Imagine two candidates interviewing for a marketing role at a forward-thinking tech company. Shivani fits the team like a glove—her background, interests, and work style mirror those of the existing staff. She’s comfortable with the company’s values and seamlessly echoes its way of doing things. Arun, however, brings something different. His experience spans varied sectors, and his ideas challenge the status quo. While he doesn’t fit the mould, he offers something potentially invaluable: the ability to expand the team’s thinking and capabilities.
This contrast illustrates a key shift many companies are embracing today—moving away from the conventional notion of ‘culture fit’ to the more progressive idea of ‘culture add’.
In the past, companies sought employees who aligned closely with their established cultures, believing that this ensured smooth integration and productivity. But this approach has limitations. As Praveen Purohit, deputy CHRO, Vedanta Resources, explains, “‘Culture fit’ can lead to a homogeneous workforce that lacks diversity in thought and creativity.”
“Prioritising ‘culture fit’ can lead to homogeneity or a monoculture, which may stifle creativity and limit innovation.”
Sujiv Nair, G-CHRO, Re-sustainability
Vedanta, for instance, values an entrepreneurial mindset, a core part of its DNA. However, while ‘culture fit’ remains important, Purohit emphasises that the company seeks employees capable of introducing fresh ideas and innovation. “We want people who bring an ownership mindset but at the same time are different—what we call a ‘culture add’.”
The challenge for organisations, particularly those in fast-paced or disrupted industries, is balancing the need for cultural continuity with the demand for agility and innovation. While a strong cultural foundation ensures cohesion, it can also create blind spots, reducing an organisation’s ability to adapt. This is where the concept of ‘culture add’ comes into play.
Hiring for ‘culture add’ involves seeking candidates who align with a company’s core values but bring something new—whether it’s fresh ideas, diverse experiences, or unique skills. Sujiv Nair, G-CHRO, Re-sustainability, notes the growing awareness of unconscious bias in hiring for ‘culture fit’. “Prioritising ‘culture fit’ can lead to homogeneity or a monoculture, which may stifle creativity and limit innovation,” he says. Nair believes companies must focus on hiring ‘culture contributors’—those who enrich the culture rather than merely fitting into it.
“Hiring for ‘culture fit’ alone can result in teams that think and act alike, potentially limiting the range of solutions available to address complex problems.”
Ramesh Shankar, senior HR leader
Some companies, such as Netflix, have embraced this approach. Known for its “Freedom and Responsibility” ethos, Netflix initially sought employees who thrived in an autonomous environment. But as the company expanded globally, it realised the importance of hiring people who would not only fit but also enhance its culture, bringing in diverse perspectives that helped the company navigate international markets more effectively. The shift from ‘culture fit’ to ‘culture add’ allowed Netflix to stay ahead of market trends by drawing on the varied insights of its global workforce.
“Finding the ‘deadly combo’ of ‘culture fit’ and ‘culture add’ is the ultimate goal.”
Praveen Purohit, deputy CHRO, Vedanta Resources
The benefits of ‘culture add’ are clear. As Ramesh Shankar, a senior HR leader, observes, “Hiring for ‘culture fit’ alone can result in teams that think and act alike, potentially limiting the range of solutions available to address complex problems.” By contrast, hiring for ‘culture add’ brings diversity of thought, enabling teams to tackle challenges in more creative ways. This approach has long been practiced in large organisations, such as government institutions and public-sector banks in India, where employees from diverse backgrounds bring unique perspectives to serve a varied customer base. Increasingly, private corporations are adopting similar strategies, recruiting globally to foster diverse thinking.
Shifting to ‘culture add’ requires more than just a change in mindset. It demands a rethinking of recruitment processes. Nair advises companies to start by evaluating their existing culture to identify gaps that new hires could help fill. Standardising interview questions to assess a candidate’s potential to contribute to the culture—not just fit into it—can help. Training interview panels to value cultural contributions can also mitigate unconscious biases, fostering a more inclusive workforce.
Microsoft is one company that has overhauled its hiring practices in this way. It now looks for ‘learn-it-all’ candidates, those with a passion for continuous learning and improvement. This shift aligns with the company’s evolving culture and has brought in talent capable of driving innovation.
In today’s rapidly changing world, ‘culture fit’ alone is no longer sufficient. While alignment with core values remains important, ‘culture add’ is the critical ingredient that allows companies to innovate and adapt. As Purohit succinctly puts it, “Finding the ‘deadly combo’ of ‘culture fit’ and ‘culture add’ is the ultimate goal.” Organisations that strike this balance will not only survive but thrive, creating workplaces that are both cohesive and dynamic—a winning formula for the future.
The shift from ‘culture fit’ to ‘culture add’ is not just a buzzword—it’s a strategic imperative. As companies face unprecedented challenges, those that can build teams capable of thinking differently while staying true to core values will be best positioned to succeed. After all, in a world where change is the only constant, the ability to adapt may be the most valuable culture of all.
