Sign in
Post a Job

Corporate fit and lessons learned: Green Bay Packers and Miami NFL Game

Right Fit Job Hiring Decisions And Professional Sports Search Remotely

In reflecting upon the NFL game last week where the Green Bay Packers beat the Miami Dolphins (30 to 17), I am reminded of the idiom, ‘fish out of water.’ The shallow and informal meaning is “to be in an unusual or  unfamiliar situation” according to Collins Dictionary. Cambridge provides a better definition, someone who is uncomfortable, unhappy and awkward because they lack familiarity with the people around them in a specific situation. As a psychologist, its not as precise as a more accurate description could be.

Similar topics:

Oxford Languages offers a surgical take, “a person in a completely unsuitable environment or situation.” Emphasis added. The purpose of this article is to explore corporate fit as a hiring practice and lessons learned with Green Bay Packers and Miami Dolphins NFL Game.

The right “fit” in job hiring evident during Green Bay Packers and Miami Dolphin Game

Why is the last definition important to job seekers, career transitioners and human resources personnel? Dictionary.com puts it bluntly, “this expression alludes to the fact that fish cannot survive very long on dry land.

In today’s times we’re all about surviving to thrive. It is crucial, as we survey the land, reconnoiter various alternatives (job and entrepreneurial opportunities),  we take note of functions, situations, hemispheric regions, local environments, culture, and people that give us synergistic energy and those who deplete our reserves.

Getting back to the Green Bay Packers and Miami Dolphins game. I’m not a sports analyst nor a solid sports enthusiast. However, I do take note of environmental factors, corporate norms, and workplace culture impacting job performance so that I can best provide life coaching and career coaching services. One of the best ways to observe top ranked performers in action, in real time, under intense public pressure is to view professional sports games as a detached spectator. No skin in the game, no bias or preconceived notations of player abilities.

Harsh environmental elements can negatively impact on-the-job output

Miami Dolphins Linebacker Brooks said it best on ESPN a few days ago, “the cold weather affected the Dolphins.”

As someone not really interested in watching the game (I did so with my husband and friends), it wasn’t hard to notice Green Bay players literally sailing on the field, as if they were flying alongside the turbulent wind currents. On the other hand, Miami Dolphin players appeared stilted, f-r-o-z-e-n actually, as if they were immobilized by the harsh weather, impeding their response time to a snail’s pace. Even the Dolphin coaches on the sidelines seemed to be lethargic. As their player’s limbs refused to keep up with the fast pace of their opponents; Dolphin coaches appeared stymied as their brains appeared to freeze. An actual physiological ailment that takes place when someone eats, drinks or breathes something cold (see Cleveland Clinic). Cold air was given as an example.

3 Traditional ways employees react to harsh working conditions

What should you do if you work in a harsh environment or employed in less than favorable workplace?

Well, if you find that you have no other career choices or alternatives to working in a toxic environment, dealing with a difficult boss, or working alongside jealous coworkers and colleagues, many beleaguered staff:

  • Grin and bare it thereby lowering your standards of performance and expectations for yourself and others,
  • Adapt by acclimating yourself to the environment (condition yourself to perform in colder climates using exposure therapy, become less dependent upon the need for positive reinforcement, become more self-reliant and determined, build stronger external network), or
  • Go elsewhere that is best suited to your style and meets your environmental preferences.

Assessing the ‘right fit’ is critical for hiring decisions

In thinking about the NFL football game, one can readily see how finding the ‘right fit’ in corporate America has been paramount for human resources professionals. Job seekers often wonder, “I have all of required skills. Great references were provided demonstrating I can walk on water. Why didn’t I receive an offer?”

Maybe skilled human resources professionals, supervisors and managers; based upon your interview responses could glean early on that you weren’t the right fit. A footballer used to practicing in 90 degree weather, catching dry balls, and sprinting in coarse fields. When the corporate environment called for a player who routinely practices in 30 degree weather, adjusts to fierce weather conditions (harsh winds changing the direction and trajectory of fast objects, slippery fields modifying the feet landing patterns ever so slightly so as not to cause a tumble). And yes, consciously telling your body to breathe slowly when inhaling and exhaling extremely cold air to prevent brain freeze.

The right fit versus adaptability: which is best ?

Organizational behavior studies published by Harvard Business Review (HBR) bears our reasoning out. Researchers Corritore, Goldberg, Srivastava along with Stanford University professors,  Manian and Potts suggested that there are two ways corporate (cultural fit) can be analyzed:

  • Corporate Fit. When hiring managers follow this model, they assess whether the candidate holds the same or similar “the values, norms, and behaviors of the team or organization as it currently exists.”
  • Adaptability. Should executives making hiring decisions follow this template, they evaluate whether the candidate has the “ability to rapidly learn and conform to organizational cultural norms as they change over time.”

Results of high corporate fit vs. high adaptability

Some of their results, you may find startling.

  • High corporate / cultural fit “led to more promotions, more-favorable performance evaluations, higher bonuses, and fewer involuntary departures.” [No surprise].
  • High ability to quickly adapt to changing cultural norms within the organization, over time “were more successful than employees who exhibited high cultural fit when first hired. These cultural “adapters” were better able to maintain fit when cultural norms changed or evolved, which is common in organizations operating in fast-moving, dynamic environments.”

3 implications for the career professional, job seeker and employer

What does this mean?

  • Should you find yourself in an uncomfortable or awkward working environment, give it time before packing your briefcase to give your notice immediately,
  • Fake it, take it, until you make it. What this means from a corporate culture perspective, researchers evidence employees who pretend to hold the same or similar values as their corporate colleagues (perceptual congruence) perform at higher levels than employees who actually hold the same values as their workplace colleagues (value congruence),
  • Corporate / culture fit isn’t a panacea for top performance. Employees with value congruence may have lower attrition rates but ‘best fit’ isn’t predictive of higher performance.
  • Cultural fit is associated with long lasting career success as they were looked upon to build bridges across functions, units and divisions; conversely employees labelled as social and cultural ‘outsiders’ were “penalized harshly without obtaining membership in any group.

You cannot copy content of this page