U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2014, 07:32 AM
 
9,817 posts, read 17,069,799 times
Reputation: 18504

Advertisements

I don't see employers having any problems finding candidates who have both skills and cultural fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2014, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Idaho
836 posts, read 1,382,413 times
Reputation: 1554
Many say they want to hire someone who thinks out of the box; they fail to mention that they don't want him thinking outside of THEIR box.

Iron sharpens iron; seems my best friends are those who initially butted heads with me, so if I 'hired' friends based on cultural fit we'd both have missed out on some rich experiences.

Hiring only those who 'fit' ensures mediocrity. Companies need to challenge themselves more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 07:56 AM
 
5,721 posts, read 4,645,090 times
Reputation: 4323
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_grimace View Post
I'll be doing a talk on the pros and cons of hiring for company culture, and I was wondering if anyone had any good arguments against cultural fit being such an important factor in today's hiring process. The trend I see in nearly all companies is a ton of emphasis and effort placed in finding people who fit with the company's mold on personal levels. Skills, qualifications, and competence by themselves hardly seem to get you anywhere these days.

I've always personally been against the big emphasis on cultural fit hiring, because as someone who puts massive effort into buffing up my skills and qualifications, I often feel discriminated against when the guy with 5 years less experience than me gets the job instead because he fit the company culture and I didn't. I also feel it lets employers be way too picky about hires, leading to lengthy interview processes, understaffed teams, and lots of unemployed folks getting led on. These are just all my feelings though, and I'm just one guy. Feelings can hardly be used for evidence in an informative speech!

Does anyone have any good arguments of why it might be better to hire just for higher competence rather than better company fit?
I totally disagree with how companies are doing this now and I think it borderlines on being illegal. Also technically it creates a less diverse company so in a way they're being hypocrites when they say they embrace diversity and want all different kinds of people. Diversity means a lot more things than just race. Also I think companies use this to mask what is just downright age discrimination.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 07:58 AM
 
Location: New York City
4,036 posts, read 8,962,312 times
Reputation: 3708
I have a friend who works for Zappos and know they place huge emphasis on culture. She absolutely loves working there because of it. Other companies that come to mind are Trader Joes, Apple and Goldman Sachs. If you’re giving a talk you should do some research on case studies—I’m sure there are a lot out there.

I think hiring for cultural fit is important, but it’s something difficult to know from an interview. Culture isn’t merely congeniality. It’s also work ethic, attention to detail, collaboration, outside interests, excitement, creativity—and a sense of humor.

I can’t think of an argument against hiring for cultural fit, but I can think of a caution. If a company were to place too much emphasis on a certain type of cultural fit (appearance, extrovertedness, family life), it could risk becoming parochial, homogeneous and boring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 08:04 AM
 
9,527 posts, read 14,904,987 times
Reputation: 9775
Cultural fit can mean a lot of things, but in some cases it just means not hiring a--holes. And in that form I think it's very important. If someone is an a--hole to the interviewer (when they're presumably trying to be on their best behavior), they're probably going to be even worse once they're on the job, and they'll destroy more productivity than they create.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 08:12 AM
 
5,721 posts, read 4,645,090 times
Reputation: 4323
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
Cultural fit can mean a lot of things, but in some cases it just means not hiring a--holes. And in that form I think it's very important. If someone is an a--hole to the interviewer (when they're presumably trying to be on their best behavior), they're probably going to be even worse once they're on the job, and they'll destroy more productivity than they create.
The problem is though they do this just based on a personality test and how someone looks. There is no way you can know someone just by a 15 minute interview so what happens is people start to use stereotypes to try and "guess" if they're a good person or not. Also like I said I think age some discrimination creeps in there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 08:22 AM
 
1,115 posts, read 2,006,852 times
Reputation: 2111
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
Cultural fit can mean a lot of things, but in some cases it just means not hiring a--holes. And in that form I think it's very important. If someone is an a--hole to the interviewer (when they're presumably trying to be on their best behavior), they're probably going to be even worse once they're on the job, and they'll destroy more productivity than they create.
This would be nice, but I don't think it's the way it's currently done. The way I see hiring for culture is more so looking are things that are discriminatory like age or race, but also other small personalities facets like mannerisms, introverted vs extroverted, interests and hobbies, etc.

For example, if a company is mostly made up of young 20 somethings, they probably won't hire a 40 year old even if he is the nicest, most genuine, (and skilled) guy around. If a company is mostly extroverts, they might not hire an introvert. If the company sells fishing rods and the candidate doesn't like fishing, they probably won't hire him (even though the position probably has nothing to do with deep knowledge of fishing - it could be an accountant position for example). Companies make it seem like you have to have this love relationship with your job, but that's simply not true. You shouldn't hate work, but work is just work. Do good at your job and live and enjoy the rest of life too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 08:25 AM
 
Location: SW Missouri
15,849 posts, read 30,438,519 times
Reputation: 22358
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_grimace View Post
I'll be doing a talk on the pros and cons of hiring for company culture, and I was wondering if anyone had any good arguments against cultural fit being such an important factor in today's hiring process. The trend I see in nearly all companies is a ton of emphasis and effort placed in finding people who fit with the company's mold on personal levels. Skills, qualifications, and competence by themselves hardly seem to get you anywhere these days.

I've always personally been against the big emphasis on cultural fit hiring, because as someone who puts massive effort into buffing up my skills and qualifications, I often feel discriminated against when the guy with 5 years less experience than me gets the job instead because he fit the company culture and I didn't. I also feel it lets employers be way too picky about hires, leading to lengthy interview processes, understaffed teams, and lots of unemployed folks getting led on. These are just all my feelings though, and I'm just one guy. Feelings can hardly be used for evidence in an informative speech!

Does anyone have any good arguments of why it might be better to hire just for higher competence rather than better company fit?
I think part of the problem with today's incompetence level is that people view work as some kind of "social" experience. When I go to work, I GO TO WORK, and I am not interested in socializing with my co workers. I can't tell you how many times I have had to deal with the stupidity of people who think that work should be "fun" instead of work.

As a business owner now, I tell all prospective employees that they are here first and foremost to perform a function. I am not interested in being their friend, or listening to stories about their personal life. In fact I tell them that I usually don't talk much, so don't bother. You would be amazed how many of them just can't grasp the concept.

In the past I have worked in companies that valued company culture above the importance of working hard and doing a good job. How these businesses continue to stay in business is beyond me.

20yrsinBranson
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 08:32 AM
 
1,305 posts, read 1,323,819 times
Reputation: 1365
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_grimace View Post
To each their own. Frankly I think working with adult children who treat work like an adult playground and are unreliable, unskilled, and incompetent are a pain in the ass to deal with.
This is the real world. You shouldn't treat everything in absolutes like this.

The keyword is everything with moderation. Everyone in my office take work very seriously. Case in point. Our contractor made a type-o in their bill to us. One of the equipment they used was a x267. They typed in x367. And this was written in font 2 (very tiny). One of our guys caught this and made the contractor retype out the bill before we would pay for it.

We also joke around in the office. We've been talking about aliens, time travel, food, our earliest childhood memories, etc. Because my RE (my boss) finds and hires his own people rather than let the firm's HR department do it, I'm convinced that he purposely hired people who can personally fit into his team of engineers.

I've also worked in an office environment where there were people who took work very seriously and are a--holes about it. What people like you don't understand is people in general are less productive in an unfriendly work environment. And unfortunately, often times a--holes who are very efficient workers tend to become managers, which gives them the opportunity to make everyone else's life miserable. And again, I don't understand why people like you don't understand that a stressed out worker is a lot less productive than a happy worker.

Back during times of slavery, there was a saying. A healthy slave can do lots of work the whole day. A sick slave can do mediocre work half a day. And a dead slave can do no work at all.

The same concept applies to today's work force. Don't get me wrong, if you think efficiency should trump culture fit, then god bless you for it. But based on my years of experience, efficiency with no culture fit will drive the company down to the ground. I've seen plenty of examples in my life. I'm just glad my boss feels the same way and has assembled his team with people that can both handle the work and can joke around, easing the stress and tension that naturally build up in an office environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2014, 09:18 AM
 
Location: Western Washington
9,081 posts, read 8,484,255 times
Reputation: 15732
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_grimace View Post
This would be nice, but I don't think it's the way it's currently done. The way I see hiring for culture is more so looking are things that are discriminatory like age or race, but also other small personalities facets like mannerisms, introverted vs extroverted, interests and hobbies, etc.
The problem with this discussion is that you have not defined any of your terms, nor have you provided anybody with the ratios involved between competence:skill:fit. Additionally you are phrasing this as an all or nothing excercise, when things in real life are rarely so clear cut.

Personality, whether you like it or not, is a key factor in many jobs. Retail clerks should be outgoing, same with sales people. Who wants to deal with a grumpy receptionist?

How exactly do you measure competence and skill? Through experience and certifications? We all know people who caught onto things faster than us, and slower as well.

Do all jobs need supreme levels of competence? Is a bookkeeper with 25 years of experience 5x as good as one with 5 years of experience? Or only a little bit? What if the person with five years of experience is highly cooperative, a pleasure to be around, and wants to learn, when the 25 year experience is a cranky a$$ hole whose idea of saying good morning is F--- off, leave me do my work?

Hiring decisions are often not clear, and the reality is we do have to spend 40 hours a week with our coworkers. Personality is important.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top