Discrimination and Hiring for Culture Fit

In one of her many stellar webinars on hiring for cultural fit, Lauren Rivera, a sociologist at Northwestern University, states, “Cultural fit has become a new form of discrimination. It is a catchall used to justify hiring people similar to decision-makers and rejecting people who are not.” 

She describes elements of paternalism and power hoarding that we see in some workplaces. In their article “Dismantling Racism: A Workbook for Social Change Groups,” Kenneth Jones and Tema Okun describe paternalism and power hoarding as characteristics of white supremacy culture. The authors provide the following descriptions: 

Paternalism: Those with power…

• think they can make decisions for and in the interests of those without power.

• often believe it is optional to understand the viewpoint or experience of those for whom they are making decisions.

Power Hoarding: Those with power… 

• feel threatened when anyone suggests changes in how things should be done in the organization.

• feel suggestions for change are a reflection of their leadership.

• don't see themselves as hoarding power or as feeling threatened.

• assume they have the organization's best interests at heart and assume those wanting change need to be more informed (stupid), emotional, and inexperienced.

Dogmatic, staunch ideologies, usually formed by those with the most power, buttress both elements and promote inherently discriminatory practices. As someone wired to challenge the status quo and inequity power dynamics, I find myself existing on the fringes of such cultures. I have talked to other truth-tellers and dissenters, and having experienced similar inequities, they all expressed the desire to no longer stand as the sole, frustrated, and exhausted advocate for equity.

Forward-thinking, skilled, and wildly transparent leaders invite creativity and dissenters, for they understand that dissenting views lead to innovation. Under such leadership, I see dissenters unbridling their superpower and challenging work cultures for the best. Investigative cultural misfits can be valuable in creating the necessary tension and conflict to propel leaders and organizations to rigorous integrity – that is, that leaders and organizations do what they espouse they do. The result is a culture that promotes accountability over politics, productive conflict over avoidance and artificial harmony, and anti-racism over complacency. 

On the other hand, distracted or intransigent leaders tend to see dissenting views as a threat and surround themselves with agreeable yes-persons. They hire to maintain paternalism and power; under the guise of hiring for “cultural fit,” they end up with people who reinforce rather than challenge one another’s perspectives. Adam Grant wrote, “They tune out boat-rockers and listen to bootlickers.”.

Where does that leave the less agreeable? I am interested in how paternalism and power hoarding marginalize the less acquiescent – those wired to raise questions, innovate, and forge undiscovered avenues. I am ultra-focused on the mental well-being of my fellow misfits. 

My work with Legacy72 focuses on helping repair their mental well-being caused by paternalistic and power-hoarding leadership and work cultures. Working under paternalistic, power-hoarding leaders and cultures, I have seen many dedicated and skilled employees experience heightened anxiety as the culture triggered fears and deepened wounds that inhibited creativity.

We also work with and learn from organizations that mine for ways to operationalize equity as the central focus of their practices and policies. They expand the definition of equity beyond its racial and cultural hues and include a diversity of thought, temperament, and work-style. 

Bridgewater is such a company. Their founder, Ray Dalio, prevents power hoarding and paternalism by not hiring for cultural fit. Instead, his organization employs those who disagree and offer opposing opinions. They do not just end with hiring. It is commonplace at Bridgewater to use Idea Meritocracy when making decisions. During this process, they stress test decisions and the perspectives that drive them so that they land on the best ideas.

Check out the process in the video (0:00 - 8:57 for the intro) and (9:08 - 12:33 for the process).

Let’s discuss. I invite you to elevate your voice in the comment section; how have you dealt with paternalism? Or power hoarding?