The hospitality industry has a recruitment problem, and it’s not just about finding enough candidates. It’s about how we hire, what we measure, and the assumptions that drive decisions on both sides of the table. The process is broken — not at the margins, but at its core.

Hiring Based on Job Titles, Not Skills

Most hospitality recruitment still starts with a job title and a list of requirements. A hotel needs a Front Office Manager. A restaurant group needs an Executive Chef. A resort needs a Director of F&B. So they post a description, filter by experience and brand names, and choose from whoever applies.

The problem is that job titles in hospitality are wildly inconsistent. A “Restaurant Manager” at one property may oversee 12 staff and a casual dining outlet. At another, the same title covers 80 staff, three outlets, and a banqueting operation. The title tells you almost nothing about what someone has actually done, how they lead, or what standards they operate at.

And yet, titles remain the primary filter. If your last role doesn’t match the one being offered, you’re often dismissed before anyone reads past the first line of your CV.

The CV Is a Poor Tool for Hospitality

A CV in hospitality typically lists properties, dates, and titles. Sometimes it includes a few bullet points about responsibilities. Rarely does it tell you anything meaningful about how someone actually performed, how they handled pressure, how they trained a team, or what service culture they built.

Hospitality is a behavioral industry. Success depends on emotional intelligence, composure under pressure, communication, adaptability, and the ability to lead by example on the floor — not behind a desk. None of that shows up on a CV. And yet, the CV remains the gatekeeper.

Employers Are Screening Out Good Candidates

Because the system relies on titles and brands, strong candidates are routinely overlooked. Someone who spent five years at a smaller independent property — delivering excellent service, mentoring staff, managing operations efficiently — will often lose out to someone who spent two years at a five-star chain but never managed beyond their section.

The bias toward brand names creates a closed loop: candidates from big brands get hired into other big brands, while candidates from smaller operations struggle to break through, regardless of their ability.

Candidates Are Misrepresenting Themselves

On the other side, the system incentivizes exaggeration. When hiring is based on titles and keywords, candidates learn to inflate. A Demi Chef de Partie becomes a Chef de Partie. A supervisor becomes a manager. A six-month contract becomes “current.”

This isn’t always malicious — it’s often a rational response to a system that filters people out for superficial reasons. But it leads to bad hires, mismatched expectations, and high turnover, which costs the employer far more than the recruitment process itself.

Recruiters Are Part of the Problem

Many recruitment agencies in hospitality operate on volume. They collect CVs, match keywords, and send candidates to fill roles as quickly as possible. The incentive is placement speed, not placement quality. Few agencies invest in understanding the service culture of the hiring property, the leadership style of the GM, or the specific operational challenges the role will face.

As a result, the recruiter becomes a forwarding service rather than a strategic partner. The candidate gets placed in the wrong environment. The employer gets a hire who doesn’t fit. And the cycle repeats.

The Interview Process Is Outdated

Even when candidates make it to the interview stage, the process rarely tests what matters. Most hospitality interviews are conversational — “Tell me about yourself,” “Where do you see yourself in five years?” — rather than behavioral or situational. They reward people who interview well, not necessarily people who perform well.

Structured interviews, practical assessments, and trial shifts are underused. In an industry where the work is physical, visible, and team-dependent, the fact that most hiring decisions are made in a meeting room or over a video call is a fundamental mismatch.

What Needs to Change

Fixing hospitality recruitment requires a shift in how both employers and candidates approach the process:

  • Hire for behavior, not just experience. Prioritize how someone works — their service instincts, leadership style, and cultural fit — over where they’ve worked.
  • Use structured assessments. Introduce scenario-based questions, practical tasks, and trial shifts as standard parts of the hiring process.
  • Look beyond brand names. Evaluate candidates based on what they’ve achieved, not just the logo on their uniform.
  • Invest in onboarding. A good hire can still fail without proper onboarding. The first 90 days matter more than the interview.
  • Hold recruiters to higher standards. Work with agencies that understand hospitality operations, not just CV databases.
  • Be honest in job descriptions. Clearly define the scope, expectations, and challenges of the role — not just the title and benefits.

The Cost of Getting It Wrong

Bad hires in hospitality are expensive. Not just in recruitment fees and training costs, but in service quality, team morale, and guest experience. A single poor leadership hire can destabilize an entire department. A revolving door of staff creates inconsistency that guests notice and competitors exploit.

The industry talks constantly about talent shortages. But the bigger issue may not be a lack of talent — it’s a system that fails to identify, attract, and retain it. Until that system changes, hospitality recruitment will remain broken.