Interviewing Etiquette

Your staff is your number-one resource. And because the key to building a great staff is hiring good people, the interviewing process is crucial. These tips on effective interviewing techniques are certain to help you select the best candidate.

in reference to:

"Your staff is your number-one resource. And because the key to building a great staff is hiring good people, the interviewing process is crucial. These tips on effective interviewing techniques are certain to help you select the best candidates."
- Service Excellence: Interviewing Etiquette (view on Google Sidewiki)

Interviewing Etiquette

Your staff is your number-one resource. And because the key to building a great staff is hiring good people, the interviewing process is crucial. These tips on effective interviewing techniques are certain to help you select the best candidates.


Logistical lessons

• Conduct the interview in a place that is free of distractions, such as a quiet table at the back of the restaurant.

• Give applicants your full and undivided attention, sit with your back to the business and take phone calls only in an emergency.

Listen and learn

• Craft a list of simple, direct questions that are based on your job descriptions. By using the same set of questions for each interview, you'll be able to compare applicants objectively.

• Ask yes-or-no questions to determine whether the candidate meets basic requirements, such as being able to work certain shifts. Switch to open-ended questions and role-playing exercises to determine the applicant's attitude and skill level, I suggest asking questions such as: How would you greet guests? How would you describe the daily specials to guests? and What sanitation procedures did you follow at your previous job?

• Take the time to listen to the applicant's answers. It's only by listening that you'll learn whether an applicant is suited for the job.

• Ask follow-up questions. For example, if an applicant says what she liked best about a previous job was her boss, follow up by asking her what qualities she especially liked in her supervisor.

• Avoid questions unrelated to the job. Obviously, stay away from illegal questions about the applicant's age, gender, religion, marital status and disabilities. If you have any doubt about what you can and cannot ask, seek legal counsel.

• Give job candidates an opportunity to ask questions. Not only does this help them determine whether they're interested in the job but it also gives you a chance to learn what their concerns are, he says.

Closing comments

In closing, thank the candidate for his or her time and interest. Then remind each person of the time frame you've established for further contact. Remain courteous even if you know you're not interested in hiring the candidate. You always want to end on a good note. There's no reason to be rude.

A Food Critic Looks at Restaurants — Do You Ever Look At Yours?

Otherwise-intelligent people who don’t know any better think you have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. After all, as a restaurant operator, all you do is take an order, cook some food, and rake in the dough. No brainer, right? If they only knew the reality of your business.

in reference to:

"Otherwise-intelligent people who don’t know any better think you have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. After all, as a restaurant operator, all you do is take an order, cook some food, and rake in the dough. No brainer, right? If they only knew the reality of your business."
- A Food Critic Looks at Restaurants — Do You Ever Look At Yours? « George's Blog (view on Google Sidewiki)

A Food Critic Looks at Restaurants-Do You Look at Your?

Otherwise-intelligent people who don't know any better think you have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. After all, as a restaurant operator, all you do is take an order, cook some food, and rake in the dough. No brainer, right? If they only knew the reality of your business.

in reference to:

"Otherwise-intelligent people who don't know any better think you have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. After all, as a restaurant operator, all you do is take an order, cook some food, and rake in the dough. No brainer, right? If they only knew the reality of your business."
- Service Excellence: A Food Critic Looks at Restaurants-Do You Ever Look at Yours? (view on Google Sidewiki)

A Food Critic Looks at Restaurants-Do You Ever Look at Yours?

Otherwise-intelligent people who don't know any better think you have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. After all, as a restaurant operator, all you do is take an order, cook some food, and rake in the dough. No brainer, right? If they only knew the reality of your business.

The same people think I have one of the cushiest jobs in the world. As a restaurant consultant and critic I get paid to eat and later write about the experience. If they only knew the reality of my business.

But maybe I can do you some good. Let's look at restaurants from the perspective of a working food critic. Wherever I go - small, mom-and-pop ethnic restaurants, national chains, high-priced spreads, the trendy and the posh, all I want is my money's worth. I expect good food properly prepared, prices in line with the decor, and an efficient, congenial, but not patronizing staff doing its best to assure return business. That's really not much to ask. Yet, many restaurants I visit fail to meet these basic criteria.

I agree that finding good help is difficult, but successful restaurateurs know how to train staff, and offer enough inducements to keep their best people. Yet another pervasive problem I encounter is the way in which some managers show contempt: serving a shoddy product but expecting the customers not to notice. Believe me, people may be reluctant to complain, but don't think they're stupid. 

They won't return if not treated with respect. We both know that some customers can be abusive, noisy and inconsiderate, but most are not. Accordingly, why not give everyone the benefit of the doubt?

More often than I care to remember, waiters or managers have placed me on the defensive when I've tried to return something that clearly wasn't right. It's bad enough to be served a $34 veal chop with all the flavor and texture of a '49 Buick, but should I have to hire F. Lee Bailey or Rambo first if I want to return it? (That joint closed a few months later, incidentally.)

I'm always more forgiving toward a place that willingly makes up for a kitchen miscue than one that fights with its customers. In another time and place: after returning from the kitchen with a leathery chicken breast I refused to eat, a waiter said to me, "The chef stands by it and will not make you another one." When I wrote of this exchange in my review, the chef phoned to say, "If I knew it was you, I would have handled it differently." His remark was indefensible, and an insult to anyone who enters his door.

Odds are that people will have a better meal wherever the owner is routinely on-site rather than elsewhere (the previous two examples being exceptions). Too often, owners walk away from the mother ship after it becomes somewhat prosperous; leaving it in the hands of a manager who has no vested interest in the business. In this business, however, you're only as good as your last meal. If you yourselves aren't there to keep an eye on things, you've got a problem. Believe me, a little hubris goes a long way towards Chapter Eleven.

It's my job and passion to visit all kinds of restaurants. My clients and readers are not as fortunate and have to choose carefully if they want the best for their money. 

Do I have the desire or power to shut down a place? Of course not. Nobody does -- except the customer who goes away feeling ill-treated and subsequently tells 50 of his best friends about it. Herewith is the advice I give them. If they start following it en masse, a bunch of places where I've been in the past month will soon post "For Rent" signs on the door. If you look at your operation from their perspective, business should improve.

1. If you haven't been treated fairly, tell the management immediately. It's the only way they know there's a problem. They should respond favorably because they need you more than you need them.

2. Judge a place it strictly on its own merits. For example, a friend complained about the time it took to get his meal in a soul-food restaurant. So what? For a ton of fresh, delicious, homemade vittles for $7.95, who cares? But it's a crime if you're paying five times that price.

3. If you don't get exactly what you ask for, send it back without delay. Waiting till something is half-eaten before returning it is an early-bird strategy that destroys your credibility.

4. Avoid restaurants where the staff says, "Hi, my name is Scooter, I'm from Ashtabula, Ohio and I'll be your server tonight."

5. Patronize individual and family-owned restaurants. More than places that rely on volume, their repeat business depends upon high quality, carefully prepared food and personal service. If the owner doesn't care enough to be on hand, neither should you.

6. Just because a restaurant has been in business forever doesn't necessarily mean it's good. Many people patronize such places out of habit, because it's convenient or because they don't know any better.

7. If you go to a chain restaurant, remember that controlled portions are based on actuarial figures that say a six-foot man should weigh 150 pounds. Most likely, your meal was prepared in a commissary halfway across the country, delivered frozen and subsequently microwaved into submission. 

8. Don't expect good food at restaurants with a dazzling waterfront view. It's axiomatic that such places don't feel any need to serve good food. Sure enough, they don't!

Avoiding The perverted Pyramid

If you read from the works of virtually any recognized management guru, you will come across the notion of inverting the organization's hierarchy. The theory goes that by putting more decision-making into the hands of those closest to the "action", organizations will become faster, more adaptive and more effective. Inverting the organizational pyramid brings with it the notion of empowerment, in the service of better organizations.

in reference to:

"If you read from the works of virtually any recognized management guru, you will come across the notion of inverting the organization's hierarchy. The theory goes that by putting more decision-making into the hands of those closest to the "action", organizations will become faster, more adaptive and more effective. Inverting the organizational pyramid brings with it the notion of empowerment, in the service of better organizations."
- Service Excellence (view on Google Sidewiki)

Avoiding The Perverted Inverted Pyramid

If you read from the works of virtually any recognized management guru, you will come across the notion of inverting the organization's hierarchy. The theory goes that by putting more decision-making into the hands of those closest to the "action", organizations will become faster, more adaptive and more effective. Inverting the organizational pyramid brings with it the notion of empowerment, in the service of better organizations.   

Well, that's the theory anyway. If you are a regular reader of our publications, you will be aware that we are firm supporters of inverting the pyramid, empowering staff, and moving responsibility and decision-making down to the people that are in contact with the recipients of government services. But, we do need to put these efforts into the context of real life, and to be aware of the pitfalls that are in our paths.   

The truth is that many organizations begin the inverted pyramid journey, but few actually succeed in reaping the benefits of the effort. It seems that far too many organizations are developing flat tires, or simply running out of gas, far from the envisioned destination. We are going to look at ways that organizations and managers end up perverting the inverted pyramid, so that if you are on the journey, you will be less likely to fail in your efforts.  

Structural Incompatibility  

There is no question that government is arranged in a hierarchical structure, with decision-making, accountability and responsibility vested first in senior executive, and then distributed down the line to other executives or managers. One only has to look at the chain of events that occurs when a public complaint is lodged. Often it will be sent to the Minister, who, with involvement of executive assistants, will pass the concern on to the Deputy Minister, who will, in turn, move the "investigation" to lower levels in the organization. The process is indeed hierarchical and traditional, moving from top to bottom. The bottom line is that, structurally, the Minister, and senior executives are ultimately responsible for what occurs in their bailiwicks. In a sense, since senior officials are held responsible, it is in their own self-interest to be involved in decision-making that may ultimately come back to haunt them, and to use their organizational power to satisfy their own needs and those of people at the top of the traditional pyramid.   

So, we run into a basic incompatibility. We have governments structured in traditional hierarchical ways, with power and responsibility at the top. On the other hand we know that customer service decisions are often best made by those at the bottom of the organization. Experience tells us that in almost all cases, where there is a conflict between the notion of empowerment, and the needs and wishes of senior executive, the needs and wishes of executive will prevail. This doesn't necessarily occur as a result of the actual people involved, but simply is a result of working in organizations that are traditionally hierarchical. This traditional structuring places limits on efforts to move power downward. The inverted pyramid can be perverted. The new way of doing things is quickly perceived as window-dressing.  

Management Limitations  

While structural incompatibilities make inverting the pyramid difficult, there are other powerful and important factors that pervert the process. Many of these, unfortunately, fall into the area of limitations, or short-comings on the part of individual managers and executives.   

We know enough about empowerment, team development and leadership to state that empowerment and pyramid inversion require some special qualities on the part of leaders and managers. When these qualities are not sufficiently developed, the process of inverting the pyramid can become stalled. We can identify a number of such competencies or attitudes:  

• perseverance in the face of frustration
• consistency in terms of decision-making processes
• trust in the abilities of the staff
• genuine desire to share power
• coaching abilities to help develop core skills on the part of the staff
  

Lack of Development Resources 

lnverting the pyramid requires new skill sets on the part of staff that are going to be empowered. The more hierarchical and autocratic an organization is before attempting to invert the pyramid, the more likely necessary skill components will be lacking. It isn't surprising. Some people think that empowering staff will be immediately welcomed by staff, and that given an opportunity, staff will take the opportunity like a duck takes to water. Experience tells us otherwise. Staff will show some degree of cynicism and even resistance. And they will founder at the start, particularly if they are not used to using effective decision-making, problem-solving and consensus building techniques.   

Further, staff in the inverted pyramid need different kinds of information, compared to those in traditional organizations. They need to know the "bigger picture" -- the goals of the organization, its purpose, and how they fit in to them. This enables their decision-making to be consistent with what the organization is trying to accomplish.   

When development resources are not allocated to build skills, or where staff are not given the information they require to make empowered decisions, flipping the pyramid will result in poor decisions. Poor decisions tend to force managers and executives to revert back to a top-down way of doing things. 

The Most Common Failure Pattern  

Generally, when pyramid inversions fail, they don't do so randomly but share a common pattern Generally, there are multiple causes for the failure, usually including many or all of the above factors.   

Usually, pyramid inversion adventures are initiated by a well meaning manager. The manager introduces the concept to staff, and may also suggest mechanisms to empower staff (eg. team structure, meetings, etc). While the manager may be enthused about the possibilities, often he or she has not thought out the implications for him/herself. Employee reactions tend to be mixed -- some will be enthusiastic, some neutral, and some cynical or resistant.   

Within the new structure, insufficient information will be provided, and as with most changes, some frustration and confusion will result. But what separates the successful inversions from the unsuccessful ones is the ability of the players to resolve the frustration and confusion early on. Failed attempts tend to create more and more frustration, the longer the process continues.   

Given insufficient information, and lack of core skills, employees have difficulty making decisions that are acceptable to the manager. What happens is that in most organizations, the fundamental structural incompatibilities regarding responsibility and accountability push the manager into reviewing and/or altering decisions made by staff, or rejecting many suggestions. Staff read this as being inconsistent, and lose faith in the empowerment process.   

The final stage of collapse occurs as the manager becomes more frustrated. Initially the manager felt that empowering staff would require less involvement in everyday decisions, since these would be taken on by staff. What really happens is that everything slows down. Decisions are reviewed and re-reviewed. Workload for everyone appears to increase, rather than decrease. At this point many managers eject from the plane.  

They begin to "take back" decision-making power, on the assumption that staff are simply incapable of making effective decisions. Sometimes this "taking-back" is subtle, and the empowerment strategy is slowly eroded until it disappears. Or, the manager simply announces that the experiment has ended. We might note that such defeats often leave the organization worse off than if they hadn't tried at all.  

Avoiding Perverting The Inverted Pyramid 

Such failures are often avoidable with proper preparation, and well thought out implementation strategies. We look at a few suggestions for engineering success.  

1. Recognize that you still work within a hierarchical structure. Lobby your executive for support and changes in the ways they interact with you. Further, when introducing your initiative to staff, indicate that there will be limits on what can be accomplished. In other words, don't create expectations that can't be fulfilled.  

2. Provide empowered staff with the tools they need to take on their new responsibilities. Be prepared, at least initially, to coach and support, or to bring in help from outside. Do not assume that staff will "figure it out".  

3. Persevere. These changes take time, and if you expect changes to occur too quickly, you may give up too early.  

4. Be as consistent as possible. The more often you take over the reins of a decision, the less likely staff will perceive you as being sincere. When you absolutely must make decisions without involving staff, explain why it was necessary.  

5. Make sure that frequent "checks" are made to see how the process is going. Don't just leave it. Encourage staff to assess and evaluate how the changes are going, and to make suggestions about how to improve it. Make it clear you don't expect everything to be perfect, but the goal is to improve continuously.  

6. Realistically assess your management style and interpersonal skills. Even your non-verbal behavior can derail a pyramid inversion. Be aware of subtle messages you may be sending.  

7. Listen! In the inverted pyramid, the managers listen more than they talk. if nobody wants to talk to you, then search out the causes and fix them.