Kitchen Hierarchy

18 January 2008 at 1:57 am 6 comments

| Peter Klein |

Before Kitchen Confidential made him a celebrity, Anthony Bourdain was a real chef, working upscale New York kitchens at places like the Supper Club and Sullivan’s. Bourdain’s style is not to everyone’s taste, but he knows how to manage a restaurant crew. A chef, after all, is not primarily an artist, but a manager, facing the same set of organizational challenges — delegation, incentives, monitoring — as any administrator.

I mention this because I recently stumbled upon an interview with Bourdain in the July 2002 Harvard Business Review. Despite several attempts by interviewer Gardiner Morse to get Bourdain to endorse creativity, spontaneity, and empowerment in the kitchen, Bourdain remains an unreconstructed devotee of Escoffier’s “brigade system,” a sort of culinary Taylorism in which each member of the cooking staff has a fixed place in the production chain, a very narrow job description, and an obligation to obey his chef de partie (section leader) and the head chef without question.

Q: There’s been a trend in business to move away from hierarchies and empower workers, but you’ve embraced a very rigid staff structure and an old style of management with great success. Why do you think it works?

A: You’re defined by the job you do, not by whatever . . . predilections you have. . . . And to have any delusions that you’re better than anyone else, however true that might be as far as your technical skills are concerned, is not allowed. Your commitment is to the team effort. Everyone lives and dies by the same rules.

You have a tremendous amount of personal freedom in the kitchen. But there’s a trade-off. You give up other freedoms when you go into a kitchen because you’re becoming part of a very old, rigid, traditional society — it’s a secret society, a cult of pain. Absolute rules govern some aspects of your working life: obedience, focus, the way you maintain your work area, the pecking order, the consistency of the end product, arrival time.

This is a case where the advantages of hierarchy — the need for fast, coordinated decision-making, the ability to internalize externalities, the possession of “decisive knowledge” by the top decision-makers, and the like — appear to outweigh the high-powered incentives and Hayekian knowledge benefits of decentralization. Look for a future Foss-Klein paper (with Nils Stieglitz) discussing this tradeoff more systematically.

Entry filed under: - Klein -, Management Theory, Theory of the Firm.

Brain Flows “The Age of Temporary Advantage”

6 Comments Add your own

  • 1. tmdblya  |  18 January 2008 at 4:33 pm

    That seems like a bit of faddish questioning on the part of Morse. If you look at what a kitchen is trying to achieve – absolute consistency in taste and presentation night after night – then it makes perfect sense that Bourdain would frown on individual liberty amongst his crew.

  • 2. Rafe Champion  |  19 January 2008 at 12:27 am

    Much the same applies on the sports field, at least to those team games with tight patterns of play. How many quarter backs do you want on the field at the same time?

  • […] -Peter Klein, “Kitchen Hierarchy.” […]

  • 4. Rafe Champion  |  21 July 2013 at 7:54 pm

    Re-reading the post as a link to today’s story I was just about to run the sports analogy again but I see that I anticipated myself in 2008. Anyway I like the post and will run in my roundup this week. Cooking programs on TV are all the rage in Sydney at present.

  • 5. Rafe’s Roundup July 26 | Catallaxy Files  |  25 July 2013 at 5:16 pm

    […] Chefs rule in the kitchen. No industrial democracy there! The Ronald Coase Institute. […]

  • 6. andrew  |  26 August 2013 at 5:06 am

    Re: quarterbacks.

    I do remember from my (limited) reading of American football history that back in the day there wasn’t one designated passer, but rather multiple ones. This was because football was still developing as well as for the purposes of strategic deception.

    So there is an interesting case history on American football in order to explore the evolution of organizational forms waiting to be written; how much of the evolution of football strategy/tactics was due to real gains in efficiency as opposed to fads, path dependency, culture, etc.?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Nicolai J. Foss | home | posts
Peter G. Klein | home | posts
Richard Langlois | home | posts
Lasse B. Lien | home | posts


Former Guests | posts


Recent Posts



Our Recent Books

Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Nicolai J. Foss and Volker Mahnke, eds., Competence, Governance, and Entrepreneurship: Advances in Economic Strategy Research (Oxford, 2000).
Nicolai J. Foss and Paul L. Robertson, eds., Resources, Technology, and Strategy: Explorations in the Resource-based Perspective (Routledge, 2000).

%d bloggers like this: