Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

triplebyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 233 posts

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#21

Post by ska »

LanceH wrote: post #8
ska wrote: post #5

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.

A big classifier I've seen that gets put under "cultural fit" is the "it's not my job" problem. A startup can't have people saying that, but big enterprise companies live by it. Some people just can't transition from one to the other. I've found in interviews that some people expect to do exactly what their credentials have prepared them for. At least for the places I've worked, that's insufficient for programming an…

True, one of the few ways that I have seen "cultural fit" used meaningfully is in this context.

Hiring for a startup : "They seem like more of a big-company type"

Hiring for a big company: "They seem like more of a startup type"

It's not really company specific.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#22

Post by tomjen3 »

elvinyung wrote: post #2

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?

Because you don't add to a team which is highly dynamic by adding a person who expects a straightforward top-down decision-making process, and the same is the case in the reverse situation. This is not about pristine or not, but simply about the average.

You do add to a team of programmers by adding a marketing person, salesperson, technical support or test person.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#23

Post by bunderbunder »

mc32 wrote: post #9
elvinyung wrote: post #2

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?

I think because when we think about culture fit, what people can add is already in the equation. When a culture fit is used to DQ someone it’s because on balance they subtracted more than they added relative to other candidates.

Or, at least, the interviewers perceived that that would be the case. Perception might be out of phase with reality there -- members of sub-optimal cultures don't necessarily realize they have a problem.

(Then, I suppose, there's the further question of whether it's even possible to add to a culture that doesn't want to be added to.)

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#24

Post by mc32 »

elvinyung wrote: post #13
mc32 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because when we think about culture fit, what people can add is already in the equation. When a culture fit is used to DQ someone it’s because on balance they subtracted more than they added relative to other candidates.

I think that's only a post hoc rationalization -- the point being that culture "fit" is also very easy to hide behind for people who are attempting to preserve a perceived consistency. Obviously all of these are just mental abstractions, but I contend that one is easier to think about as someone who cares about diversity.

To me the whole culture fit is a circus and there to make people believe they are being virtuous, etc. It’s BS.

That said, there is some value in sharing some important core principles.

However, to me either someone can execute their responsibilities, or they can’t—but it’s dufficult to infer that from a pre-work interview.

As it is non conforming cultural fit might be someone who doesn’t drink like a fish, or someone who needs to take care of family obligations after working hours, for example.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#25

Post by stcredzero »

harryh wrote: post #15

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 w…

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.

"Culture fit" is the justification for who they see as problematic, starting a bit short of being a "huge asshole or complete weirdo."

I don't think anyone cares all that much beyond that.

We know that such companies can be suffused with groupthink, to the point of mass hysteria and virulent hate. It's documented in public at this point.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#26

Post by theorique »

harryh wrote: post #15

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 w…

In my experience, culture fit is exactly that - a nice way of saying that the candidate was "a huge asshole or complete weirdo."

It's shorthand for "I think they could probably do the work, but I don't think that I/we could actually stand working with this particular candidate".

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#27

Post by [deleted] »

tbrownaw wrote: post #11
Analemma_ wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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" Either that or "I don't want us to hire them, but I can't say why because it would be against the law." "Culture fit" has mostly become a loophole for anti-discrimination laws.

"Culture fit" has mostly become a loophole for anti-discrimination laws. Is this just gut feel, or based on actual data? Because it sounds contrary to the survey results described in the article.

[deleted]

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#28

Post by zdragnar »

Analemma_ wrote: post #6
ska wrote: post #5

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.

> "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" Either that or "I don't want us to hire them, but I can't say why because it would be against the law." "Culture fit" has mostly become a loophole for anti-discrimination laws.

That's a very uncharitable assumption. At a previous company, where I was involved in the hiring process, 'culture fit' almost always was either shorthand for perceived work ethic or lack of ambition. We were primarily concerned with two things: where are you now in your abilities, and where do you aspire to be in your career?

You don't need "culture fit" as an excuse to not hire someone you don't want to. If a hiring manager has an illegal bias, there are plenty of ways to avoid hiring a particular candidate.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#29

Post by uhhhhhhh »

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.

Re: What Companies Mean by Culture Fit

#30

Post by djsumdog »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #12

> 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 ass…

I thought the same thing. A company is also its buildings, equipment, things that can be liquidated, it's founders, it's principal investors, etc..
Post reply on HN