Sample mystery guest visit report
An illustrative example: the café, visit and all figures are invented to show how a report is built. You will see one on your own venue after your first free audit.
Header
An illustrative café, European and Kazakh cuisine, Almaty business district, 70 seats.
Visit: Wednesday, 13:05-13:52, lunch hour. Guest: alone, no booking, business lunch.
Room about 90% full on arrival, three waiters on the floor.
Scored against the client's standard, version of 1 October 2026. Report checked by a methodologist.
The header sets the conditions. A Wednesday lunch in a full room and a quiet Monday evening give different figures and cannot be compared directly. The standard version is stated because the visit is scored by the rules in force on the audit day.
Total and sections
Total: 74 out of 100 on applicable items.
Welcome and seating: 10 of 12. Menu and order: 12 of 16. Serving and pace: 18 of 24. Kitchen: 14 of 14. Cleanliness: 8 of 8. Bill and receipt: 6 of 16. Goodbye: 6 of 10.
2 items did not apply; they are listed at the end of the report.
The total shows the overall level; sections show where money is lost. Kitchen and cleanliness drew no remarks here. The main loss is at the bill: a lunch guest is in a hurry, and irritation builds in the visit's last minutes.
Visit episodes
13:05. The host met the guest at the door and offered a window seat or the counter. 1 minute to seating.
13:09. The waiter brought the business lunch menu and at once asked if the guest was short of time. Item "Check whether the guest is in a hurry": 2 of 2.
13:34. The main came 15 minutes after the soup, against a 10-minute norm. The waiter gave no warning of the delay. Item "Warn of a delay": 0 of 2.
13:41. The guest asked for the bill. The waiter said "one moment" and went to a large table. After 6 minutes the guest asked another waiter for it.
13:49. The bill includes a 10% service charge. The business lunch menu does not show it; only the main menu does. Item "Payment terms clear to the guest before ordering": 0 of 3.
13:50. Fiscal receipt issued, total matches the bill. Item "Receipt issued, total matches": 3 of 3.
Each remark has a time stamp and a standard item number. The manager checks the time against the rota and sees who was on the floor.
Timings
Welcome at the door: 0:20. Seating: 1:00. Menu after seating: 3:00. Order after seating: 6:00. Soup after order: 7:00. Main after soup: 15:00. Bill after first request: 8:00.
Stage norms come from your standard. Two deviations here: the main and the bill. Comparing several lunches' timings reveals the cause: one person, or how tables are allocated at the peak.
Photos
Photo 1: table setting at seating, 13:06. Photo 2: soup served, 13:19. Photo 3: main served, 13:34. Photo 4: business lunch menu page, 13:10. Photo 5: receipt, 13:50.
Photos support what matters for scoring: table setting, serving and the receipt. Each is tied to an episode.
Methodologist's recommendations
1. At lunch, assign one waiter to bills for all window tables, so the bill comes within 3 minutes.
2. Introduce a rule: if a dish is later than the norm, the waiter comes over and gives a new time.
3. Show the service charge on the business lunch page in the same font as the prices.
Recommendations refer to episodes of this visit; the report has no general advice. We check the service charge in the menu as a standard item; the rules on it should be verified with a lawyer.
Action plan
Item: "Bill speed". Cause: nobody owns bills at the peak. Action: assign bills to one waiter from 12:30 to 14:30. Deadline: one week. Owner: floor manager.
Every item that lost points goes into the plan with four columns: cause, action, deadline, owner. A repeat audit shows what has changed.
Items not applicable
Did not apply: booking confirmation (the guest came without one), dessert offer (the business lunch includes dessert).
Non-applicable items neither add nor subtract: the total uses applicable items only. Booking handling can be checked with a separate mystery call, and scoring details are in the methodology.