How to Use the Restaurant Manager Interview Template

Why structured restaurant manager interviews matter

A restaurant manager owns the entire operation. They're accountable for the P&L, the team, the guest experience, the brand reputation, and every decision that happens within their four walls. A wrong hire at this level doesn't just cost you a salary - it costs you staff who leave under poor management, guests who stop returning, standards that erode over months, and financial performance that slides before anyone notices.

This template assesses candidates across the four competencies that define restaurant management at the senior level: leadership philosophy and execution, financial management capability, team development track record, and composure during crisis. The 60-minute format provides the depth needed for a senior hire where getting it right or wrong has six-figure consequences.

Restaurant manager candidates are experienced interviewers themselves. They know the right things to say, they're personable, and they've been through this process from both sides. That's exactly why structure matters - it pushes past polished answers to evidence, specifics, and real outcomes.

Pre-Interview Preparation

Before the candidate arrives, work through this checklist to ensure you're prepared for a thorough senior-level assessment.

Review candidate's CV, references and application - At this level, look for sustained management tenure (two years minimum in a comparable role), progressive responsibility, and measurable achievements. Note the types and sizes of restaurants they've managed. Look for evidence of P&L ownership, not just operational management. Note who their references are - former employers, area managers, or head office contacts tell you more than character references.

Prepare interview room - This is a senior management interview. The environment should reflect the professionalism of the role. A quiet, private room with water, a comfortable temperature, and no interruptions. The candidate is assessing you and your operation as much as you're assessing them.

Have scoring sheets and job specification ready - Four questions plus a practical trial needs methodical documentation. Have the job specification available so you can reference specific role requirements during the interview.

Review current P&L and operational priorities - Know your numbers inside out. What's your current food cost? Labour percentage? Average spend per head? Revenue trend? What are your biggest operational challenges? You can't assess a candidate's financial competence if you don't know your own benchmarks, and a strong candidate will ask about these themselves.

Ensure 60 minutes uninterrupted time - Non-negotiable. If you can't protect an hour for a GM-level hire, reschedule. Strong candidates will judge your operation by how the interview is conducted.

Customisation tips:

• For independent restaurants, add "Clarify ownership expectations and reporting structure"
• For group-operated sites, add "Review brand standards, KPIs, and regional targets"
• For restaurants in turnaround situations, add "Prepare honest summary of current challenges and performance gap"
• For new openings, add "Prepare vision document and development timeline"

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.

Leadership Philosophy

Why this question matters:

A restaurant manager's leadership style shapes everything - the culture of the team, the retention rate, the service standards, the kitchen relationship, even the energy guests feel when they walk in. A manager who leads through fear creates a compliant but disengaged team. One who's too hands-off creates chaos. You need someone with a deliberate, articulated approach to leadership that they've refined through experience, not someone winging it based on their mood.

What good answers look like:

• Articulates a clear, developed leadership philosophy ("I believe in what I call 'visible leadership.' I'm on the floor more than I'm in the office because the team need to see me doing the work alongside them, not hiding behind reports. But I'm also deliberate about creating structures - development plans, clear standards, regular feedback - so the team knows what's expected and feels supported in achieving it")
• Gives concrete examples of how their philosophy translates to practice ("I hold weekly one-to-one meetings with every manager and supervisor. Those meetings follow a consistent structure: wins from the week, challenges, development goals, and one thing I can do better to support them. It takes time, but it means I catch problems early and my team feels heard")
• Shows how their approach has evolved ("Early in my management career, I thought being respected meant being strict. I was consistent, but I wasn't empathetic. When I lost three good team members in two months, I realised that competence without care doesn't build loyalty. Now I lead with high standards and high support in equal measure")
• Demonstrates awareness of different leadership needs ("My head chef needs autonomy and trust - I give him clear targets and let him run his kitchen. My newest supervisor needs much more structure and regular check-ins. My duty manager falls somewhere in between. A single leadership style doesn't work when your team has people at every level of experience")
• Mentions building leadership in others ("My job isn't just to lead the team - it's to develop the next generation of leaders. I've had two assistant managers promoted to GM in the last three years because I invested in giving them increasing responsibility, challenging them to think beyond their comfort zone, and coaching them through mistakes rather than punishing them")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot articulate a leadership philosophy beyond platitudes ("I lead by example" without evidence of what that means in practice)
• Describes leadership entirely in terms of control ("I make sure everyone knows who's in charge")
• Uses "I" exclusively when describing team achievements - every success is theirs, no mention of the team's contribution
• Leadership style hasn't changed or developed over their career - suggests they're not reflective
• Describes previous teams performing well but can't connect that to specific things they did as a leader
• Badmouths former teams or employers - a manager who blames their people reveals their own failure to lead them

Customisation tips:

• For independent restaurants with owner involvement, explore how they navigate the owner-manager dynamic
• For group-operated restaurants, ask about leading within a brand framework while maintaining their personal leadership identity
• For restaurants needing cultural change, probe their experience transforming team culture, not just maintaining it
• For restaurants with large teams (30+), discuss how they scale their leadership across multiple management layers

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Inspiring leader with clear development philosophy; articulates a deliberate approach refined through experience; specific examples of developing others and adapting their style to different situations
• 4 - Good: Strong leadership skills with team focus; clear examples of leading effectively but may lack the depth or adaptability of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Adequate leadership experience with some self-awareness; has managed teams but leadership approach isn't yet deliberate or articulated
• 2 - Below Average: Underdeveloped leadership style; manages by default rather than design, limited self-awareness about their impact on teams
• 1 - Poor: No clear leadership approach; describes management as task coordination, shows little understanding of what leadership means at this level

Financial Management

Why this question matters:

A restaurant manager who can't read, interpret, and act on financial data isn't managing the business - they're managing the dining room. The P&L is the scoreboard for everything they do: labour scheduling, menu pricing, cost control, revenue growth, and operational efficiency all show up in the numbers. A manager who treats financials as someone else's responsibility will burn through margin without knowing it.

What good answers look like:

• Speaks fluently about their financial results ("I managed a £1.8 million turnover restaurant with a 32% food cost target, 28% labour target, and 15% EBITDA target. Over two years I improved food cost by 2 points through menu engineering and waste reduction, maintained labour within target by implementing a demand-based scheduling model, and grew revenue 12% through average spend initiatives")
• Demonstrates strategic pricing and menu thinking ("I worked with the head chef to redesign our menu around margin contribution rather than food cost percentage alone. Some high food-cost dishes actually contributed more in absolute terms. We introduced a seasonal tasting menu at £65 that had a 68% GP and drove covers on quieter midweek nights")
• Shows they manage costs without undermining quality ("When I needed to reduce labour costs, I didn't just cut hours. I analysed our service flow, identified where we were over-staffed during transitions between services, and redesigned the shift patterns. We cut weekly labour by twelve hours without affecting service quality because the cuts came from periods where we had more staff than guests")
• Understands the full P&L, not just cost lines ("Revenue management matters as much as cost control. I introduced a pre-theatre menu that filled the restaurant between 5:30 and 7pm - a period we were previously empty. That added £3,000 a week in revenue with minimal incremental cost because the team was already there")
• Can discuss cash flow and working capital ("I manage my ordering to optimise cash flow. I negotiated 30-day terms with our wine supplier instead of paying on delivery, which freed up £8,000 in working capital. I also implemented a waste-first ordering system where we use perishable stock before ordering new")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot discuss their restaurant's financials with confidence - vague about GP, labour percentage, or revenue figures
• Focuses exclusively on cost cutting with no mention of revenue growth or guest spend optimisation
• "The area manager or accountant handles the numbers" - at this level, you are the numbers person
• No experience with a full P&L - only managed individual cost lines or operational budgets
• Claims financial improvements but can't explain the methodology or the actual numbers
• Describes financial management as a reporting exercise rather than a strategic tool

Customisation tips:

• For independent restaurants, explore their experience managing a full P&L without group support or benchmarking
• For group-operated sites, ask about working within financial targets while managing local market conditions
• For premium restaurants with high average spend, discuss managing the balance between guest experience investment and profitability
• For restaurants in financial difficulty, probe their experience with turnaround situations and tough financial decisions

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Deep P&L understanding with proven results; can discuss food cost, labour, revenue growth, and profitability with specific numbers and methodologies
• 4 - Good: Strong grasp of cost management with some commercial achievement; may lack the strategic depth on revenue growth or the full P&L breadth of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Basic financial understanding with awareness of key metrics; limited experience actively managing a P&L or driving financial improvement
• 2 - Below Average: Limited financial experience; aware of the concepts but hasn't been accountable for financial outcomes
• 1 - Poor: No financial management experience; cannot discuss P&L concepts or restaurant economics

Team Development

Why this question matters:

At the restaurant manager level, team development isn't just about training individual staff members - it's about building an entire management structure that can operate independently. The true test of a restaurant manager isn't how the restaurant runs when they're there, but how it runs when they're not. A manager who develops strong supervisors, a capable assistant manager, and a motivated floor team creates a sustainable operation. One who hoards knowledge and responsibility creates a restaurant that collapses on their day off.

What good answers look like:

• Describes developing management pipeline, not just individual contributors ("I've promoted three team members to supervisor, two supervisors to assistant manager, and one AM to their own GM role. Each one had a personalised development plan that I reviewed monthly. My current AM is six months from being ready for their own site")
• Shows a systematic approach to development ("I use a skills matrix for every team member showing where they are now and where they need to be. We set quarterly development goals, and I coach managers on how to run these conversations with their direct reports. Development isn't a once-a-year conversation - it's built into how we operate")
• Gives a specific example of developing someone through a challenge ("My newest supervisor was struggling with giving feedback - she'd either avoid it entirely or deliver it too bluntly. I sat in on some of her team conversations (with her agreement), gave her detailed feedback afterwards, and we practised using real scenarios. Within two months, she was handling performance conversations independently and well")
• Demonstrates investment in people beyond what benefits the restaurant immediately ("I supported one of my best waiters to start his sommelier qualification even though it didn't directly benefit our wine programme at the time. He felt invested in, stayed with us for an extra two years, and eventually brought that knowledge back to our floor team")
• Shows accountability for team turnover and engagement ("When my kitchen team's turnover hit 40% in one quarter, I didn't blame the industry. I conducted exit interviews, identified that our shift patterns were burning people out, and worked with the head chef to restructure the rota. Turnover dropped to 15% the following quarter")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot name specific individuals they've developed or describe the process in detail
• Team development approach is purely training-focused with no mention of coaching, mentoring, or career progression
• "My door is always open" as their development strategy - passive availability isn't active development
• High team turnover in their previous role with no acknowledgment of their responsibility
• Describes developing people in transactional terms ("I train them so they can run shifts for me") rather than genuine investment in their growth
• No evidence of creating management capability beneath them - everything depends on their personal presence

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants needing to rebuild their management team, probe their experience hiring and developing managers, not just floor staff
• For restaurants with diverse teams, explore their approach to developing people from different backgrounds and experience levels
• For group restaurants with structured development programmes, ask how they use those frameworks versus their own initiatives
• For restaurants struggling with retention, focus specifically on their retention strategies and results

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Creates development culture with clear progression paths; can describe specific individuals developed through to promotion; builds management capability that sustains performance in their absence
• 4 - Good: Invests in team growth and training with good examples; may lack the systematic approach or management pipeline development of the top tier
• 3 - Average: Some development initiatives; understands the importance of development but limited evidence of sustained, systematic investment in people
• 2 - Below Average: Limited focus on development; develops people reactively or only when business need demands it
• 1 - Poor: No evidence of team development; team depends entirely on their presence, no progression stories or capability building

Crisis Management

Why this question matters:

Every restaurant manager will face a genuine crisis. A kitchen fire during service. A walk-out by three team members on a bank holiday. A food poisoning accusation. A serious accident. How they respond in these moments - when there's no playbook, no time to consult, and the pressure is extreme - reveals their true management capability. A manager who stays calm, thinks clearly, and acts decisively protects the business, the team, and the guests. One who panics, freezes, or makes rash decisions turns a crisis into a catastrophe.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a genuinely high-stakes situation with clear actions ("We had a gas leak reported by the kitchen at 7:30pm on a fully booked Friday. I immediately evacuated the restaurant - 65 guests and 18 staff. I called the gas emergency line, accounted for all staff, set up a triage area for guests who needed to settle bills, and personally apologised to every table. We re-booked everyone for the following week with a complimentary bottle of wine. The gas engineer cleared us by 9pm but I kept the restaurant closed for the evening because I didn't trust rushing back into service")
• Shows their crisis framework ("My crisis response follows three principles: safety first, communicate honestly, and think about tomorrow not just tonight. In any emergency, I make sure no one is in danger, I tell the truth to whoever needs to know, and I make decisions that protect the business long-term even if they cost money tonight")
• Demonstrates learning and system improvement ("After a near-miss with a severe allergen incident where a guest received a dish containing their stated allergen, I overhauled our entire allergen communication system. We introduced new allergen cards, retrained every team member, changed the kitchen's verification process, and I personally checked every service for a month. The system has caught three potential incidents since then")
• Shows composure under extreme pressure ("When two team members got into a physical altercation in the kitchen during service, I separated them immediately, sent one home with a manager and kept one in the staff room, then went straight back to the pass to keep service running. I dealt with the HR and disciplinary aspects the next day. The guests never knew anything had happened")
• Balances immediate response with post-crisis management ("The crisis response itself is only half the job. After a serious complaint from a guest who claimed they found glass in their food, I handled the immediate situation at the table, secured the food for investigation, filed the incident report, contacted our insurers, and called the guest the next day. The investigation showed it was a fragment from a broken glass during washing-up. We changed our glass-handling procedures as a result")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot describe a genuine crisis they've managed - only routine problems dressed up as crises
• Describes panicking or being overwhelmed in their example - some stress is normal, but a GM must stay functional
• Crisis response focused entirely on protecting the business with no mention of people (staff or guests)
• No learning or system improvement after the crisis - just went back to normal
• Delegates everything upward during a crisis ("I called the area manager immediately") - a GM must handle the immediate response
• Describes making impulsive decisions during a crisis that made things worse, without acknowledging the learning

Customisation tips:

• For restaurants in older buildings, discuss their experience with building-related emergencies (flooding, power failure, structural issues)
• For restaurants with complex menus and allergen risk, focus on food safety crises and their prevention approach
• For restaurants with licensed premises, explore their experience handling licensing incidents
• For multi-site candidates, ask about managing a crisis remotely when it happens at a site they're not physically at

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Calm, decisive leadership under pressure; describes genuine high-stakes situations handled with clear thinking, appropriate priorities, and system improvement afterwards
• 4 - Good: Handles crises effectively with good examples; stays composed and makes sound decisions, though may lack examples of the most extreme scenarios
• 3 - Average: Manages routine challenges; has some relevant experience but limited evidence of handling a genuine crisis with full GM accountability
• 2 - Below Average: Struggles under pressure; examples suggest they become reactive, impulsive, or overly reliant on others during high-stress situations
• 1 - Poor: Cannot handle operational crises; describes freezing, panicking, or making situations worse

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

Restaurant manager candidates are skilled interviewers - polished, confident, and persuasive. The practical trial strips away the performance and shows you how they actually operate in a restaurant. Do they see what needs to be done? Do they engage with staff and guests naturally? Do they identify problems and opportunities? A 30-minute walk-through of your restaurant with a strong GM candidate should feel like a business consultation.

What to observe:

Demonstrated leadership presence on floor - Did they walk through the restaurant like a manager or like a visitor? Watch for natural confidence, appropriate engagement with staff, and the body language of someone who belongs in charge.

Engaged appropriately with team members - Did they introduce themselves, ask names, and show genuine interest in the team? Watch for warmth and respect alongside authority. A GM who ignores junior staff during a trial will ignore them on day one.

Showed guest-focused mindset - Did they observe guest behaviour, notice service moments (good or bad), and comment on the guest experience? A commercially-minded GM sees every table as revenue, every guest interaction as reputation.

Identified operational improvements - During the walk-through or trial, did they spot things they'd change? This isn't criticism - it's evidence they're already thinking like your next GM. Listen for observations about service flow, presentation standards, waste, or team deployment.

Communicated professionally at all levels - Watch how they speak to barbacks, waiters, chefs, and managers. A GM who's charming with you but dismissive to junior staff reveals their true leadership style.

Setting up an effective trial:

• A floor walk-through where they observe a service period and share their assessment afterwards
• Or: running a pre-service meeting with your management team, then observing them during service
• Brief your team to be cooperative and natural
• If possible, introduce a scenario (a mock guest complaint, a service challenge) to see them in action
• Note their observations afterwards - what did they see, what would they change, what impressed them?

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Natural GM capability demonstrated; identified multiple improvement opportunities, engaged effectively at all levels, and showed the commercial and operational eye of an experienced restaurant manager
• 4 - Strong: Good management presence with strong observations and professional interactions; comfortable in the GM role with only minor gaps
• 3 - Adequate: Shows potential with development; some good management instincts but lacked the depth, confidence, or breadth of observation expected at GM level
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with management demands; operated more as an AM or supervisor than a GM during the trial
• 1 - Inadequate: Not suited for GM role; lacked presence, commercial awareness, or the ability to operate at this level

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond skills and experience, cultural fit determines whether a restaurant manager will build the culture you want. At this level, cultural alignment affects not just the team, but the brand, the guest experience, and the business's reputation. Select all indicators that genuinely apply.

Shows passion for hospitality excellence - Does this person love the industry at a deep level? A GM who's passionate about hospitality creates energy, drives standards, and inspires their team. One who's just collecting a salary creates a flat, uninspired operation.

Demonstrates commercial mindset - Do they naturally think about the business? Did they ask about your revenue, costs, or growth plans? A commercially-minded GM sees opportunities, not just problems.

Takes ownership of outcomes - Throughout the interview, did they own their results - good and bad? A GM who takes ownership of failures as well as successes builds a culture of accountability.

Invests in people development - Did they talk about their people with pride? A GM who develops their team creates sustainability. One who hoards talent creates dependency.

Interest in brand and standards - Do they care about what your restaurant stands for? A GM who connects with your brand will protect and strengthen it. One who doesn't will gradually dilute it.

Positive about accountability - Were they comfortable discussing being held accountable for the P&L, the team, and the guest experience? GMs who welcome accountability tend to be your best performers.

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for restaurant manager success. Leadership carries the highest individual weight because everything flows from how the GM leads.

Leadership carries 30% because the GM sets the culture, the standards, and the pace. Rate 1-5 based on leadership philosophy answers, team development approach, and trial observations. Multiply by 0.30.

Financial acumen carries 25% because a GM who doesn't understand the P&L can't run the business. Rate 1-5 based on financial management answers and their commercial awareness during the trial. Multiply by 0.25.

Team development carries 25% because sustainable restaurant performance depends on the team the GM builds. Rate 1-5 based on team development answers and evidence of building management capability. Multiply by 0.25.

Cultural fit carries 20% - higher than other roles because at GM level, the person defines the culture. Rate 1-5 based on the cultural fit indicators and your assessment of brand alignment. Multiply by 0.20.

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 support in one area (often financial or team development)
• 3.0 to 3.4: Consider second interview - potential but significant questions remain about their readiness for full GM accountability
• Below 3.0: Do not proceed - significant concerns that onboarding cannot address at this level

Customisation tips:

• For financially struggling restaurants, increase Financial Acumen to 0.30 and reduce Cultural Fit to 0.15
• For restaurants needing cultural transformation, increase Cultural Fit to 0.25 and reduce Financial Acumen to 0.20
• For restaurants with strong back-office support, reduce Financial Acumen to 0.20 and increase Team Development to 0.30
• For new openings where team building is critical, increase Team Development to 0.30 and reduce Financial Acumen to 0.20

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional candidate with proven GM capability; demonstrated leadership depth, financial competence, and team development track record. Move fast before they accept elsewhere
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Strong choice who would lead your restaurant effectively and deliver results across people, guests, and profit
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Significant potential but questions remain - perhaps strong commercially but untested with large teams, or excellent with people but light on financials. A second conversation could clarify
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Gaps identified in leadership depth, financial understanding, or crisis capability that are unlikely to close through onboarding at this level
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit for the GM role; don't proceed regardless of hiring pressure or urgency

Additional Notes

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

• Specific reference check questions (P&L results, team retention, crisis handling, relationship with ownership or area management)
• Salary expectations, bonus structure discussions, and notice period
• Their vision for the restaurant if hired - does it align with yours?
• Notable commercial ideas or observations from the trial
• Concerns to explore in a second interview or during probation
• Specific areas where they'd need support from you or the wider business

What's next

Once you've selected your restaurant manager, proper onboarding is essential for setting them up to take full ownership. See our guide on Restaurant Manager onboarding to ensure your new GM takes command of the operation, builds the right relationships, and starts delivering results from month one.