Workplace Culture Impact On Career

I think we can all agree that hiring for culture FIT is old news. But here’s why we also need to reconsider just hiring for culture add/contribution too. For years, business leaders have focused on cultural fit, aiming to bring in people who seamlessly blend with an organisation's existing values and behaviours. In more recent years, the concept of hiring for culture add or contribution has gained more traction. This approach is all about hiring people who not only fit but also enhance the existing culture by bringing in their diverse perspectives and new ideas. This shift has been crucial for fostering innovation and creating more inclusive workplaces. However, I've learned that there's an even more crucial element for us to consider. CULTURAL ADAPTABILITY While writing Let’s Talk Culture, I was fortunate to interview Sameer Srivastava, an Associate Professor at UC Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. Sameer’s research, which analysed over 10 million pieces of internal communication, revealed a fascinating trend. The study tracked how employees adapted to different cultural conventions over time and the consequences of these adaptations on their career trajectories. Employees who demonstrated high adaptability, even with initially low cultural fit, significantly outperformed their peers in the long run. They received more promotions, favourable performance evaluations, higher bonuses, and had fewer involuntary departures. Can the people you hire evolve with your culture? In my culture study, 81% of leaders said their culture is dynamic and changes from one day to the next. Change is a certainty. It makes sense to hire people who can adapt with the culture as it changes over time, not just those who can fit in with the culture as it is. If we recruit adaptable people, we'll build a team that can thrive in any environment.

Hiring isn’t just about resumes; it’s about reading between the lines. At Supersourcing, we’ve seen that hiring isn’t just about skills—it’s about how candidates approach challenges, take ownership, and fit into the team’s rhythm. So, let me share an experience that stuck with me. We interviewed someone with stellar technical skills. On paper, they were a dream hire. 💫 In reality? Not so much. 🚫 They showed up late—not once, but twice—and didn’t bother to share an update or request a reschedule. That lack of accountability spoke louder than their resume ever could. So, instead of chasing the “perfect” candidate, we hired someone with fewer credentials but a solid sense of ownership and a positive attitude. Six months later, not only are they excelling, but they’ve also brought fresh energy to the team. They’ve stepped up in ways we didn’t anticipate—taking on new challenges, supporting their peers, and driving collaborative wins. Their attitude was transformative, to say the least. And here’s the truth bomb - nearly 89% of hiring failures aren’t due to skills but poor attitude. So, what makes for great attitude? - Turning feedback into growth - Facing challenges with curiosity and resilience - Collaborating for collective wins - Owning the job (and then some) It all comes down to this. For candidates: Your attitude can keep doors open long after your skills get you through them. For companies: Skills are trainable. Mindset isn’t. Hiring for cultural fit and adaptability will pay dividends every time. What do you think? Have you experienced the difference between hiring for mindset vs. skills?

218 CVs in a day. 120 interviews in a week. And in the end… I select maybe 2 or 3 people. …why so few? It’s not that the rest aren’t capable — many are smart, well-spoken, even experienced. But hiring isn’t just about skills on paper. It’s about fit. Over time, I’ve started noticing patterns. — Too many job hops (especially in the mid-years) often show a lack of commitment. — When I ask about KPIs, they start describing KRAs. — When I ask about results or targets, they change the topic. — Case scenarios? I get diplomatic answers — afraid to be real. — Simple questions turn into long, stretched explanations. — And often, they talk a lot about the work done, but not the impact created. The people who’ve truly done the work never have to prove it. Their calm confidence says it all. Because when you’ve been through the grind — your results speak louder than your words. With my years experience, I’ve also learned : Hiring someone who isn’t culturally aligned with your organisation can be disastrous. At Cambridge Court Group of Schools -one of our strongest core values that we preach every day is:  “Nothing at the cost of culture.” You might be incredibly result-oriented, but if you don’t align with the culture — it just doesn’t work. And the reverse is also true — being a great cultural fit but not delivering results can only go on for so long before credibility fades. Here’s a truth I’ve come to believe: Everyone — including me (Executive Director)— is replaceable. Titles don’t make us irreplaceable. Value and alignment do. So when I hire, I look for that rare balance — someone who fits our culture, walks the talk, and lets their work speak for them. Because at the end of the day — skills can be taught, but culture… that’s built deep within. #Leadership #Hiring #WorkCulture #TeamBuilding #CambridgeCourtGroup

Hierarchy Can Fuel Innovation, But Only If Leaders Choose To Light The Match We often hear that Asian workplaces are hierarchical, and that this stifles initiative. But what if the hierarchy itself is the key to unlocking boldness? Traditional high Power Distance cultures emphasize respect for authority. The unintended consequence? Juniors often wait to be told, hesitating to speak up or challenge ideas. Innovation suffers. But I’ve seen local organizations in Manila shatter this stereotype. Their secret? Leadership that consciously uses the weight of hierarchy to create psychological safety. When the CEO or senior director explicitly says, “My door is open,” that permission carries immense authority. When a junior proposes a defended idea and is told, “You lead the team,” it’s a powerful mandate from the top. The hierarchy isn’t removed; it’s repurposed. It grants freedom instead of restricting it. The irony is profound. Building this culture requires unwavering effort from the very top. Leaders must nurture it by consistently rewarding speaking up, and defend it by resisting the fallback to pure command-and-control, especially under pressure. This isn’t about importing Western egalitarianism. It’s about smarter leadership within the cultural context. It proves that “national DNA” isn’t destiny. A leader who understands the deep-seated respect for structure can redirect that same energy to empower, engage, and unleash incredible innovation from every level. The power of hierarchy isn't in its rigidity, but in its potential to authorize change. #ESAmentor

What Professionalism Penalizes From Chapter Two of I'm Not Yelling In organizational settings, professionalism is often presented as a neutral guide for conduct. In practice, it functions as a disciplinary mechanism. Across sectors, consistent patterns emerge: • Assertiveness is recoded as aggression • Directness is classified as a communication deficiency • Confidence is reframed as attitude or lack of collegiality • Disagreement is treated as disruption rather than contribution These interpretations are not applied uniformly. They disproportionately affect individuals whose communication styles diverge from dominant workplace culture norms, even when performance outcomes are demonstrably strong. Over time, employees internalize these signals. Credibility becomes conditional, not on effectiveness or results, but on restraint and conformity. The issue is not individual behavior or isolated misjudgments. It is the enforcement of standards that appear neutral while operating unevenly. This analysis forms the core of Chapter Two, which examines how credibility is constructed, policed, and rewarded within contemporary workplace systems.

TRUST IS MOSTLY HORIZONTAL. OUR ORGANIZATIONS ARE MOSTLY VERTICAL. NO WONDER THINGS OFTEN FEEL HARDER THAN THEY SHOULD. People trust “people like me” - peers, colleagues, those who share similar realities, pressures, doubts. That horizontal tribe frequently carries more credibility than formal authority. Yet most management systems are still designed vertically: announcements from the top, cascades through hierarchy, carefully structured communication channels. Logical perhaps. Effective… less so. People behave for three broad reasons: • Because they are told to • Because they want to • Because people like them do Traditional management obsesses over the first. Engagement programmes chase the second. The third - peer influence - remains the most powerful and the most underestimated. Look sideways, not just upwards. Because even in strongly hierarchical cultures, what peers accept, reject, imitate or normalise has enormous impact on whether change sticks or fades. Trust travels laterally. Leadership often travels vertically. Bridging that gap is where real organizational change starts. https://lnkd.in/d2J8t9x

📢 Is Hierarchy Silencing Voices in Your Global Team? 🌍 In many global teams, hierarchy is an unspoken barrier to collaboration. A junior employee in Japan may hesitate to challenge a senior colleague, while a manager in the U.S. expects direct and frank debate. The result? Ideas go unheard, innovation stalls, and frustration builds. When leaders overlook how cultural hierarchies shape participation, they risk reinforcing exclusion instead of fostering an inclusive, high-performing team. ❓ ❓ So, how can you bridge the gap? 1️⃣ Cultivate a Speak-Up Culture – Encourage participation by explicitly inviting diverse perspectives: “I’d love to hear different viewpoints on this.” 2️⃣ Train Leaders on Differences in Communication Styles – Silence doesn’t always mean agreement. Leaders must learn to “read the room” and create psychological safety for all. 3️⃣ Implement Structured Meetings – Use frameworks like “1-2-4-All.” This method ensures balanced engagement, fosters diverse perspectives, and prevents discussions from being dominated by a few voices. Here is how it works: 🔹 1 min – Reflect individually on the topic. 🔹 2 min – Discuss ideas with a partner. 🔹 4 min – Share insights in small groups. 🔹 All – Present key takeaways to the larger team. 4️⃣ Offer Alternative Avenues for Input – Some employees prefer private 1:1s or written contributions—make space for all voices. 💡 When leaders bridge hierarchical gaps, diverse teams thrive.   Ready to build a culturally competent workplace? Let’s talk! 📅 Schedule a complimentary strategy call today! #GlobalTeams #InclusiveLeadership #CulturalDifferences #CulturalCompetence

Why India’s IT talent is walking away? By 2025, the industry could lose 22 Lakh employees. You can replace salaries. You can replace perks. But you can’t replace trust and purpose once they’re gone. That’s the real story behind what’s happening in Indian IT right now, and it’s a warning for every corporate leader. A TeamLease Digital study found that 57% of Indian IT professionals say they’ll never return to IT services. That’s nearly 22 lakh employees projected to quit by 2025. Why? Not because of money. But because of a toxic culture, lack of growth, and burnout. Even big names like Infosys (14.1%) and TCS (13%) reported high voluntary attrition in FY25. A 2024 study titled Please Do Not Go, found 19 different reasons why software engineers leave, most linked to leadership, recognition, and work environment, not pay. This isn’t a talent war anymore. It’s a workplace culture crisis. Gen Z and millennials aren’t leaving for higher pay, They’re leaving for respect, growth, and psychological safety. When employees feel micromanaged, unheard, or burnt out, they don’t just quit the job, They quit the system. What companies can do differently: ✅ Redefine success: Focus on outcomes, not hours logged. ✅ Build leadership trust: Managers make or break retention. ✅ Prioritize mental well-being: Burnout isn’t a badge of honor. ✅ Give growth clarity: Career stagnation is the quiet killer of motivation. The question every HR and leader should ask today: If 57% of our people would never want to come back, what story are we writing as an employer? Because the Great Resignation isn’t over, It just evolved into the Great Re-evaluation. #bestadvice #careers #hr #leadership #linkedin #corporateculture

Few ideas have been as widely romanticised in the startup world as the concept of the flat organisation. Founders often proclaim with pride: “We don’t do managers here. Everyone is equal. We are flat.” For early-stage teams, this belief carries the aura of creativity, speed, and a refreshing rebellion against corporate bureaucracy. But research — and hard reality — paints a very different picture. A large-scale Wharton study of 6,234 startups revealed a telling contradiction: while flat structures encourage creativity and ideation, they often harm execution and commercial performance once the team grows beyond twenty to thirty people. Without clear roles and managerial layers, startups suffer from duplicated effort, unresolved conflicts, and, ultimately, missed market opportunities. Similarly, research from the Copenhagen Business School found that the introduction of administrative middle management actually strengthens innovation. By freeing founders from day-to-day firefighting, managers create the organisational scaffolding that allows new products — and the company itself — to scale sustainably. The lesson is clear: what feels liberating in the early days becomes limiting as headcount grows. Flatness works when everyone can sit around one table. But as soon as complexity increases, flatness mutates into confusion. Power is no longer absent — it is simply hidden. And hidden power almost always translates into politics, turnover, and frustration. This is why so many “flat” startups eventually turn to consultants and coaches, not because they lack talent, but because they lack structure. The absence of hierarchy postpones difficult decisions that inevitably catch up with the business: Who resolves conflict? Who owns delivery? Who develops people? The contrarian insight is this: hierarchy is not the enemy. It is the enabler. Properly designed, hierarchy brings clarity, accountability, and focus — without suffocating innovation. The right kind of middle management does not dilute culture; it protects it from collapse. The startup that survives is not the one that clings to flatness as a philosophy, but the one that recognises it as a phase. Visionary founders do not fear hierarchy — they architect it. ******* My work Alternative Leadership focuses on empowering first-time managers to lead with clarity, confidence, and purpose — through immersive workshops and coaching.

I was speaking to a CEO of an investment company recently who said to me: “We’re tired of hiring the wrong people. They just don’t really understand our business or the pressures of working for an investment manager in the multifamily environment.” On paper, their last hire looked great. Right background. Strong track record. Good references. But when we unpacked what had gone wrong, it wasn’t skills. It was culture. They’d hired someone who was technically capable, but: Didn’t think like an investor Struggled with the pace, scrutiny and accountability Never fully bought into the way the firm made decisions and managed risk In other words: the “wrong hire” wasn’t a competency problem – it was a compatibility problem. After 20 years headhunting in #CRERealEstate, especially around investment and development, I see the same pattern over and over: ❌ Processes that over‑index on CVs, deals and logos ✅ Processes that win deliberately hire for culture, not just credentials Skills are easy to test. Culture fit is harder to define, measure and protect – but it’s where most hiring processes rise or fall. When you get culture right: People ramp faster Teams perform better Retention improves Leadership spends less time firefighting “people issues” When you don’t, you end up with “wrong hires” that were actually predictable from day one. The lesson from that CEO’s experience? If you’re hiring for your team and you’re not rigorously assessing for culture, you’re leaving your biggest risk completely unchecked.