[pkrotich]

I used to believe in "culture fit" as well but it took me going to a tech conference to realize it was a codeword / gateway for alot of **isms.

And I don't even mean racism - say your potential candidate is older with kids (assuming you're younger) would you pass them because they cannot go out drinking with you after work (a.k.a social circle)?

That said, I agree that you want to work with people you get along with, but it has to be at work. Social circle is the issue for me.

[p1esk]

By "social circle" I did not mean people I go out for drinks with - I'd call those "friends". I simply meant people I have something in common with, share the same values with, people I can relate to. If the candidate is older with kids (assuming I'm younger) - he/she should be someone I want to become in the future, someone I respect, someone I'd learn from. Race, gender, age, even education - does not really matter - as long as I'm genuinely interested in that person and feel like I'd enjoy working with them. After many years of interviewing and hiring at various startups this is more important to me than technical skills. Skills could be learned, personalities usually don't change.

[klooney]

I feel like programmer discourse goes in a circle every five years on agreeableness/human factors when hiring. You can say "rigid process and blind hiring!" And then you hire someone you knew was, er , difficult, and it sucks and they get fired and you have to adjust. Then on the other side of the spectrum, you have grumpy people pointing out that it turns out agreeableness turns out to mean coethnic drinking buddies, and how could you?