from Hacker News

What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

by Harj on 9/10/18, 5:51 PM with 221 comments

by mikeleeorg on 9/10/18, 8:35 PM
I once fell into the position of having to hire for a fast-growing new team at a large corporation. We didn't have a manager yet, so our department's VP trusted me to make hiring decisions.
I made the first 20-ish hires, then helped out with 20 more. When we eventually got a director and other managers who were peers to me, I held the informal distinction of being able to make good hiring calls. Many of my hires rose quickly in the company, earned strong performance reviews, and even won awards at the company.
Eventually, I become a middle manager and had to teach managers I supervised how to hire in a similar fashion. Relying on me to make a final call wasn't scalable.
And that's when trouble began.
A few bad hires leaked in. For the first time, our group experienced attrition. So I set about to try to systemize my recruiting process such that it was repeatable by others.
That's when I had to codify our team "culture", which was something I used to help with my hiring decisions. There were times when I made a call to hire a candidate who seemed too junior for a role, because I felt there was a strong "culture fit."
Of course, what I realized was, I was simply assessing for typical soft skills, as well as personality traits such as tenacity, initiative, quick study, etc.
In other words, there was no magic. I didn't have some special gift for hiring. It was just a simple unspoken template in my head. And it wasn't exactly "culture" either, as much as it was a set of personality traits that every company looks for.
I suppose what I came up with was basically a "structured culture fit screening assessment", to borrow the article's parlance. If you don't have something like this, I'd highly encourage that you look into it. Not only can it help minimize bias, but it can also give you a repeatable process for all of your company's hiring managers.
by rmason on 9/10/18, 8:16 PM
My experience about 'culture fit' was that it was a code word for ageism. Sometimes they'd be even more direct if I pushed back. This wasn't at the end of a 45 minute interview, it was in the first five minutes after I'd already passed the technical review. Might not be true in every instance, but I absolutely cringe when I hear that phrase.
by kgilpin on 9/10/18, 6:31 PM
I'm in agreement with other commenters here that "culture fit" usually feels like a euphemism for something else. I think what it's really about is explained here in the article:
"A single toxic employee who is a bad fit for the existing culture can tank the morale and productivity of an entire team. "
So, is there really more to "culture fit" than the No Asshole Rule (1)? If not, can we start calling it what it is: "asshole rejection screening". Then maybe we can use the word "culture fit" less (maybe even "culture" less), because requiring new employees to "fit a culture" is pretty lacking in concrete justification.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_No_Asshole_Rule
by dbt00 on 9/10/18, 7:04 PM
I found the Uber comments interesting. As someone on the other side of the table from Uber recruiting, I always figured a huge part of their hiring problem is that it was obvious from the early stages that Uber was run by and populated by a huge percentage of assholes, and people who had the sensitivity to understand that and the desire and choices available to avoid doing so would. Thus, the asshole primacy was maintained.
by SonnyWortzik on 9/10/18, 9:02 PM
We joke a lot about that after I was hired as a middle aged coder...
during interview
Boss: "so do you think you can fit in this culture?"
Me: "You mean, do I wear skinny jeans and drink kale smoothies? Probably not, but if you want your work done, does culture fit matter when you have a mile long back log?"
Boss: "good point, so... How does your schedule look for next week?"
it was all history from there.
by tyingq on 9/10/18, 5:59 PM
Interesting topic, but...
"Among the 300 companies I spoke to, only 20% told me they engaged in screening for specific traits beyond soft skills."
Not convinced self disclosure is the best way to determine what they actually screen for.
by harryh on 9/10/18, 6:19 PM
I'm pretty suspicious about most conversations about culture fit: I think they are more smoke than fire.
Especially in technology, where it's a seller's market for labor I don't think a lot of companies are actually screening on this criterion. Do they think you are smart and can do the work? Then companies are going to want to hire you with the possible exception of if they think you are a huge asshole or complete weirdo.
I don't think anyone cares all that much beyond that.
by kthejoker2 on 9/10/18, 6:55 PM
Outside of "exhibits basic social grace and custom", culture to me is:
* Diversity of thought and multidisciplinary approach to problem solving * How you view teams, how you would organize a team you were going to be part of, what makes a good team * How you handle failure, defeat, and disappointment * How you handle difficult people and situations * Your communication style, especially for bad news * How you convince others to change * Your view on work life balance * Your attitude towards management and leadership styles * Your appetite for risk and entrepreneurship * Your dispute resolution tactics
There may be others... In any case you can address most of these for senior hires with simple SBO questioning.
For juniors you're probably best off just focusing on communication skills, working in teams, and challenging situations or failures.
by bjornlouser on 9/10/18, 7:05 PM
Good culture fit is when we ask an employee to do something and they do it. A bad fit is someone who occasionally says no. A toxic employee occasionally says no and explains why they won't.
by ammon on 9/10/18, 6:10 PM
An interesting point that I ended up cutting from the blog post is that companies also use culture as a selling point to convince candidates to join. We have seen this work (convince a candidate to take an offer). However, most companies underestimate how similar their culture pitch is to other pitches candidates hear. I think these pitches are less effective than most companies think they are.
by elvinyung on 9/10/18, 5:57 PM
I was at a talk by Emily Chang about her new book Brotopia, and she raised a really good question: why frame it in terms of culture fit, as if culture is something pristine to be preserved? Why not think of it as culture addition, that is, in terms of trying to assess how much one can bring to the table?
by crazygringo on 9/10/18, 8:44 PM
> Uber, however, might be a different story... For years before this, they selected for aggressive employees, who wanted to be owners, not renters.
For a company built on the sharing/renting economy, that's... ironic.
by ska on 9/10/18, 6:06 PM
In my experience "Candidate X isn't a good cultural fit" has almost always been used as short had for either "I don't want us to hire them, but I can't articulate why in way I am comfortable with" or less often "What an asshole".
I don't think I've ever been part of a conversation about "cultural fit" that wasn't swimming in bullshit, or at least wading in it.
by mk89 on 9/11/18, 6:56 AM
I think that hiring for culture fit is not the hardest thing to do - it's no different from hiring for technical skills. It just requires that you have some background in psychology so that you can easily spot someone who is lying. Of course, it doesn't mean that you need to have a master degree in psychology. You can learn, and here experience and gut feelings play a very important role, although as someone has said, there are interesting questions you can ask to tell the Rockstar from the team player. So yes, you can use normal questions plus gut feelings.
For me more important than hiring the right people is how to retain the good ones and prevent assholes to prevail and destroy the nice atmosphere at work.
Prevention is nothing if you don't act when the problem occurs. And eventually it will.
I can't believe that companies like Amazon or Google with > 100000 employees only hire great people culturally fit. We are animals, and when put together there is always someone that wants to prevail. And there is always the culturally unfit that somehow sneaks in. The difference is how you tackle that. I have seen and been in companies where the action was literally doing nothing. You have to change to behave in a different way towards the asshole, in order to make your life easier. That's the answer. Lots of "Let's hire for good fit", but no "how to deal with aholes at work that disrupt your work environment".
Ps. People should read the "no as*hole rule" book. A first good resource on how to deal with such people.
by motohagiography on 9/10/18, 9:28 PM
Culture fit is a euphemism for shared values, and those are a mix of where strategy meets background.
Trouble I have seen is that companies don't talk about those two things because they truly are the value proposition of the firm. Often this is not precisely clear.
The real strategy of a company is necessarily hidden, but the direction it yields is something people can align to, knowingly or more often, not.
Is the strategy to get acquired for IP or because they were positioned to execute in a growth market, or maybe to create or dominate a market? These are radically different, but you can tell by looking at a cap table and an office what their plan is.
Do they need people to not ask questions, or do they need compelling visionaries? Maybe they need people to keep the ball in the air, engineers to optimize and scale big ideas, or new blood in an ossified institution. Those strategic outcomes define culture.
When I hear people say, "culture eats strategy for breakfast," I always think, "yeah, without strategy, culture starves." As you can tell I'm a real hit at off sites.
by WisNorCan on 9/10/18, 7:49 PM
Amazon stands out among the tech giants with the most distinctive behavioral values (LPs*). They are used for both recruiting, decision making and career advancements. Amazon provides a strong counter example to the thesis of this article.
[1] https://www.amazon.jobs/principles
by seppin on 9/10/18, 6:59 PM
"I don't want to spend 8 hours a day with this person" is a perfectly good reason not to hire someone.
by deathanatos on 9/11/18, 1:14 AM
Huh. I reserve "culture fit" to mean "did the candidate make racist, sexist, or ageist remarks (or other such similar remarks about something absolutely unrelated to actual engineering)?"
I've yet to not hire someone under this. (Though I have one person who I would not hire today, but I still do not know how I would have screened for them in the interview.)
Seems like I'm the only one, though. The rest of the comments seem to indicate looking for something deeper.
by Suntracker on 9/11/18, 12:29 PM
The phrase "Culture Fit" has many shades and hues. Generally, the hiring manager and his/her team would take a call on "cultural aspect", which in principle should be a fair representation of the company culture. But on many occasions that may not be case. If a manager has a bias and certain prejudicial views, it becomes culture of the team/group. In that case, a "culture fit" aspect of interview is meaningless.
by uhhhhhhh on 9/10/18, 6:26 PM
In my experience, "Culture fit" has always been the cover for "toxic" workplaces where sexism, bullying and worse run rampant.
If everyone acts professional then chances are you'll figure out how to work together. If you're unable to act professional then chances are the new hire isn't the problem, you are.
by jdauriemma on 9/11/18, 3:00 PM
If your company culture is valuable to you, articulate the things that make it valuable and write them down. Make sure the criteria are specific and measurable, then apply them to the interview and evaluation process.
by eplanit on 9/10/18, 8:08 PM
They mean "Bias Fit".
by _audakel on 9/10/18, 8:30 PM
> Obviously, screening for specific personality traits has not kept Bridgewater or Stripe from succeeding. Uber, however, might be a different story. I am going to argue that personality trait screening may have harmed Uber.
I agree there has been turmoil that has been detrimental to uber. But maybe the fact they specifically looked for hard core, "won't take no for an answer" is the reason they reached massive market / valuation they did. Lyft choose the "friendly" route and didn't get anything close to Uber size/valuation.
I'm not saying this is the best strategy/ always works, but you are saying you consider stripe successful basically because they have not had turmoil/bad press, despite the fact they are a fraction of the value of Uber.
Tldr: you probably NEED aggressive, won't take no, type of ppl to grow to a Uber size as quickly as they did.
by DoofusOfDeath on 9/10/18, 6:14 PM
> A company is its employees.
This is a bit nit-picky, but I find it distracting when an article leads with a statement that strikes me as grossly inaccurate.
Because if the rest of the article hinges on the accuracy of that opening statement, I'm likely to regret having spent time reading the article.
Clarification: The reason I'm skeptical of that particular opening statement is AFAIK U.S. corporations can have assets, liabilities, etc. that are very different than simply the sum of their employees. For example, I would gladly accept the parts of Apple that aren't employees: its bank accounts, patent portfolio, etc.
by golemiprague on 9/10/18, 8:18 PM
Culture fit is what people really feel inside but don't want to talk about because the current religion dictates that diversity is the best thing for a company. The thing is, for most tasks, homogenous and cohesive team is much more efficient and performant. It is easier for most people to work with people who are similiar to them, both culturally, racially, temperamentally, IQ level and anything else you can think about. Companies, like countries tend to disintegrate when they become too diverse. Sometimes, small doses of diversity are necessary for break throughs and creativity, but it is small doses, not the main way things suppose to work day by day.