More companies measuring corporate culture
Ruth Rappini recently met with a woman who had requested an informational interview. The vice-president of organizational development at Medavie was impressed with the woman’s passion and innovation and while her background in banking and investment analysis was not necessarily a good match, Rappini thought she might be a good fit in Medavie’s communications department.
“One way or the other, I wanted her to work for our company because of the values she had,” she said.
That sentiment is backed by the results of a recent report that found 83 per cent of Canadian senior executives said cultural fit is more important than necessary skills when finding candidates. And a further 82 per cent said corporate culture impacts an organization’s ability to acquire talent, according to the 2010 Canadian Corporate Culture Study by Waterstone Human Capital.
“Corporate culture is a strategic competitive advantage and the really great organizations know this,” said Marty Parker, managing director of Waterstone Human Capital. “They understand that culture is perhaps the most important asset they can have and if they get it right, they’ll see the results on the bottom line.”
During its interview process, the 1,700-employee Medavie looks for fit, competencies and behaviours, said Rappini.
“People (here) are very supportive and respectful of each other and that’s what we want to make sure we’re propagating.”
Without a strong culture, there can be turnover and disgruntled employees dragging their heels, keen to get home as soon as they can, said Rappini.
“It’s how you’re motivating people and providing that work environment where they can maximize their potential and talent and capabilities,” she said. “If you have that kind of great atmosphere, then people are looking for how they can contribute more, they’re interested in their jobs, doing things where they’re tapping into the individual intelligence of everybody.”
But for Jude Fairweather, it’s hard to be so black and white when it comes to choosing fit over skills. The two are not mutually exclusive, said the vice-president of organization development and capabilities at Aviva North America.
“It has to be a ‘both/and’ because your strengths are part of who you are and your strengths in the wrong place will not be recognized,” she said.
Aviva takes a strength-based approach, meaning everybody is considered talent and developed as such, she said. That can mean moving someone from the wrong role to one where he could do better in the company.
“Everybody can certainly contribute to their best and work to their strength,” said Fairweather.
The company refers to its employee promise in its recruitment efforts and screens for fit both in initial phone calls with candidates and subsequent interviews with several employees to garner multiple perspectives.
“Part of the refinement that we’re making now, moving forward, is getting even more crystal clear about that,” said Fairweather. “I would make sure we looked at cultural fit before even considering bringing someone in, because you will fail if you don’t fit the culture.”
And job candidates are much more inclined to also screen for fit, she said, such as a potential employer’s position around corporate responsibility.
“Employees more so today are looking to the culture of the organization,” she said.
There’s a balance between cultural fit and skills requirement when it comes to recruitment, said Kathleen McNair, executive vice-president of HR and corporate communications at Corus.
“It’s very important the person has the fundamental skill set you’re looking for and there isn’t a skill gap. That said, you need to be hiring people who are going to fit with your corporate culture,” she said. “We try to make sure we hire people who are going to exemplify our values.”
Corus is also an open, collaborative company, she said, as demonstrated by its new Toronto headquarters that lack any offices, even for the CEO.
“If someone can’t fit into that culture or environment, it’s not going to be successful for them and it’s not going to be successful for us,” said McNair.
As further indication of culture’s importance, 77 per cent of respondents to Waterstone’s 2010 survey said they measure culture, compared to 35 per cent in 2006.
Corus first did an employee survey in 2003 and while values were important to workers then, they weren’t key behavioural influencers, said McNair. In every subsequent survey, values have become increasingly important and relevant to workers thanks to initiatives such as a corporate university, a mentorship program and rewards and recognition tied to values.
“Our 2010 results demonstrate that our values are now key influencers and critical drivers of our corporate culture.”
