Latest / The Science of Leading / Hiring the Risk: How Toxic Culture Starts Before Day One

Transcript

Hiring the Risk: How Toxic Culture Starts Before Day One · The Science of Leading

• 0:00
  Welcome to the Science of Leading.
• 0:01
  I'm Claire Monroe with Edwin Carrington.
• 0:03
  Edwin, let me start with something that feels... a little uncomfortable.
• 0:07
  Sometimes a hostile work environment is being built before the new hire
• 0:11
  even gets a badge, a laptop, or that awkward first-day coffee.
• 0:11
  Yes,
• 0:16
  and that's not dramatic, it's just how it works.
• 0:18
  By the time leaders notice something feels off,
• 0:21
  they think they're dealing with a performance issue or a personality
• 0:25
  clash.
• 0:25
  But the real mistake often happened earlier.
• 0:28
  In the hiring decision.
• 0:30
  What got ignored, what got excused,
• 0:32
  and which behaviors were reframed as "confidence" or "drive."So when
• 0:38
  people hear "hostile work environment," they picture what happens after
• 0:41
  someone's hired.
• 0:42
  The jokes, the tension, the exclusion.
• 0:45
  You're saying the groundwork can be laid during the interview process
• 0:48
  itself.
• 0:48
  Exactly.
• 0:50
  And it helps to anchor this in something concrete.
• 0:53
  The legal standard people refer to-often without really understanding
• 0:58
  it-is that behavior crosses the line when it's severe or pervasive enough
• 1:02
  to create an environment a reasonable person would find intimidating or
• 1:06
  abusive.
• 1:06
  Or when tolerating that behavior becomes part of keeping your job.
• 1:10
  That's the threshold.
• 1:12
  Severe, pervasive, or tied to employment.
• 1:12
  That "severe or pervasive" part
• 1:17
  matters, because people tend to assume it has to be extreme to count.
• 1:17
  Right.
• 1:22
  One serious incident can be enough.
• 1:24
  Or a pattern that builds over time.
• 1:27
  And importantly, we're not talking about general unpleasantness.
• 1:31
  The law focuses on conduct tied to protected characteristics-race,
• 1:36
  gender, age, disability, and so on.
• 1:38
  That's where leaders often oversimplify things and call it "drama," which...
• 1:43
  doesn't help anyone."Drama" is such a downgrade for something that can
• 1:47
  actually make people feel unsafe at work.
• 1:47
  It is.
• 1:50
  And then there's the power dynamic,
• 1:53
  which changes everything.
• 1:54
  If the person creating the issue is a supervisor,
• 1:58
  the organization carries a different level of responsibility-especially
• 2:02
  if that behavior affects someone's role,
• 2:04
  pay, or career progression.
• 2:06
  With peers or clients, the question becomes whether the company knew
• 2:11
  or should have known and failed to act.
• 2:13
  Either way, prevention isn't optional.
• 2:13
  The supervisor part is what sticks
• 2:18
  with me.
• 2:19
  If you hire someone into a management role who already shows those tendencies,
• 2:23
  you're not just adding risk-you're amplifying it.
• 2:23
  Exactly.
• 2:27
  Power multiplies impact.
• 2:30
  A difficult individual contributor can cause friction.
• 2:33
  A toxic manager can reshape an entire team's behavior.
• 2:37
  People notice who gets protected,
• 2:39
  whose complaints go nowhere, and whether performance excuses everything.
• 2:39
  And
• 2:45
  this is where "culture fit" starts to get... slippery.
• 2:48
  Because it sounds harmless, but it can hide a lot.
• 2:48
  Without clear standards,
• 2:53
  "fit" often becomes shorthand for familiarity.
• 2:56
  People who feel comfortable, sound similar,
• 2:59
  behave in ways the team already accepts.
• 3:02
  Over time, that doesn't just shape who gets hired-it shapes what behavior
• 3:06
  is tolerated.
• 3:06
  So it's not just who you bring in.
• 3:09
  It's what you were willing to overlook to bring them in.
• 3:09
  Exactly.
• 3:13
  And there's another piece leaders tend to underestimate-retaliation.
• 3:18
  People who raise concerns are legally protected,
• 3:21
  but in reality, retaliation doesn't always look obvious.
• 3:24
  It can be quieter.
• 3:26
  Fewer opportunities, colder interactions,
• 3:29
  subtle exclusion.
• 3:30
  That's often enough to keep people from speaking up at all.
• 3:30
  So before
• 3:35
  day one, the real question isn't just "can this person do the job?" It's
• 3:39
  also "what happens to the people around them if they don't feel safe speaking
• 3:43
  up?"That's exactly the question.
• 3:45
  And it belongs with leadership,
• 3:47
  not just legal.
• 3:47
  Okay, let's make this practical.
• 3:50
  If I'm hiring, what are the signals I should stop romanticizing?
• 3:54
  Because some of these behaviors get rewarded in interviews.
• 3:54
  They do.
• 3:58
  Pay attention to how candidates talk about others.
• 4:01
  If every former colleague was "incompetent" or "holding them back,"
• 4:01
  that's
• 4:06
  a signal.
• 4:06
  Notice how they handle disagreement,
• 4:09
  how they react to structure, whether they interrupt or dismiss.
• 4:12
  None of these alone predict future issues,
• 4:15
  but together they tell you how someone handles friction and status.
• 4:15
  The
• 4:20
  "everyone else was the problem" story... yeah,
• 4:22
  that's familiar.
• 4:23
  It sounds impressive at first,
• 4:25
  and then you think about what it actually means.
• 4:25
  Exactly.
• 4:29
  And references matter here, but only if you ask better questions.
• 4:33
  Not "were they good," but "how did they handle pressure," or "how did
• 4:37
  they respond to feedback." One of the most revealing questions is whether
• 4:42
  you'd trust them with less experienced team members.
• 4:42
  That's a sharp filter.
• 4:47
  Because if someone hesitates on that,
• 4:49
  you've learned something pretty specific.
• 4:49
  You have.
• 4:52
  And look at your own team during the process.
• 4:55
  Are people making excuses because the candidate is "brilliant"?
• 4:58
  Is discomfort being brushed off?
• 5:00
  That's how organizations rationalize avoidable problems.
• 5:00
  Let me push on
• 5:05
  that a bit.
• 5:06
  Interviews are stressful.
• 5:07
  People interrupt, people oversell.
• 5:09
  We can't treat every rough edge like a red flag.
• 5:09
  That's fair.
• 5:13
  The goal isn't perfection.
• 5:15
  It's pattern recognition.
• 5:17
  If someone interrupts once and adjusts,
• 5:19
  that's normal.
• 5:20
  If they consistently dismiss, dominate,
• 5:23
  or deflect-and show no reflection when challenged-that's different.
• 5:27
  The real question is how they behave when they don't immediately get
• 5:31
  control.
• 5:31
  Not how polished they are... but how they respond to limits.
• 5:31
  Exactly.
• 5:37
  And remember, many issues never get formally reported.
• 5:41
  People stay quiet because they assume nothing will change or the cost
• 5:45
  is too high.
• 5:45
  So if your metric is "we don't have complaints," you may just be measuring
• 5:50
  silence.
• 5:50
  And silence turns into exits.
• 5:53
  People don't always file reports-they leave.
• 5:53
  Yes.
• 5:57
  And those exits are often the clearest signal leadership ignores.
• 6:01
  It's easier to call it a talent market issue than to examine the environment
• 6:05
  people are leaving.
• 6:05
  So what actually changes this?
• 6:08
  What do teams need to do differently?
• 6:08
  Start with structure.
• 6:12
  Consistent questions, clear evaluation criteria,
• 6:16
  and less reliance on instinct.
• 6:18
  Use behavior-based questions tied to real situations.
• 6:22
  Train interviewers to notice how candidates handle pressure,
• 6:25
  disagreement, and boundaries.
• 6:27
  And after hiring, act quickly when issues appear-because slow responses
• 6:32
  teach people that standards aren't real.
• 6:32
  And this is where something like
• 6:37
  OAD.
• 6:37
  ai fits in-not as a shortcut,
• 6:40
  but as a way to make the process more consistent and less dependent on
• 6:43
  who speaks the loudest.
• 6:43
  Exactly.
• 6:45
  Tools like OAD help reduce noise,
• 6:48
  standardize evaluation, and make it easier to compare candidates on actual
• 6:53
  evidence.
• 6:53
  It supports better decisions rather than replacing judgment.
• 6:53
  So maybe
• 6:58
  the real shift is this: culture isn't protected after something goes wrong.
• 7:02
  It's shaped by what you allow during hiring.
• 7:02
  That's a more accurate way
• 7:06
  to think about it.
• 7:06
  And if you're looking to put that into practice,
• 7:09
  you can test OAD's tools-like behavioral assessments-for free at o-a-d-dot-a-i.
• 7:15
  It's a practical step toward more consistent hiring and stronger teams.
• 7:15
  Thanks
• 7:20
  for listening.