Fit Happens (Except When It Doesn’t)

Rethinking “Culture Fit” and the Subtle Ways It Masks Ageism, Bias, and Discomfort with Difference

“Culture fit” comes up all the time in hiring conversations. On the surface, it sounds harmless. Who wouldn’t want someone who fits in?

But when it’s left undefined, “culture fit” becomes a catch-all for bias. It’s not about whether someone can do the job—it’s about whether they make the interviewer feel comfortable. Comfort is deeply subjective, shaped by personal experiences, assumptions, and unspoken preferences.

I’ve seen “culture fit” used to screen out highly qualified people for reasons no one wanted to name directly:

“She seems a little too set in her ways.”
“We’re looking for someone who can grow with us.”
“He didn’t quite match our energy.”
“They’re weird.”

Translation? Often: “They’re too old.” Or “too introverted.” Or “too intense.” Sometimes just… not us.

That’s how “culture fit” turns into a bias delivery system. It can hide ageism, ableism, racism, and discomfort with neurodivergence. It allows decision-makers to pass on candidates without ever examining whether the issue is really difference, not capability.

I’m not saying team cohesion doesn’t matter. It absolutely does. But cohesion shouldn’t mean conformity. It shouldn’t mean hiring the person you’d most like to grab coffee with. And it definitely shouldn’t mean dismissing someone because they communicate differently, come from a different generation, or need accommodations to do the job well.

So what’s the alternative?

The good news is: business experts have been flagging this dynamic for years. And some excellent frameworks have emerged to help organizations find alignment—without defaulting to sameness.

Culture Add

Culture add is one of the most common alternatives to “culture fit,” and a quick search will turn up plenty of resources. It asks: Who brings something new that we’re missing? Here are a few cases I’ve seen play out in real time:

• A person with lived experience of disability might flag communication gaps or accessibility issues.

• Someone grounded in gender identity work could help refine language in member materials.

• Colleagues from different faith backgrounds may notice scheduling conflicts around major religious holidays.

• And sometimes, it’s as simple as noticing that a catered lunch accommodates allergies—because someone’s already lived the consequences of being forgotten.

When we build with “add” in mind, we build with intention.

Values Alignment

Instead of evaluating how much someone “feels like us,” ask whether they share your mission, values, and approach to collaboration. (That’s a fair question for a candidate to ask, as well.)

In one of my past roles, a shift took place over the course of a year or so: We went from emphasizing overall member value to elevating education as a key pillar of the organization in its place. As someone who approaches member engagement with a macro lens, that shift left me out of sync. The work didn’t change, but the values that guided it did.

That’s not about fit. That’s about alignment.

Role Readiness

Can they do the work—or grow into it with the right support?

That’s the real question. Sometimes, especially with early-career professionals, the talent is there, but the scaffolding is not. Leadership means recognizing not just what someone brings to the table, but what they need to thrive.

If you’re using “culture fit” as a gut check after determining a candidate is qualified, ask yourself: whose gut are you listening to, and whose are you not?

Because if familiarity breeds contempt, then hiring for “culture fit” might be how we end up curating cliques instead of building culture. Real inclusion takes more than comfort. It takes intention.