How to Use the Waiter Interview Template

Why structured waiter interviews matter

Waiters are your restaurant's face. They're the person who greets a table, reads the room, handles a complaint about a steak, and decides whether a guest leaves wanting to come back or wanting to leave a bad review. A skilled waiter increases average spend through confident recommendations, turns first-time visitors into regulars through genuine warmth, and keeps service running smoothly when the kitchen is in the weeds. A poor hire loses you money through slow table turns, botched orders, and mishandled complaints that escalate onto review sites.

This template ensures you assess every candidate consistently across the competencies that predict waiter success: service experience, guest relations, complaint handling, multitasking under pressure, and menu knowledge. The 45-minute format includes time for both interview questions and a practical service trial, which is essential because many candidates present well in conversation but fall apart when they're carrying three plates and a table's trying to get their attention.

Using the same questions and scoring criteria for every candidate also protects you legally by demonstrating fair, non-discriminatory hiring practices. The weighted scoring system lets you adjust priorities for your specific operation - fine dining will weight guest relations differently than a high-volume brasserie.

Pre-Interview Preparation

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

Review candidate CV and service experience - Look for the types of restaurants they've worked in, the covers they've handled, and the length of each role. Note whether they've worked front-of-house exclusively or whether they have broader hospitality experience. Flag any frequent job changes or gaps for discussion.

Prepare interview area in dining room - Conduct the interview in the dining room rather than a back office. This lets the candidate see the environment they'd be working in and gives you a chance to observe how comfortable they are in the space. It also makes the transition to a practical trial more natural.

Have scoring sheets and pen ready - Document responses as they happen. When you're interviewing multiple candidates across a week, the details that distinguish a strong candidate from an average one fade quickly without notes.

Ensure 45 minutes uninterrupted time - The interview portion takes roughly 25 minutes, with 20 minutes for the practical service trial. Brief your team that you're unavailable and ensure someone else is managing the floor.

Review current menu and service standards - Refresh yourself on today's specials, allergen information, and wine list highlights. You need to assess whether the candidate can meet your specific standards, not generic ones.

Prepare role-play scenarios - Have two or three realistic scenarios ready: a complaint about food, a request for recommendations, and a table that needs managing (e.g., a couple celebrating an anniversary, a business lunch). These reveal more than standard questions.

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, add "Review silver service requirements and wine service protocols"
• For high-volume casual dining, add "Set up section assignment for practical trial"
• For restaurants with extensive wine lists, add "Prepare wine knowledge assessment"
• For restaurants with open kitchens, add "Review kitchen communication protocols"

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.

Service Experience

Why this question matters:

Restaurant service experience isn't uniform. A waiter from a 30-cover neighbourhood bistro operates completely differently from someone who's worked a 200-cover chain restaurant. Understanding where a candidate has worked, what volume they've managed, and how they've progressed tells you whether they'll adapt to your operation quickly or need extensive retraining. It also reveals whether they see waiting as a career or a stopgap - candidates who've invested in their development tend to stay longer and perform better.

What good answers look like:

• Names specific restaurants and describes what made each operation different ("At [restaurant], it was a 60-cover fine dining room with a seven-course tasting menu. I managed four tables and was responsible for wine service. At [restaurant], it was casual Italian doing 300 covers on a Saturday with a 15-minute table turn target")
• Describes how their skills developed over time ("I started as a runner, then moved to a section of three tables, and eventually managed the busiest section on weekend nights")
• Shows awareness that different restaurants require different approaches
• Mentions specific skills beyond order-taking - wine service, allergen management, upselling, handling VIPs
• Discusses what they enjoyed and what challenged them with genuine reflection
• Demonstrates an understanding of the commercial side of service (table turns, average spend, covers per hour)

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot describe specific restaurants or their responsibilities beyond "I took orders and served food"
• Claims fine dining experience but can't describe silver service or wine presentation
• Short stints at multiple restaurants with no progression or explanation
• Dismissive about casual dining experience ("It was just a chain, nothing special")
• Only talks about tips or pay rather than the work itself
• Blames kitchen, management, or colleagues for every negative experience

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining: Probe their experience with tasting menus, wine pairing, and high-value guest management
• For casual dining: Focus on speed, section management, and handling high volume
• For hotel restaurants: Ask about working within a larger hotel operation and managing room guests
• For independent restaurants: Explore their comfort with varied responsibilities beyond table service

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Extensive relevant restaurant experience with clear progression; can articulate specific skills developed and demonstrates understanding of different service environments
• 4 - Good: Solid service experience across relevant restaurants; shows development and can describe specific responsibilities
• 3 - Average: Some restaurant experience, possibly limited to one type of operation; understands the basics but lacks breadth or depth
• 2 - Below Average: Limited service experience; may have worked in hospitality but with minimal table service responsibility
• 1 - Poor: No service experience and limited understanding of what the role involves

Guest Relations

Why this question matters:

Guest relations is where waiters create value that goes beyond food delivery. A waiter who reads the table correctly - knowing when to be attentive and when to give space, when to recommend and when to let guests browse, when to check in and when to hold back - creates an experience that justifies your prices and generates return visits. Poor guest relations costs you directly: guests who feel ignored don't order dessert or a second bottle, and guests who feel hassled don't come back.

What good answers look like:

• Describes reading different table dynamics ("A couple on a date wants minimal interruption and romantic atmosphere. A business lunch needs efficient service and discreet timing. A family with kids needs speed, patience, and practical solutions like high chairs ready before they ask")
• Gives specific examples of creating memorable experiences ("I once noticed a couple's anniversary card on the table. Without being asked, I arranged a complimentary dessert with a candle and wrote a congratulations note. They came back monthly after that")
• Shows understanding that the greeting sets the tone for the entire experience
• Mentions anticipating needs rather than just responding to requests ("I check water levels, bread baskets, and condiments during natural passes rather than waiting to be flagged down")
• Demonstrates awareness that different guests want different levels of interaction
• Talks about building rapport without being intrusive

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes a one-size-fits-all approach to guest interaction
• Cannot give specific examples of creating positive guest experiences
• Uses scripted language rather than describing genuine interactions ("I always say 'How is everything?' at the three-minute check")
• Shows no awareness of reading table dynamics or body language
• Focuses only on upselling rather than guest satisfaction
• Gets defensive when discussing guests who were difficult or unhappy
• Describes guest relations as a task rather than the core of the role

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining: Probe their comfort with high-net-worth guests, formal address, and discreet attentiveness
• For casual dining: Focus on warmth, efficiency, and managing family groups
• For hotel restaurants: Ask about managing hotel guests who expect recognition and personalised service
• For destination restaurants: Explore their ability to create a special experience for guests who've travelled specifically for your restaurant

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Natural warmth and hospitality instincts with specific, compelling examples of reading tables, anticipating needs, and creating memorable experiences
• 4 - Good: Friendly and professional manner with clear examples of positive guest interactions and awareness of different guest needs
• 3 - Average: Basic guest service approach; polite and adequate but limited evidence of reading the room or creating standout moments
• 2 - Below Average: Somewhat cold or mechanical approach; treats all tables the same regardless of context
• 1 - Poor: Poor guest interaction skills; uncomfortable with guests or dismissive of the relationship aspect of service

Handling Complaints

Why this question matters:

Every restaurant receives complaints. What matters is how they're handled. A waiter who can acknowledge a guest's frustration, take ownership, resolve the issue promptly, and recover the experience turns a potential one-star review into a loyal customer. A waiter who gets defensive, blames the kitchen, makes excuses, or escalates every issue to a manager wastes management time and loses guests permanently. Complaint handling is also a window into how a candidate deals with pressure and criticism.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a specific complaint situation with a clear resolution ("A guest's steak was overcooked. I apologised immediately, didn't argue about the cooking, removed the plate and told the kitchen. I offered them a starter on the house while they waited for the replacement, and checked back after the new steak arrived to make sure it was right")
• Shows understanding of the LAST framework (Listen, Apologise, Solve, Thank) or similar approach
• Demonstrates ownership rather than blame-shifting ("It doesn't matter whose fault it is - the guest is sitting in front of me, and their experience is my responsibility")
• Mentions knowing their authority level - what they can resolve themselves versus what needs a manager
• Describes following up after the resolution to ensure the guest is satisfied
• Shows awareness that how you handle a complaint matters more than the complaint itself

Red flags to watch for:

• Immediately says "I'd get the manager" without attempting to resolve anything themselves
• Describes getting personally upset or defensive when receiving complaints
• Blames the kitchen, other staff, or the guest for every situation
• Cannot describe a specific complaint they've handled - only gives hypothetical answers
• Views complaints as personal attacks rather than opportunities to recover service
• Dismisses the importance of certain types of complaints ("Some people just complain about everything")
• No awareness of when to offer compensation and when a simple apology suffices

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining: Focus on discretion, maintaining composure with demanding guests, and the higher stakes of complaint recovery
• For casual dining: Ask about handling complaints at volume - multiple issues during a single service
• For restaurants with online review presence: Explore how they handle guests who threaten to leave bad reviews
• For restaurants with specific dietary requirements: Ask about handling allergen-related complaints where safety is involved

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Empathetic and solution-focused with specific examples of turning complaints into positive outcomes; takes ownership naturally
• 4 - Good: Good problem-solving approach with clear examples; understands the importance of resolution and follow-up
• 3 - Average: Adequate handling of issues; resolves basic complaints but may escalate unnecessarily or lack empathy
• 2 - Below Average: Limited problem-solving ability; tends to deflect responsibility or freeze under pressure
• 1 - Poor: Poor approach to complaints; defensive, blame-shifting, or unable to describe any resolution experience

Busy Service Management

Why this question matters:

Saturday night, every table is full, the kitchen's behind on mains, table 12 wants to order dessert, table 8 just arrived and needs drinks, and table 5 is ready for the bill. How a waiter manages this determines whether your restaurant runs smoothly or descends into chaos. Poor section management means long waits, cold food, missed orders, and frustrated guests. Good multitasking means higher covers, faster turns, happier guests, and better revenue per service.

What good answers look like:

• Describes specific systems for managing a section ("I mentally map my tables by stage - who's waiting for drinks, who's ordered, who's waiting for food, who's finishing mains. I do a visual sweep every time I walk through the section")
• Explains prioritisation logic ("New arrivals get acknowledged within 30 seconds even if I can't take their order yet. Food running hot takes priority over taking a dessert order. Bills go out promptly because slow billing kills table turn")
• Mentions communication with kitchen and bar as central to service management
• Shows awareness of physical efficiency - grouping tasks by location rather than running back and forth ("If I'm going to the kitchen, I check whether any nearby tables need clearing on the way back")
• Describes pre-service preparation ("I check all my tables are set correctly, condiments are stocked, and I've read the specials and any 86'd items before the doors open")
• Demonstrates composure under pressure rather than just speed

Red flags to watch for:

• Describes busy service as overwhelming rather than manageable with the right approach
• No system for tracking where each table is in their dining journey
• Cannot explain how they decide what to do next when multiple tables need attention
• Admits to ignoring certain tables during rushes or "forgetting" about tables
• No mention of pre-service preparation or mise en place for the floor
• Blames the kitchen for service delays without describing their own communication role
• Describes service as purely reactive - waiting for guests to flag them rather than anticipating needs

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining: Ask about managing extended service timings, course pacing, and coordinating multi-course experiences
• For high-volume casual: Focus on table turn times, speed of service, and managing large section sizes
• For restaurants with complex menus: Test their ability to track modifications, allergens, and special requests across multiple tables simultaneously
• For restaurants with separate bar service: Ask about coordinating drink orders with bar staff

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Systematic approach with clear priorities; demonstrates specific methods for tracking tables, managing time, and maintaining quality across all tables simultaneously
• 4 - Good: Good organisation under pressure with sensible prioritisation; manages busy periods effectively
• 3 - Average: Manages busy periods adequately but without clear systems; may occasionally lose track of tables or priorities
• 2 - Below Average: Struggles when busy; no clear system for managing multiple demands
• 1 - Poor: Cannot handle multiple demands; becomes flustered and service quality collapses across the section

Menu Knowledge and Upselling

Why this question matters:

A waiter who knows the menu inside out - ingredients, allergens, preparation methods, and pairings - sells more, handles dietary requirements confidently, and creates trust with guests. Average spend increases measurably when waiters make genuine, knowledgeable recommendations rather than generic suggestions. A waiter who can't answer basic menu questions forces guests to feel uncertain, reduces order value, and creates a perception that your team doesn't care about the food.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a specific method for learning menus ("When a new menu launches, I taste every dish, note the key ingredients and allergens, and practice describing each one in my own words rather than reading the menu description back")
• Explains how they recommend dishes naturally ("I ask what they're in the mood for rather than just suggesting the most expensive item. If someone says they like fish, I'll describe how our sea bass is prepared and why the chef pairs it with that specific sauce")
• Shows understanding that upselling is about enhancing the guest's experience, not pushing products
• Mentions allergen management as a natural part of menu knowledge
• Demonstrates wine or drink recommendation confidence ("If someone orders the lamb, I'd suggest the Malbec because the tannins complement the richness")
• Describes how they handle questions they can't answer ("If I'm not sure about an ingredient, I check with the kitchen rather than guessing - getting it wrong on allergens is unforgivable")

Red flags to watch for:

• No clear method for learning menus beyond "reading it a few times"
• Cannot describe how they'd recommend a dish - just points to the menu
• Views upselling as pushy or uncomfortable rather than part of good service
• No awareness of allergen management or cross-contamination communication
• Claims to know wine but can't describe even basic pairing principles
• Describes food in generic terms ("It's really nice") rather than with knowledge and enthusiasm
• Shows no curiosity about the food or drink being served

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining with tasting menus: Focus on their ability to describe dishes in detail, explain wine pairings course by course, and manage the narrative of the meal
• For casual dining: Emphasise speed of recommendation, handling dietary requirements across large groups, and promoting specials
• For restaurants with extensive wine lists: Test their ability to recommend wines at different price points and describe flavour profiles
• For restaurants with changing menus: Ask about their approach to learning new dishes quickly and consistently

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Proactive learner with natural sales ability; demonstrates specific methods for learning menus, makes confident recommendations, and understands the relationship between knowledge and revenue
• 4 - Good: Good learning approach and guest guidance; can describe dishes knowledgeably and makes appropriate recommendations
• 3 - Average: Basic menu knowledge approach; can describe dishes from memory but limited in pairing knowledge or natural recommendation ability
• 2 - Below Average: Limited interest in menu learning; relies on reading menu descriptions rather than developing personal knowledge
• 1 - Poor: No interest in product knowledge; cannot describe dishes or make recommendations

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

Interviews reveal how candidates talk about service. Trials reveal how they actually serve. A 20-minute practical session on your floor shows table presence, physical grace, communication style, and whether they can manage the mental load of real service. Many waiters who articulate beautiful service philosophy in interview become stiff and robotic when they're actually carrying plates. Others who seemed quiet in conversation come alive on the floor.

What to observe:

Greeted guests warmly and professionally - Have staff sit at a table and watch the candidate approach. Do they make eye contact, smile naturally, and establish rapport? Or is the greeting stilted and rehearsed?

Took orders accurately and efficiently - Give them a table with a moderately complex order (dietary requirements, modifications, drinks). Watch whether they write it down, repeat it back, and ask clarifying questions.

Demonstrated good product knowledge - Ask them to recommend a dish or describe a menu item during the trial. Can they speak about food with genuine knowledge, or do they just read the menu?

Maintained awareness of all tables - Even if they're only serving one table in the trial, watch whether they notice other things happening in the restaurant. Spatial awareness indicates how they'll manage a full section.

Communicated effectively with kitchen/bar - Watch how they relay orders. Do they use clear, efficient communication? Do they check back on timing?

Handled service pressure calmly - Introduce a small complication during the trial (a changed order, a question about allergens). Watch how they respond. Composure under observation predicts composure during service.

Maintained professional appearance throughout - Watch their posture, grooming, and presentation. Service is a visual profession - guests notice the details.

Setting up an effective trial:

• Set up a table with two or three staff members acting as guests
• Give the "guests" specific scenarios: one has a dietary requirement, one wants a recommendation, one changes their order
• Let the candidate use your actual POS system if possible (or pen and paper)
• Observe from nearby without hovering directly
• After the trial, ask them how they felt it went - self-awareness is a valuable quality
• Brief your staff to be natural, not to trick or deliberately fluster the candidate

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Natural server with excellent instincts; managed the table with confidence, warmth, and efficiency that suggests immediate readiness
• 4 - Strong: Met all requirements comfortably; showed strong service skills with smooth, professional execution
• 3 - Adequate: Basic service requirements met with some coaching needed; the fundamentals are there but refinement is needed
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with service demands; uncomfortable or disorganised during the trial
• 1 - Inadequate: Cannot meet service standards; fundamental skills are absent

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond skills and experience, cultural fit determines whether a waiter will stay, develop, and become part of your team. Select all indicators that genuinely apply to this candidate based on your observations throughout the interview and trial.

Shows genuine hospitality warmth - Did they naturally create a welcoming atmosphere? Do they seem to genuinely enjoy making people feel comfortable? Hospitality warmth is the hardest thing to train - candidates either have it or they don't.

Demonstrates professional presentation - Were they well-groomed, appropriately dressed, and aware of their physical presentation? In service, appearance is part of the product.

Takes pride in guest satisfaction - Did they talk about guest experience with genuine investment? Did they show concern about getting things right during the trial?

Works well with service team - Did they interact naturally with your staff during the trial? Waiting is a team sport - a brilliant individual who can't work with runners, bar staff, and kitchen will create friction.

Shows interest in restaurant industry - Did they ask about your restaurant, your menu, or your approach? Genuine interest in the industry predicts retention and development.

Maintains energy throughout service - Did they sustain their energy and enthusiasm throughout the interview and trial? Service shifts are long, and candidates who fade during a 45-minute assessment will struggle during an eight-hour service.

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for waiter success in most restaurant operations.

Guest service carries the highest weight because it's the core of the waiter role. A waiter who can't connect with guests, read tables, and create positive experiences fails at the fundamental purpose of the job. Rate 1-5 based on guest relations, complaint handling, and trial performance, then multiply by 0.40.

Multitasking determines whether a waiter can manage a full section during busy service without tables suffering. Speed and organisation directly affect your covers per service and guest satisfaction. Rate 1-5 based on busy service management responses and observed efficiency, then multiply by 0.25.

Professionalism covers presentation, menu knowledge, composure, and the overall impression a waiter creates. It's what separates a functional server from one who enhances your restaurant's reputation. Rate 1-5 based on menu knowledge, appearance, and general professionalism observed, then multiply by 0.20.

Cultural fit affects retention, team dynamics, and the atmosphere your restaurant creates. A skilled waiter who clashes with your team or doesn't share your service values will create problems that affect everyone. Rate 1-5 based on cultural fit indicators, then multiply by 0.15.

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

Interpretation:

• 4.0 and above: Strong hire - offer position with confidence
• 3.5 to 3.9: Hire with development plan - good candidate who may need 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:

• Fine dining restaurants might increase Professionalism to 0.25 and reduce Multitasking to 0.20
• High-volume casual dining might increase Multitasking to 0.30 and reduce Professionalism to 0.15
• Neighbourhood restaurants where regulars matter might increase Guest Service to 0.45 and reduce Multitasking to 0.20
• New restaurants building a team might increase Cultural Fit to 0.20 and reduce Professionalism to 0.15

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional server; move fast before they accept elsewhere. Great waiters are in demand across every restaurant in your area.
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Solid choice who meets your requirements and will develop further with your training and mentoring.
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Potential but need more information. Consider a paid trial shift during a real service to see them under genuine pressure.
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Issues that probably can't be resolved through training alone. Only reconsider if you have no other candidates.
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit; don't proceed regardless of staffing pressure. A poor waiter costs you in guest complaints, lost revenue, and team morale.

Additional Notes

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

• Specific training needs if hired (e.g., wine knowledge development, POS system training, silver service coaching)
• Reference check questions to ask previous restaurant managers
• Availability for split shifts, weekends, and bank holidays
• Salary or tip expectations discussed
• Notable strengths to build on during onboarding
• Any concerns about pace, knowledge gaps, or guest interaction to monitor during probation

What's next

Once you've selected your waiter, proper onboarding is essential for retention and rapid productivity. See our guide on Waiter onboarding to ensure your new hire learns your menu, service standards, and floor operations from day one.