3 ms·

On the other hand if you never hire anyone with different ideas then you'll inevitably create a monoculture that had difficulty seeing its own weaknesses and ma

On the other hand if you never hire anyone with different ideas then you'll inevitably create a monoculture that had difficulty seeing its own weaknesses and making improvements. Sometimes two philosophies aren't necessarily wrong but simply aren't compatible. Choices like emphasising frequent collaboration and constant communication or async-first deep work. Mismatches there are genuine culture misfits and it benefits everyone to realise that early and move on with no hard feelings. But a lot of ideas in how a team works are not so black and white. It's valuable to hire people who have different ideas and aren't afraid to advocate for them when the time is right as long as they are still team players who will accept a result that isn't their personal preference if that's the team's consensus or management's direction. Not hiring people like that because their personal preferences don't align with the team's current way of doing things is also a culture misfit but in this case it's a dodged bullet for the good candidate.

brightlancer 3y ago
> > Culture is much harder to "teach". For me testing for culture fit has become much more important than tech acumen, particularly at more senior levels. You need to have a sense of at least whether the candidate aligns with the company culture, and is willing to fit. > On the other hand if you never hire anyone with different ideas then you'll inevitably create a monoculture that had difficulty seeing its own weaknesses and making improvements. This is a balancing act for which there isn't a hard and fast rule, because organizations need a culture, but not all cultural values are good. A group might want to bend on someone who is weaker on their Documentation And Testing value, but not bend on someone who is weaker on their Honesty value; but maybe they won't bend on Documentation And Testing because they view it as essential and don't want to risk that the FNG won't internalize it. "But that isn't the cultures I object to," I've heard critics say. Of course not. But sometimes those are the cultural values that folks are trying to conserve. That's why there's no hard and fast rule. Sometimes the cultural values are dishonesty or bigotry or cronyism, or simply an aversion to being called "bro". But often they're honesty and open-mindedness and fairness. We should not toss out the baby with the bathwater.

brightlancer 3y ago

> > Culture is much harder to "teach". For me testing for culture fit has become much more important than tech acumen, particularly at more senior levels. You need to have a sense of at least whether the candidate aligns with the company culture, and is willing to fit. > On the other hand if you never hire anyone with different ideas then you'll inevitably create a monoculture that had difficulty seeing its own weaknesses and making improvements. This is a balancing act for which there isn't a hard and fast rule, because organizations need a culture, but not all cultural values are good. A group might want to bend on someone who is weaker on their Documentation And Testing value, but not bend on someone who is weaker on their Honesty value; but maybe they won't bend on Documentation And Testing because they view it as essential and don't want to risk that the FNG won't internalize it. "But that isn't the cultures I object to," I've heard critics say. Of course not. But sometimes those are the cultural values that folks are trying to conserve. That's why there's no hard and fast rule. Sometimes the cultural values are dishonesty or bigotry or cronyism, or simply an aversion to being called "bro". But often they're honesty and open-mindedness and fairness. We should not toss out the baby with the bathwater.