8 ms·

I always interview for "culture fit". In my experience, that's almost always the bottleneck, and the technical part is rarely a problem. Learning a new skill is

I always interview for "culture fit". In my experience, that's almost always the bottleneck, and the technical part is rarely a problem. Learning a new skill is not an earth-shattering problem if you have a good attitude towards work, and good interpersonal skills are a must in teams

richmarr 9y ago
That prompts two questions for me if you don't mind sharing. (a) How do you define and assess "culture fit", and why? (b) How do you know the things you're optimising for are actually good proxies for productivity? Appreciate these aren't questions with simple answers (or maybe even answers at all), but hiring/assessment process is my current field and I'm always curious where peoples thinking is at.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  That’s a fancy way of saying “we hire people we like”. It’s an approach that isn’t perfect but is good enough for many roles. We pick spouses based on that approach and it works out pretty well for most people.
  - mlashcorp 9y ago
    You are correct, "culture fit" is not a good descriptor of what I meant. We hire people we believe we will be able to work with. It's not a popularity contest, we evaluate problem solving, analytical thinking and communication skills, such as the ability to explain complex topics in easy terms. I'll give you an example, usually we are interviewing people straight out of the university, but this can be applied to any candidate. I'll start by asking the candidate to talk about his master's project. As he talks about it, I'll guide the conversation towards these topics : -What was the problem -How was it defined? -How did you tackle it? -Explain your solution -support your decisions -Was there a cost/benefit analysis? -How was the problem decomposed? This will give me an initial picture of the candidate's ability to address a problem, and is far more important to me than wether he knows "the number after F in hexadecimal" or some other nonsense.
    - Peroni 9y ago
      This isn't screening for 'culture fit' though and I'd sincerely recommend avoiding referring to it as that. You're screening for strong communication skills and that's absolutely fine (and highly recommended). Interviewing for culture fit (as you've seen in the responses to your comment) has an extremely negative stigma attached to it for good reason.
      - philipps 9y ago
        I strongly agree with this. “Culture fit” is one of those concepts that often disadvantages “others”. This is something we may not be able to avoid without putting in place safeguards (concert musicians were predominantly male until blind auditions were used - and it turned out that female musicians play just as well or better). As I mention above this is often not a result of bad intentions, but of implicit biases that have an effect on our judgements even if we are fully aware of them and explicitly try to avoid them. See https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html
    - lucozade 9y ago
      On reading this post, it may well be that culture fit is quite a good description. At least from the POV that you're selecting from a small cadre of (almost exclusively) male masters grads.
  - tonyedgecombe 9y ago
    Which is a polite way of saying “we hire people like us”
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    About half of all marriages fail. All the intimate relationships people have prior to marriage also don't last. So people we like has a fairly high failure rate for intimate relationships. Having said that, it doesn't necessarily mean it was all a complete waste. Most people don't stay in their first job, so there's that.
    - ndh2 9y ago
      "People we like" is not how 100% of all people pick their spouse.
    - late2part 9y ago
      I suggest that the average marriage lasts longer than most jobs. Average Job: 4.6 Years - https://www.thebalance.com/how-long-should-an-employee-stay-at-a-job-2059796 https://www.thebalance.com/how-long-should-an-employee-stay-... Average Marriage: 8 Years - https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/32-Shocking-Divorce-Statistics.aspx https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/3...
      - jogjayr 9y ago
        Given how much harder it is to leave a marriage than it is to leave a job, I'd think the gap between those two should be much larger.
        Spooky23 9y ago
        The two are pretty tightly linked. If you have an underemployed or unemployed couple without a support network, you pretty much have to get divorced to get social services.
    - Spooky23 9y ago
      What's your definition of success? I don't walk into any job interview situation expecting 30 years of bliss -- that's generally not a reality. If you stick around for 3 years that's probably a decent employment relationship depending on industry. Many marriages, including those that ultimately fail, work pretty well for a long time. I'm not that old, and I've been married for 13 years. Is that a win? Also, the average marriage is around 8 years, but the median is close to 40 iirc. People who get divorced trend to have issues like being young, poor, previously divorced, criminal issues or substance abuse problems. Divorce rates for couples at least 25 without those risk factors are dramatically lower -- implying that people with fewer signs of bad judgement display better judgement in picking a spouse and maintaining a relationship.
  - pmorici 9y ago
    Have you looked at the divorce rate?
tehwalrus 9y ago
Isn't culture fit just another word for "people like me"? There have been numerous articles reporting the huge damage this sort of optimisation does. Did you mean "inter-personal skills"? The rest of your answer seems to suggest so. This is not the same as culture fit.
- jonahx 9y ago
  > Isn't culture fit just another word for "people like me" More like: people who aren't going to grate on me, which is very different and encompasses a much larger set of people. The "culture fit" strategy can no doubt be abused, but it's also wrong not to recognize that a technically brilliant hire can be terrible for the company if there are communication problems or personality conflicts.
  - tehwalrus 9y ago
    "Inter-personal skills" plus "works well in a team" seem to be those criteria, as I would describe them (from the UK). (I don't actually mind what anyone calls it, but "culture fit" has got a bad press and got my hackles up! Apologies to all!)
    - mlashcorp 9y ago
      I agree, I regret my use of the term "culture fit".
  - philipps 9y ago
    This type of selection (“people who don’t grate me”) often favors people that are similar to us. Project Implicit[1] at Harvard has done interesting work highlighting our difficulty to make “objective” judgements (esp. about other people that are different from ourselves), and that we go to great lengths justifying our biased decisions not just to others but to ourselves. Hence “implicit” biases. 1. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html
    - 9y ago
humanrebar 9y ago
> Learning a new skill is not an earth-shattering problem... Depends on the problem. If you're cranking out brochure websites from a set of templates, you have a pretty accessible role to fill. But I have many colleagues who make mistakes (even when people object clearly), dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. Some of the time, I can even see their eyes glaze over as I try to get them to think a few more moves ahead in their plan. Now, organizations should have safe roles for journeyman engineers who crank out and maintain code as directed, but most organizations expect all senior engineers to be part time system design experts, which I don't think everyone has the knack for. Likewise, not everyone is a great communicator and strong enough technically to be accurate in their communication.
- crispyambulance 9y ago
  > But I have many colleagues who make mistakes [...] dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. A skilled practice of behavioral interviewing can, I think, mostly screen out such candidates. People who have a habit of "doubling down on their mistakes" will find it hard to wiggle around pointed behavioral questions which require the candidate to describe real experiences and answer follow-up questions. The problem is that most organizations are terrible, TERRIBLE at evaluating candidates. They forget that interviewing candidates is a skill in itself that needs to be developed and needs to be consistent across the organization. Moreover, these same organizations fail to "close the feedback loop" when it comes to evaluating employee performance. The "annual review" data can be put to good use by informing hiring decisions. Instead annual reviews are just an irritating burden used for the purpose of carving up the raise/bonus pie. It is basic engineering... evaluate your outputs (employees), then use that data to adapt to your inputs (candidates). But virtually no one does it, because its all tied up in HR-bullshit instead.
- BeetleB 9y ago
  >But I have many colleagues who make mistakes (even when people object clearly), dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. Your making the parent's point for him. This is a behavioral problem. Hence, screening for culture fit.
Double_a_92 9y ago
But you still need some technical skill... Otherwise you could just hire some soccer player (outgoing teamplayer. etc.) and you're good.
- fairpx 9y ago
  I think that’s a given here

richmarr 9y ago

That prompts two questions for me if you don't mind sharing. (a) How do you define and assess "culture fit", and why? (b) How do you know the things you're optimising for are actually good proxies for productivity? Appreciate these aren't questions with simple answers (or maybe even answers at all), but hiring/assessment process is my current field and I'm always curious where peoples thinking is at.

Spooky23 9y ago
That’s a fancy way of saying “we hire people we like”. It’s an approach that isn’t perfect but is good enough for many roles. We pick spouses based on that approach and it works out pretty well for most people.
- mlashcorp 9y ago
  You are correct, "culture fit" is not a good descriptor of what I meant. We hire people we believe we will be able to work with. It's not a popularity contest, we evaluate problem solving, analytical thinking and communication skills, such as the ability to explain complex topics in easy terms. I'll give you an example, usually we are interviewing people straight out of the university, but this can be applied to any candidate. I'll start by asking the candidate to talk about his master's project. As he talks about it, I'll guide the conversation towards these topics : -What was the problem -How was it defined? -How did you tackle it? -Explain your solution -support your decisions -Was there a cost/benefit analysis? -How was the problem decomposed? This will give me an initial picture of the candidate's ability to address a problem, and is far more important to me than wether he knows "the number after F in hexadecimal" or some other nonsense.
  - Peroni 9y ago
    This isn't screening for 'culture fit' though and I'd sincerely recommend avoiding referring to it as that. You're screening for strong communication skills and that's absolutely fine (and highly recommended). Interviewing for culture fit (as you've seen in the responses to your comment) has an extremely negative stigma attached to it for good reason.
    - philipps 9y ago
      I strongly agree with this. “Culture fit” is one of those concepts that often disadvantages “others”. This is something we may not be able to avoid without putting in place safeguards (concert musicians were predominantly male until blind auditions were used - and it turned out that female musicians play just as well or better). As I mention above this is often not a result of bad intentions, but of implicit biases that have an effect on our judgements even if we are fully aware of them and explicitly try to avoid them. See https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html
  - lucozade 9y ago
    On reading this post, it may well be that culture fit is quite a good description. At least from the POV that you're selecting from a small cadre of (almost exclusively) male masters grads.
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  Which is a polite way of saying “we hire people like us”
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  About half of all marriages fail. All the intimate relationships people have prior to marriage also don't last. So people we like has a fairly high failure rate for intimate relationships. Having said that, it doesn't necessarily mean it was all a complete waste. Most people don't stay in their first job, so there's that.
  - ndh2 9y ago
    "People we like" is not how 100% of all people pick their spouse.
  - late2part 9y ago
    I suggest that the average marriage lasts longer than most jobs. Average Job: 4.6 Years - https://www.thebalance.com/how-long-should-an-employee-stay-at-a-job-2059796 https://www.thebalance.com/how-long-should-an-employee-stay-... Average Marriage: 8 Years - https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/32-Shocking-Divorce-Statistics.aspx https://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/3...
    - jogjayr 9y ago
      Given how much harder it is to leave a marriage than it is to leave a job, I'd think the gap between those two should be much larger.
      - Spooky23 9y ago
        The two are pretty tightly linked. If you have an underemployed or unemployed couple without a support network, you pretty much have to get divorced to get social services.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    What's your definition of success? I don't walk into any job interview situation expecting 30 years of bliss -- that's generally not a reality. If you stick around for 3 years that's probably a decent employment relationship depending on industry. Many marriages, including those that ultimately fail, work pretty well for a long time. I'm not that old, and I've been married for 13 years. Is that a win? Also, the average marriage is around 8 years, but the median is close to 40 iirc. People who get divorced trend to have issues like being young, poor, previously divorced, criminal issues or substance abuse problems. Divorce rates for couples at least 25 without those risk factors are dramatically lower -- implying that people with fewer signs of bad judgement display better judgement in picking a spouse and maintaining a relationship.
- pmorici 9y ago
  Have you looked at the divorce rate?

tehwalrus 9y ago

Isn't culture fit just another word for "people like me"? There have been numerous articles reporting the huge damage this sort of optimisation does. Did you mean "inter-personal skills"? The rest of your answer seems to suggest so. This is not the same as culture fit.

jonahx 9y ago
> Isn't culture fit just another word for "people like me" More like: people who aren't going to grate on me, which is very different and encompasses a much larger set of people. The "culture fit" strategy can no doubt be abused, but it's also wrong not to recognize that a technically brilliant hire can be terrible for the company if there are communication problems or personality conflicts.
- tehwalrus 9y ago
  "Inter-personal skills" plus "works well in a team" seem to be those criteria, as I would describe them (from the UK). (I don't actually mind what anyone calls it, but "culture fit" has got a bad press and got my hackles up! Apologies to all!)
  - mlashcorp 9y ago
    I agree, I regret my use of the term "culture fit".
- philipps 9y ago
  This type of selection (“people who don’t grate me”) often favors people that are similar to us. Project Implicit[1] at Harvard has done interesting work highlighting our difficulty to make “objective” judgements (esp. about other people that are different from ourselves), and that we go to great lengths justifying our biased decisions not just to others but to ourselves. Hence “implicit” biases. 1. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/aboutus.html
  - 9y ago

humanrebar 9y ago

> Learning a new skill is not an earth-shattering problem... Depends on the problem. If you're cranking out brochure websites from a set of templates, you have a pretty accessible role to fill. But I have many colleagues who make mistakes (even when people object clearly), dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. Some of the time, I can even see their eyes glaze over as I try to get them to think a few more moves ahead in their plan. Now, organizations should have safe roles for journeyman engineers who crank out and maintain code as directed, but most organizations expect all senior engineers to be part time system design experts, which I don't think everyone has the knack for. Likewise, not everyone is a great communicator and strong enough technically to be accurate in their communication.

crispyambulance 9y ago
> But I have many colleagues who make mistakes [...] dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. A skilled practice of behavioral interviewing can, I think, mostly screen out such candidates. People who have a habit of "doubling down on their mistakes" will find it hard to wiggle around pointed behavioral questions which require the candidate to describe real experiences and answer follow-up questions. The problem is that most organizations are terrible, TERRIBLE at evaluating candidates. They forget that interviewing candidates is a skill in itself that needs to be developed and needs to be consistent across the organization. Moreover, these same organizations fail to "close the feedback loop" when it comes to evaluating employee performance. The "annual review" data can be put to good use by informing hiring decisions. Instead annual reviews are just an irritating burden used for the purpose of carving up the raise/bonus pie. It is basic engineering... evaluate your outputs (employees), then use that data to adapt to your inputs (candidates). But virtually no one does it, because its all tied up in HR-bullshit instead.
BeetleB 9y ago
>But I have many colleagues who make mistakes (even when people object clearly), dig a hole for themselves, double down on the mistake, and the either back their way into job security with their mess or end up moving on once the chickens come home to roost. Your making the parent's point for him. This is a behavioral problem. Hence, screening for culture fit.

Double_a_92 9y ago

But you still need some technical skill... Otherwise you could just hire some soccer player (outgoing teamplayer. etc.) and you're good.

fairpx 9y ago
I think that’s a given here