What Gordon Ramsay can teach about hiring

Be clear about the job at hand during interviews

One thing Ramsay does very well is that nobody is confused about what they are signing up for. The job you’re applying for is made very clear.

The kitchens are intense. They're stressful. You’re mostly expected to know how to do your job and get on with it. People get called a number of things that would get me banned off LinkedIn. Nobody walks into a Ramsay kitchen expecting hugs and kombucha.

Meanwhile, some companies spend interviews presenting a version of themselves that doesn't actually exist.

• The company with constant deadlines suddenly talks about work-life balance.
• The business that’s had 3 rounds of layoffs in 2 years talks about stability.
• The company that has never seriously invested in DEI talks about how important it is.

Then six months later they wonder why somebody quit.

If your culture is fast-paced, chaotic, or demanding - say so. Every company is going to go through a time when things are frenetic and roadmaps are an ethereal concept and that’s fine! It’s part of the journey but you need to be up-front about it.

You don't need everyone to want the job. You need the right person to want the job. The one that will succeed and that will make your team better. No matter how challenging the job is, someone will love it.

Every interview stage should test something specific

Ramsay doesn't randomly ask chefs to shell lobsters or to recreate a dish they just tasted. Every challenge exists for a reason.

He knows what he's looking for and the challenge is designed to reveal it.

Your interviews should do the same - know exactly what you’re testing for and keep that goal in mind. If a stage exists, it should have a clear purpose.

If you can't explain what you're assessing, it probably shouldn't be there.

Attitude beats perfection

One thing Ramsay consistently rewards is coachability.

Contestants survive terrible services because he believes they can improve.

Others get eliminated despite being technically stronger because they refuse feedback, blame everyone else, or think they already know everything.

Most hiring managers claim they value attitude over skills. Then they reject anyone who isn't a perfect match. If you've spent six months complaining about talent shortages, maybe stop searching for unicorns.

A candidate who is 80% there and genuinely wants to learn is often a better hire than someone who ticks every box and thinks they're the smartest person in the room.

feedback is part of the process

When Ramsay eliminates somebody, he usually tells them why. Sometimes brutally. But he tells them and he tells them quickly.

Meanwhile candidates spend hours preparing for interviews only to receive:

"We've decided to move forward with another candidate."Or worse - silence forever.

Not helpful. Nobody expects a 5-page performance review. But if somebody invested time in your process, the least you can do is tell them where they fell short.

Not only is it the decent thing to do, it's also how people improve. Although, you should not be as mean as Gordon is about it… (If you are, send me the feedback, it sounds hilarious)

15 years of experience doesn’t mean 15 years of knowledge

A favorite trope of mine in Hell’s Kitchen is the chef who is like “I’ve been working in kitchens for 35 years, I know how to cook!”. Then they can’t. They produce raw steak or a signature dish that looks like I made it. If someone has 15 years of experience in DevOps, it doesn’t mean they were progressing and learning for those 15 years.

Skills and experience do not directly correlate but years spent working in the industry can be a solid metric. You just need to assess what they’ve been doing with that time. If I had spent the last 15 years recruiting for the exact same role profiles, I likely won’t be as good as someone who has spent 5 years recruiting for every role under the sun.

So - assess skills, not tenure.

Someone can be great but this isn’t the right place for them

Lots of excellent chefs have left Hell’s Kitchen. Gordon Ramsay wasn't looking for the best chef in the competition. He was looking for the best chef for his kitchen.

One of the biggest mistakes hiring managers and candidates make is assuming every rejection means a person wasn't good enough. Someone can be great but not great for the job at hand. The team might not be a good culture fit, they might like to work at a different pace - someone who likes working fast isn’t a good fit for a company where decision making takes ages.

Don’t reject someone because they don’t have 100% of the skills you need but also don’t hire someone who is going to be miserable in the job.

Final Thoughts

Obviously this article is tongue in cheek - Hell’s Kitchen is a reality show and many decisions are made for entertainment reasons. How else would some of the absolute drama llamas survive for most of a season? I still think there’s some lessons to learn.

The biggest lesson fromHell's Kitchenis that Ramsay knows exactly what success looks like before the competition even starts.

He knows what he's hiring for. He knows how he'll assess it.

A surprising number of interview processes don't. The interviews are the first time that a potential employee and potential employer meet each other so it has to be done right.

Comment below on what you think makes a hiring process successful, if you want guidance on your own processes, or you know how to stop me thinking about work - reach out onrose@ninedots.io!