Is ‘culture fit’ merely a code word for unethical discrimination?
I have been researching hiring in the tech industry and this is the glaring elephant in the room. In the very least, the widespread acceptance of this abstract category opens up a convenient laundering term for abuse. And in reality, it’s glaringly exactly that.
The general HR rhetoric seems to only highlight the problem. If ‘culture fit’ is merely a matter of good/bad attitude, why are we referring to it as “culture?” These are very clearly separate items. The way they are being treated as interchangeable is beyond suspicious to me. “Culture fit” is used in broad contexts while any query is answered with concerns amounting to attitude differences. In a time when “identity” also suffices for “culture”, how can this possibly be reconciled?
I argue it can’t be and this is another shameful chapter in the tech world’s going list of hypocrisies. Prove me wrong.
The general HR rhetoric seems to only highlight the problem. If ‘culture fit’ is merely a matter of good/bad attitude, why are we referring to it as “culture?” These are very clearly separate items. The way they are being treated as interchangeable is beyond suspicious to me. “Culture fit” is used in broad contexts while any query is answered with concerns amounting to attitude differences. In a time when “identity” also suffices for “culture”, how can this possibly be reconciled?
I argue it can’t be and this is another shameful chapter in the tech world’s going list of hypocrisies. Prove me wrong.