below Average: Avoids difficult situations or handles them without the finesse the role demands
• 1 - Poor: Makes situations worse; lacks the composure, empathy, or skill to handle problems at the level guests expect

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

A maitre d's true quality is visible the moment they step onto a restaurant floor. The way they move, the way they scan the room, the way guests respond to their presence - these things cannot be faked in an interview. The practical trial reveals whether their floor presence is genuine and whether they can operate at the level your restaurant demands.

What to observe:

Demonstrated commanding floor presence - Did they walk into the dining room and immediately look like they belonged in charge? Watch for confident, graceful movement, natural positioning where they can see the whole room, and the kind of presence that guests notice without being able to explain why.

Engaged warmly with guests - Did they approach guest interactions with genuine warmth and ease? Watch for natural smile, appropriate eye contact, and the ability to make guests feel important without being obsequious.

Directed team effectively - Did they communicate with the floor team using the subtle, non-verbal signals that fine dining demands? Watch for efficiency and discretion in their team communication.

Maintained overview of service - Did they keep awareness of the whole dining room rather than getting absorbed in one interaction? Watch for periodic scanning, awareness of service pacing across tables, and anticipation of needs before they arise.

Showed attention to detail - Did they notice things? A slightly crooked napkin, a water glass that needs refilling, a candle that's burning unevenly. The maitre d' who sees these details is the one who maintains your standards.

Setting up an effective trial:

• Schedule during a service where the candidate can observe and then participate in floor management
• Brief your team to be receptive and natural
• If possible, have them manage a section for 30-45 minutes with real guests
• Watch from a distance - their behaviour changes when they know you're looking
• Afterwards, ask them to assess the service they observed - their observations reveal their standards

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Natural maitre d' presence and skill; commanded the floor, engaged guests beautifully, directed the team with subtlety, and demonstrated the standards and instinct the role demands
• 4 - Strong: Good floor leadership demonstrated; comfortable at this level with only minor moments where they fell below the maitre d' standard
• 3 - Adequate: Shows potential at this level; some good instincts but inconsistent - moments of maitre d' quality alongside moments of standard floor management
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with floor management at the maitre d' level; operated more as a restaurant supervisor than a maitre d'
• 1 - Inadequate: Not suited for the maitre d' role; lacked the presence, guest instinct, or service sophistication the position demands

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond skills and experience, cultural fit determines whether a maitre d' will enhance or dilute your restaurant's identity. At this level, the person becomes inseparable from the brand. Select all indicators that genuinely apply.

Shows passion for hospitality - Does this person genuinely love making people feel special? A maitre d' without passion creates polished but hollow service. One with genuine warmth creates magic.

Demonstrates elegance and poise - Throughout the interview and trial, did they carry themselves with the grace the role demands? This isn't about formality - it's about the natural composure and dignity that fine dining guests expect from the person leading the room.

Leads by example - Based on everything you've observed, do they practise what they preach? A maitre d' who demands standards they don't personally maintain creates resentment.

Shows guest-first mindset - In every answer, every example, every observation during the trial - was the guest at the centre? A maitre d' who talks more about operations than guests has their priorities wrong.

Interest in service excellence - Do they stay current with service trends, visit other restaurants, and push their own standards forward? A maitre d' who's stopped striving has started declining.

Positive about demanding standards - Were they energised by the conversation about standards, or did they seem exhausted by it? The right candidate sees exacting standards as the privilege of fine dining, not its burden.

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for maitre d' success. Guest relations carries the highest weight because the maitre d' is, above all else, the guardian of the guest experience.

Guest relations carries 35% because the maitre d's ability to build and maintain guest relationships directly drives covers, reputation, and revenue. Rate 1-5 based on guest relations answers and trial observations of their guest interactions. Multiply by 0.35.

Leadership carries 30% because the maitre d' sets the standard for the entire service team. Rate 1-5 based on leadership answers, team development approach, and trial observations. Multiply by 0.30.

Service standards carries 20% because consistency of excellence defines the dining room experience. Rate 1-5 based on service standards answers and the level of detail they demonstrated. Multiply by 0.20.

Cultural fit carries 15% because at this level, the maitre d' embodies the restaurant's identity. Rate 1-5 based on the cultural fit indicators and your assessment of how they'd represent your brand. 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 - strong candidate who may need time to learn your specific standards and guest base
• 3.0 to 3.4: Consider second interview - potential but significant questions remain about their suitability for your specific operation
• Below 3.0: Do not proceed - the maitre d' role demands excellence, and significant gaps cannot be closed through training

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants where the maitre d' manages a large team, increase Leadership to 0.35 and reduce Service Standards to 0.15
• For guest-experience-driven operations where the maitre d' is the primary guest relationship owner, increase Guest Relations to 0.40 and reduce Cultural Fit to 0.10
• For new restaurants building their identity, increase Cultural Fit to 0.20 and reduce Guest Relations to 0.30
• For restaurants with a strong existing team, reduce Leadership to 0.25 and increase Service Standards to 0.25

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional candidate with genuine maitre d' presence, guest instinct, and leadership capability; move fast before another restaurant secures them
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Strong choice who would elevate your dining room and bring the sophistication your restaurant needs
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Significant potential but questions remain - perhaps strong on guest relations but untested with your service style, or excellent technically but uncertain cultural alignment
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Gaps identified in presence, guest instinct, or standards that training cannot close at this level
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit for the maitre d' 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 (guest feedback, team retention, service standards, relationship with kitchen)
• Wine knowledge level and whether sommelier training is needed
• Their vision for the dining room if hired - does it align with yours?
• Notable observations from the trial about their presence, instinct, and attention to detail
• Concerns to explore in a second interview (stamina for the role, approach to kitchen relationship, management of personal guest relationships when moving to a new restaurant)

What's next

Once you've selected your maitre d', proper onboarding is essential for establishing their authority and embedding them in the restaurant's identity. See our guide on Maitre d' onboarding to ensure your new maitre d' takes command of the dining room, builds the right guest relationships, and sets the standard for service excellence from day one.