Ask HN: Be honest, how often do you reject good candidates for cultural reasons? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Be honest, how often do you reject good candidates for cultural reasons?

I am not asking only out of personal reasons, rather I have heard from enough others similar experience that I am prompted to ask:

How often do employers truly reject good or even great applicants simply out of cultural reasons?

It seems to me that even if your expertise couldn't fit the job advertisment any better, if you simply ... look different and have a too different sounding name, there is a high chance you are gonna get declined.

I am not asking to shame, but rather I could imagine it being a legitimate point of concern for employers to think "this guy is great but I fear he is not gonna fit into our team culturally speaking".

So I just wnat to know how common it is.

View on HN

It depends what you mean by "cultural" reasons.

We interviewed a very qualified candidate. Answered all our questions excellently. Well, he directed all his answers at me - and completely ignored my boss. Every time she asked him a question he turned to me (a man) to give his answer. He seemed completely incapable of acknowledging or speaking to a woman.

Unsurprisingly we passed on him.

On another occasion, I was interviewing someone for a very senior management role. Again, excellent on paper, gave a great presentation, asked smart questions, delivered brilliant answers. Until we asked a question which was something like "How do attract and maintain a diverse and representative workforce?"

His answer was, basically, "Well... it just happens, doesn't it? I don't believe in racism. So if they want to apply, we should let them. I try to treat them as if they're equal to us." And then he rambled on a bit. Instant no from the entire panel.

I don't think I've ever rejected someone for supporting the wrong football team, or not wanting to go for after-work drinks, or for having a silly haircut.

Work is a team-sport. Having a "brilliant arsehole" on the team just means that you have an arsehole on the team. A 10x engineer can't make up for all the 1x engineers they drive away.

> We interviewed a very qualified candidate. Answered all our questions excellently. Well, he directed all his answers at me - and completely ignored my boss. Every time she asked him a question he turned to me (a man) to give his answer. He seemed completely incapable of acknowledging or speaking to a woman.

I find your interpretation of his behaviour interesting. Couldn't it be that he was simply being shy and thus more comfortable speaking to a man (and looking him in the eyes rather than the woman)? I could imagine that being common esp. among tech nerds.

No. He was a brash and confident young man. He just didn't recognise that a woman was worth responding to. He looked at her when she was speaking, but directed his answers and questions only to the men in the room.

But let's pretend for a moment that you are right. That office had lots of women at all levels. If he can't communicate with his colleagues and senior management team, then that's a problem.

To your point, culture is intentional. Culture starts two places: at the top and at the front door. It's not an "aftermarket" add on. It's not "look we have free coffee". It's not passive slogans (e.g., "Be kind").

In short, culture takes effort. It takes work (and not the path of least resistance type of work).

I do mostly (1099) contract work, with an occasional W2. Perhaps it's my "feed"? Perhaps there's a bias in the size of my sample? I'll admit that. That disclaimer aside, for the most part, I've experienced default cultures. Less intentional, more reactive. Not so much teams as groups of people who have their cheques signed by the same people.

Many talk about culture and the value. Few actually embrace and execute that talk.

The only appearance things that would come into play when I was a hiring manager were things like lots of tattoos, body piercings, strange colored hair. Someone that had some or all of the above wasn’t going to appeal to our older customers and at least in my experience, people who make lots of modifications on the outside often do so as a substitute for fixing something that’s broken on the inside.

I generally had a good feel for if I would hire someone within a minute or two of the interview starting. That was based on body language and personality though more than appearance (even the body mod appearance items I listed above).

I honestly think it's unlikely that people on a public forum would admit to excluding candidates due to personal prejudices.

Why? People simply create throwaways for that.

Or age?

Ageism seems to be a real thing indeed.

Though not really the subject of my question.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com