A great hiring decision comes down to one thing

Across the world, anyone in the field of human resources management who is involved with the hiring process is familiar with the term “culture fit.” After candidates have been assessed on knowledge and skills, and a shortlist has been prepared, the final decision is often based on that one intangible quality. This is so widely accepted that it is rarely questioned. Instead, detailed internal discussions in organisations are held and a candidate is finalised. One could say, with apologies to Jane Austen, it is a truth universally acknowledged that a manager in possession of a hiring ticket must be in want of a culture fit.

But if we ask recruiters and hiring managers what they really understand by the term culture fit, one is likely to hear different answers. These can range from “communication” and “presentability” (which are often euphemisms for the right accent or right way of dressing), to justifications for the candidate who will “get” cultural references or jokes or “will be fun to hang out with after work”.

In her study of hiring practices in elite banks, Professor Lauren A Rivera of Northwestern University in the US, points out that interviewers seemed to favour candidates who were closest to them in backgrounds and experience. Her study indicates that managers gravitate towards candidates with similar social, educational and sometimes even ethnic backgrounds to, in Twitter-speak, PLUs, or “People Like Us”, thus filtering out diversity of thought and background in the organisation.

As a result, there has been some criticism of the concept of a culture fit. Candidates with great track records may be rejected because they lack polish or panache, and those from the “right” schools or colleges, or wielding the right phones and accessories, may be selected instead. But regardless of this bias in several international organisations, great hiring decisions are not about a culture fit but a work ethic fit.

For instance, hiring managers can assess this critical aspect through focusing on a candidate’s traits and characterises – either through intense probing at the interview stage that ask for detailed examples or through psychometric or personality tests. Further, reference checks (with open-ended questions) that include observations and facts from previous managers/peers are a rich and relevant source of data on a candidate’s motivations and approach to their daily work.

While culture is a nebulous term, it is often easy to recognise in an organisation – for instance, in daily conversations, in meetings and in the “way things get done around here”. Dig a little deeper, and the culture of an organisation is often more about work ethics, and less about educational and social backgrounds.

A candidate’s approach to problem solving or execution is not necessarily attributable to “culture” or “personality,” but is often one of work ethic, and how they approach their daily responsibilities. It is then a question of their attitudes (which is the third pillar in the well-established HR competency framework, besides knowledge and skills) to their work and workplace. When work ethics match, it does not matter if the candidate and colleagues will go on to be best buddies at the office. The only thing that will matter is that they all show up, do their job and work towards a common goal.

In a perfect recruiting world, the cultural norms of an organisation should be clearly defined and communicated. For instance, does the organisation value conformity and collaboration? Does, say, a particular role in the organisation require those attributes more than other roles would? Does the organisation treasure risk-takers, and those willing to challenge rules? Do they prioritise teamwork, or people who will complete tasks independently?

Hiring managers should be able to break down these statements into characteristics and check these during interviews. If an organisation thrives on collaboration and cross-functional teams, the candidate should be assessed for empathy and ability to work well with others – and those interviewed who have largely been independent contributors may not appreciate a culture where decisions are discussed and consensus is valued. In a post-Covid-19 world, where employees must have the ability to work without supervision, the focus should be on the completion of tasks and high degrees of professionalism.

Of course, managers may be uncomfortable with a particular candidate or have a strong preference for another, but may not be able to articulate the reason. This is not to say that managers should ignore that gut feeling – rather, HR leaders should talk managers through that feeling and use it to identify the real reason behind the preference.

The National