Are you working from the premise that the "work culture" you're attempting to fit people into is already an ideal working culture? If yes, isn't that presumptuous?
And if new hires must “fit” into this work culture you represent isn’t that the definition for a static work culture since you apparently know who would fit and who would not fit—which is quite different from a work-in-progress work culture?
Hi Valentino, apologies for the delay in response, I didn't see your comment until now. That's a good question you pose...
80% of people work for large companies... that have very well established reasonably static work cultures. So, those cultures are static... and you want your hires to fit to them: Starbucks, GE, Amazon, Google, Ford, Smith Barney.... all of very different cultures and they aren't changing.
Small companies on the other hand (less than 300 FTE) flip their cultures with new leadership.
So, its not a once-size-fits-all, but it is a generalization you aren't going to significantly change a large company through a hire.
Here's two interesting examples, from some well known companies...
"Intel’s culture is changing, too. Under the charismatic Grove, who was CEO from 1987 to 1998 and then chairman until 2005, the company was a rough-and-tumble place. Grove’s motto was “Only the paranoid survive,” and managers frequently engaged in “constructive confrontation,” which any outsider would call shouting. Engineers ruled the roost. Grove and Barrett also instituted the practice of doling out cash to PC makers for joint advertising, which Intel rivals have alleged blocks them from some markets.
Read more: http://www.lastpodcast.net/2005/12/30/intel-rebranding-and-its-corp...
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Share Alike"
And a note from a former IBM Executive:
"As a former IBM executive who took early retirement twenty years ago, just as the company's bureaucracy was beginning to strangle the organization, I was fascinated to learn how that bureaucracy spread and the extremes to which it went, creating a culture thst led to decisions (if any) by committee, conspiratorial compromise, and self-protective behavior. This is not the IBM I had known. Even more interesting is the rapidity with which Louis Gerstner diagnosed the sickness of the company and the speed and persistence with which he administered tough medicine.
Despite IBM's near-terminal condition Gerstner saw it correctly not only as a business enterprise but as a "national treasure" that was well worth the collossal efforts needed to restore it."
Comment
All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.
Just enter your e-mail address below
1801 members
316 members
180 members
190 members
222 members
34 members
62 members
194 members
619 members
530 members
© 2024 All Rights Reserved Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
With over 100K strong in our network, RecruitingBlogs.com is part of the RecruitingDaily.com, LLC family of Recruiting and HR communities.
Our goal is to provide information that is meaningful. Without compromise, our community comes first.
One Reservoir Corporate Drive
4 Research Drive – Suite 402
Shelton, CT 06484
Email us: info@recruitingdaily.com
All the recruiting news you see here, delivered straight to your inbox.
Just enter your e-mail address below
You need to be a member of RecruitingBlogs to add comments!
Join RecruitingBlogs