To think employers shouldn’t hire on cultural fit

[Matleave22]

In my opinion, hiring on cultural fit is a really fast way to only hire ‘people like you’.

Surely a range of people with diverse outlooks and differing world views will make for a better and more powerful team! I think this ‘hiring on culture’ ideology inhibits diversity and inclusion.

What do you think? AIBU?

*school leaves, and graduate programmes

I think there is a distinct but often unwritten differentiation between company values and culture, and I wish recruiters would make that clear. As a very hard working, driven person I can in theory fit into any company. As a practising Muslim woman I have issues fitting into companies where there is a culture (and expectation) of drinking, sexualized 'banter' and constant after work socialising. After graduation I naively assumed I'd do my job and progress, but realized quickly that these 'cultural' elements can be integral to promotion as they are viewed as evidence of dedication to the company.

I was told to my face that they didn't hire me because I didn't speak Gujarati, there was nothing in the job spec that required it - when I queried it they said it was because I wouldn't fit in because that was the language they all spoke! I wish I had it in written form because its discriminatory

Culture fit has nothing to do with diversity and everything to do with team dynamics. Interviews are a two way street especially more so currently when candidates are more plentiful than jobs. No one moves to somewhere they feel they won't thrive do they? And who hires someone who will upset the apple cart? Unless it's a toxic or stale place that needs fresh ideas and then you're really on a hiding to nothing as decent staff won't stay long. That's hiring 101 surely?

25 firms prioritising young people from FSM/non-university educated parents backgrounds in certain schemes is hardly all accountancy firms, is it?

And, quite frankly, so what if it was? The white, middle-class boys that you mention will have had plenty of other privileges.

Are you not concerned about the white, middle-class girls btw?

And, no, your children aren't disadvantaged 'because you care.

In fact, they don't sound disadvantaged at all. Not being eligible to apply for a few apprenticeships is not what being disadvantaged means.

Cultural fit means company culture.

Not what some people seem to think it means

Don't see an issue with it

@Oblomov21

Yep. I do. Check it out. All 25 firms signed up to it. And they prioritise disadvantaged children with free school meals and a parent who didn't go to uni, for their work experience.

They only take disadvantaged children for their work experience. Only. It's their criteria.

Plus for apprenticeships. The same.
I rang pwc and KPMG to check I hadn't misunderstood.

I asked if they had this support programme, which is of course right, to support disadvantaged Children

But was it run . alongside a programme of recruiting any student from .... not disadvantaged families ? say a grammar school (which mine aren't) or from a family who aren't on free school meals. Who have a parent or both parents attending Uni.

They both said no.

I was told by other parents that I should just appreciate that my boys aren't on free school meals, and have parents who are interested. Which I had to agree with. So they are advantaged because I care.

But I couldn't grasp that the top 4 don't / only offer work experience to disadvantaged children.

To be clear though, work experience and recruitment are not the same thing.

For their work experience they only take young people from less advantaged backgrounds: who might well not be confident enough to know that these schemes are good options for them. They specifically note that this is the "access accountancy" scheme.

www.kpmgcareers.co.uk/apprentice/discovery-work-experience/

That is not the case for e.g. their audit apprenticeship: www.kpmgcareers.co.uk/apprentice/audit-apprenticeship-programmes/audit-apprenticeship/

Or any of the others that I looked at. And you don't need to have done work experience there to get an apprenticeship or a graduate training scheme. They are trying to compensate for some of the disadvantages, not prevent anyone else from applying to actual roles there.

Ought to add that ability and attitude are the only criteria I would consider when assessing applicants.

You’ve all just made me realise that I hire people in the same way I treat relationships
For example shared values are high on my list
Problem solving same - I’m solution focussed and can’t cope with whinging or negativity
I’m also most sympathetic to good all rounders or people who are prepared to challenge or try something new
I’m not great with jobs worth’s or those who work in own silo

But I couldn't grasp that the top 4 don't / only offer work experience to disadvantaged children.

Work experience is not a job offer.

I think kinzarose describes it well.

If a company culture includes an expectation of going to the pub after work, this effectively excludes eg practicing Muslim people and usually women (and some men) with young children.

Accountancy firms only hire disadvantaged children now

Yep. I do. Check it out. All 25 firms signed up to it.
And they prioritise disadvantaged children with free school meals and a parent who didn't go to uni, for their work experience.

Eh?

Are you really claiming there are only 25 accountancy firms in the UK staffed entirely by children ?

If there are only 25 accountancy firms in the country why is there a "top 100" list?

Never mind the fact that work experience programmes for children are not "hires" .

Why would you hire someone who doesn’t share your company’s cultural/behavioral values?

"What a deliberately inflammatory, and definitely untrue statement." What do you mean?

I would guess this comment from your earlier post:
Accountancy firms only hire disadvantaged children now, which is of course right. But there is no normal recruitment alongside it

Which you then modified, without stating it was a correction, to the fact that this is a specific programme for temporary work experience for disadvantaged children. The clue is in the name.

And this one:
My employment lawyer says white middle class boys are now being disadvantaged, they aren't being hired

If your employment lawyer talks equivalent nonsense about the law you might want to find a replacement.

"cultural fit" is about how the organisation works. If its being used to employ "someone who looks like me" then they are doing it wrong.

@NameChangeforMoneyThings you’ve put that very well. It’s about widening the pool of available talent at the recruitment stage, by giving people who wouldn’t otherwise think of applying an insight into the opportunities there. I personally think it’s a great idea.

Do you work in HR:-)

In a truly equal world, people should be hired on the basis of their ability to do the job. Not to improve the D&I profile of the hiring company.

I agree. My work is guilty of it and snaps up extroverts who dont last their probation period. I think it's a license to appoint on gut feelings ie discriminate.

I’ve heard of it in the tech sector.

It basically means hiring a person who can communicate and not necessarily the most technically able person.

@TheyWentToSeaInASieve

Do you work in HR:-)

In a truly equal world, people should be hired on the basis of their ability to do the job. Not to improve the D&I profile of the hiring company.

They usually are. What the D&I focus does is force people to search further and harder to ensure they are recruiting the best person for the job, not just hiring the first white male that comes along, who often happens to be a mate of someone in the team.

They only take disadvantaged children for their work experience. Only. It's their criteria
Plus for apprenticeships. The same. I rang pwc and KPMG to check I hadn't misunderstood

Oblomov21 Assuming this is accurate and you haven't misunderstood, this situation needs to be given more publicity and challenged, surely?

@mustlovegin

They only take disadvantaged children for their work experience. Only. It's their criteria Plus for apprenticeships. The same. I rang pwc and KPMG to check I hadn't misunderstood

Oblomov21 Assuming this is accurate and you haven't misunderstood, this situation needs to be given more publicity and challenged, surely?

It isn't accurate the poster is referring to a 2 day work experience programme KPMG offer www.kpmgcareers.co.uk/vacancies/work-experience-discovery-insight-programme-london-tbc-2021/990cbe78-9957-d9e3-4105-2d3c420d957c . That is only to children eligible for FSM or if neither of their parents went to university. They then can skip to stage 2 of the apprentice hiring process if it went well but the apprentice and graduate schemes are open to all who meet the academic requirements. I don't work for KPMG but was so surprised I looked it up.

YABU for starting a potentially controversial thread with over 70 replies so far, and then not coming back to it after what, three hours and counting.

Surely a range of people with diverse outlooks and differing world views will make for a better and more powerful team

It's not clear what you mean by 'culture' OP. But your statement is not true in every scenario. Filling diversity quotas for the sake of it does not always result in stronger teams. And sometimes there is a valid need (or desire, even?) to recruit 'people like you'.

Would you hire someone who gives off 'hipster' vibes for an agricultural estate agent role?

Or someone from Extinction Rebellion to work at Coutts or for the Royals? Don't think so

Would you hire a nanny to look after your children if she wasn't 'like you' in certain aspects?

I don't work for KPMG but was so surprised I looked it up

This kind of scheme exists in all the big accounting/consulting firms. They are regularly misrepresented by people whining about "poor middle class boys being discriminated against".

Of course their existence is the reason there are so few white middle class men in the upper levels of the firms in question.