Imagination is key in reviewing restaurants

By The Standard | Mar. 25, 2012

By Rosie MitchellWhen Zimbabwe on a Plate, Zimbabwe in a Glass, was launched in 2006, much thought, discussion and several think tanks, had gone into its making. Representatives of the trade from across the country were consulted, culinary experts were invited to offer their views, and the original score sheet, which has been refined over the years, and the competition’s modus operandi, absorbed all these inputs.

Of course, reviewing and rating restaurants can never be a perfect science, for some subjectivity is always involved in what pleases any particular diner. However, the appointment of a team of reviewers who are simply members of the public who eat out regularly, helps in maintaining as much objectivity as possible, and the score sheets — for years now, a different one for each entry category — go a long way towards the same goal of avoiding personal bias on the part of reviewers, giving a focus for their praise and their criticisms, which are then more easily and objectively measurable.

In addition, Zoap management rotates reviewers around different restaurants and in different parts of the country each year, avoiding wherever possible, the review of the same restaurant consecutively by the same reviewers so that prejudices do not get entrenched, based on previous years’ experiences.

In more recent years, great effort has gone into ensuring that reviewers sample restaurants in other towns and cities than their own as much as possible, as this gives a very good feel for the comparability of restaurants in different places, in terms of the standards found there and how these compare with those at home.

This has been very useful. It has, as one might have hoped, revealed that the Zoap system works very well in comparing “like with like”, demonstrating to reviewers, sponsors and managers that the score sheets give a very good comparative indication of standards — what they were designed to do — and that the competition is as fair as can be achieved. There are indeed excellent restaurants across the whole country, and the ratings show it. Thus, Zoap ensures that reviewers spread their wings to far flung restaurants and are able to make comparisons personally.

Key to what separates a great restaurant from a good one, though, as the reviews, score sheets and views expressed over and over again by reviewers and judges, is always, the use of imagination. Not for nothing, did Zoap introduce the “Most Imaginative Menu Award” from the outset, while not long after, we saw the introduction of the “Most Imaginative Dining Experience Award”. Plenty of marks get awarded for the use of imagination, whether that be applied to the overall concept, theme, or menu content, or the décor and setting.

It will be fascinating to see who the winners are for 2011, and then, how the reviews and ratings evolve over this year. For it can be seen so far in 2012 that reviewers are hardly mincing their words any more!