Company culture matters. It shapes how people work together, make decisions, communicate, and respond to challenges. So, it is understandable that employers want to consider culture when they hire.
But should culture sit at the heart of the hiring decision? Perhaps the better question is how we consider culture.
There is an important difference between exploring whether someone can work effectively within an organization’s values and looking for someone who simply feels like a “good fit.” The first can be grounded in evidence. The second can easily become subjective. A stronger hiring strategy starts with what success in the job requires, then considers how an individual could contribute to the team and organization.
Culture fit can sound like a sensible hiring goal. But what does “fit” actually mean? That is where difficulties can begin.
In WorkLife’s examination of culture-fit interviews, Khyati Sundaram, CEO of Applied, describes culture fit as “very nebulous” and says it is often represented by feelings. The article explores the risk that hiring for fit can perpetuate existing biases and result in organizations hiring people who look and act like those already there.
However, that does not mean culture should be ignored. The same article points to a shift from broad notions of culture fit toward values alignment, alongside structured interviews that ask candidates consistent, job-relevant questions. That distinction matters.
Human connection will always play a part in recruitment. Interviews are conversations between people, after all. The challenge comes when personal connection becomes evidence of suitability. Recent People Management reporting on cultural fit highlights the risk of confusing likability with potential. Katie Hart, talent acquisition and experience lead at Perkbox Vivup, warns that prioritizing cultural fit or likability can “easily slip into bias” because people tend to hire people who are like them.
Instead, the article recommends thinking about “culture add”. That is, to consider the different perspectives and strengths someone could bring rather than trying to reproduce the existing workforce. It also offers an important balance. While cultural alignment does matter, it should not override the skills, behaviors and competence required to do the job.
Read more: Are You Seeing Potential, or Seeing Yourself?
That gives us a more useful starting point for hiring: the role itself. Before interviewing candidates, ask:
Define these requirements in advance to give hiring teams a more consistent reference point. Instead of asking, “Can I see this person fitting in here?”, we can ask, “What evidence (behavioral insight) do we have that this person can succeed in this role?”
Structured interviews support that shift. People Management recommends assessing candidates against consistent, role-specific criteria, while WorkLife highlights structured interviewing as a way of putting guardrails around some of the biases people naturally bring to decisions.
Discover: The McQuaig Job Survey
Job fit is only part of the picture. A person joins a role, but they also join a team. Understanding how someone is likely to work alongside others can provide useful insight into how that team might operate.
The aim is not to create a team of people with identical working styles. Someone who is naturally decisive may complement a colleague who prefers more time to analyze the evidence. Someone energized by frequent interaction may work effectively alongside someone who brings greater reflection and focus. Neither approach is inherently better. What matters is understanding those differences and creating the conditions for people to work together effectively.
That is a more useful way to think about culture. Rather than protecting the culture by repeatedly hiring similar people, organizations can build it deliberately through people with different strengths who can work toward shared goals.
More here: Is your team achieving its full potential?
Psychometric assessments add another source of evidence to this process, when they are properly validated and used correctly. Behavioral assessments can provide insight into how someone may naturally approach aspects of work such as communication, decision-making, pace, structure, and collaboration.
But an assessment should not make the hiring decision. Instead, behavioral insight helps hiring teams explore where an individual's natural preferences align with the requirements of the role, where they may approach things differently, and what questions are worth exploring further at interview.
Used alongside structured interviews, experience, skills, and other job-relevant evidence, psychometrics support a more informed conversation. Importantly, they should not become another way of screening for sameness. There is no universally “right” behavioral profile. Context always matters.
Get informed: Why Scientific Validation Matters in Psychometric Assessments
There is another reason to be careful about subjective definitions of fit. A 2026 Human Resources Director article examining culture fit from an Ontario employment-law perspective describes the concept as “inherently subjective” and warns that it can act as a proxy for unconscious bias when employers cannot objectively define or measure what they mean.
Its recommendations include structured interviews, clearly defined job requirements, consistent evaluation criteria, and a focus on job-related competencies. The legal context will vary by jurisdiction, but the broader hiring principle is useful: be clear about what you are assessing and why it matters to the job.
So, should company culture be a factor when you hire? Yes. But culture should provide context rather than become a subjective test of whether somebody feels familiar. Start with the job. Define what success requires. Assess candidates consistently. Understand how different behavioral strengths could contribute to the team. And explore alignment with meaningful organizational values rather than looking for people who simply seem to “fit in.”
Perhaps the question is not: “Will this person fit our culture?”
But instead: “Can this person succeed in the role, contribute to the team, and help us build the culture we want for the future?”
That creates a stronger foundation for both hiring decisions and healthy, effective teams.
A strong hire is only the beginning. How a new employee is supported once they join can have an important impact on their ability to contribute, build relationships, and succeed in their role. In our webinar, Fix the Onboarding Accountability Gap, we explore how to create greater clarity and accountability around onboarding—helping turn a well-informed hiring decision into a stronger start.