Chefs’ perspectives of failures in foodservice kitchens, part 1: A phenomenological exploration of the concepts, types, and causes of food production failure

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept, types, and causes of food production failure (FPF) in restaurant kitchens from the perspective of chefs. Employing a phenomenological epistemology, a qualitative methodology was adopted to explore FPF. Extant literature was reviewed. Using purposive sampling, and employing an emic posture, 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with senior restaurant and hotel chefs until saturation occurred. Interviews were transcribed, read repeatedly, and coded using the qualitative analysis software package QDA Miner Lite. An inter-rater reliability score of .78 using Cohen’s Kappa coefficient formula reflected substantial agreement between coders. Thematic analysis was used. The study revealed three main categories of FPF types (sensory/organoleptic, safety, other) and FPF causes (People related failure; Operation-related failure; and Food supply/supplier-related failures). A conceptual model was developed from these categories underpinned by management control systems, continuous training, clear communication, and the organizational culture and climate of kitchens. Chefs found that FPF was inevitable based on human error, and can be precipitated by certain factors but reduced by other interventions. Research findings may assist in reducing its frequency, thereby increasing customer satisfaction and retention while reducing financial and environmental costs of FPF. Practical, theoretical, and managerial implications are discussed.

Graphical abstarct

Video Abstract

Read the transcript

Watch the video on Vimeo

KEYWORDS:

• Food production failure
• restaurants
• chefs
• phenomenology
• practice theory

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to thank all the participants for their time and insights, and would like to thank the anonymous reviewers’ feedback for helping strengthen this paper. We would also like to thank Michael Gill for constructive feedback on the methodology section, Lucia Healy for assistance with transcriptions of interviews, colleagues in TU Dublin for their careful proofreading and comments, and Dr. Henry Heberle for his assistance with the Venn diagram.