We all want to ensure talent thrives in our culture and represents our values. But is “Cultural Fit” too narrow of a concept to work?

Perhaps Cultural “FIT” creates too much redundancy & fundamentally constrains diversity. If one fits, s/he represents what is already present. It implies there is nothing accretive or different.

Also, Cultural “FIT” implies that culture is static, not dynamic. Organizations are, by definition, organic. If you’re assessing talent based on a codified framework, you may be missing the idea that your culture must evolve. Maybe your next leader will help shape the culture for tomorrow in a healthy and productive way — and in a way that doesn’t “FIT” today’s framework.

I wonder if Cultural “CONTRIBUTION” is a more relevant concept. Rather than evaluate candidates based only on how they fit the existing culture, we should consider how they will contribute to the culture of tomorrow. This should challenge us to think more progressively about our organizations and the talent we seek.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.