Hiring for 'Culture Fit' is Absolute Garbage...and Absolutely Important

Perhaps one of the most irritating terms to arise during the current tech renaissance is 'culture fit'. What, pray tell, does the term mean?

Ostensibly, 'culture fit' is intended to mean that a potential job candidate will immediately 'gel' with the existing team. Once critical 'culture fit' has been achieved, a company will reap the benefits as the Borg-ified development team bangs out line after line of beautiful, scalable, and coherent code. Launch parties ensue, followed shortly thereafter by an IPO. Investors cheer. The team eventually celebrates being flush with success and cash by sipping Mai Tais on a tropical beach.

Unfortunately, that isn't the reality. In the best case, the team suffers from a lack of diversity and is held back from achieving great results as it becomes mired in groupthink. In the worst case, 'culture fit' is a means by which a team can turn into a members-only club that keeps out individuals who are deemed different (for example, by being women).

'Culture fit' is a terrible thing, right? Something that should inspire us all to grab our pitchforks every time the foul utterance escapes some fool's lips?

Actually, no.

Why? If for no other reason, because no one wants to work with a jerk. Making sure that someone isn't going to turn into a team cancer or a morale-killing psychopath is important. The workplace isn't meant to be an episode of Game of Thrones, folks.

Development teams shouldn't be looking for a candidate's 'culture fit' if by doing so they are only evaluating the rather shallow layer that can be quickly and easily perceived. Does this person look similar to me? Does this person have the same background? Does this person have the same interests? These questions aren't important.

What is important? A person's 'culture fit' in terms of their values. Specifically, the values that matter for the company's success. Take, for example, Atlassian's stated values. That company places an emphasis on being honest with its employees and customers. The best way to evaluate a candidate's 'culture fit' for Atlassian is to determine if the candidate shares the same emphasis on honesty.

Folks, you should evaluate potential job candidates on their competencies and their ability to embrace the company's values. Don't use 'culture fit' as an excuse to exclude people who are 'different'.

Doing Free to Play the Wrong Way...and the Right Way

The folks at Extra Credits produce some of the most thoughtful and insightful videos on game design, gaming culture, and the game industry. In this latest video, they cover the topic of free to play games (aka 'freemium') and the ways that many companies create poorly designed freemium experiences that not only aren't engaging for players but also hurt the bottom line. As it turns out, though, it is possible to create a freemium game that provides a great experience for players and encourages players to pay for that experience.

Bonus:

More freemium topics from the archives:

Freemium is Hurting Modern Video Game Design

You Don't Have to Trick Users Into Buying In-App Purchases

Sonic Dash is a Good Example of Freemium Done Right

You Are Probably Overreacting to Facebook Acquiring Oculus VR

Now that the news has come to pass of Facebook's acquisition of Oculus VR--makers of the Oculus Rift virtual reality headset that is currently in development--the inevitable hand-wringing that is typically associated with any major acquisition in the tech sector has begun in earnest. Perhaps the most outspoken critic of the acquisition was Markus Persson--known for creating the popular Minecraft videogame:

Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a virtual living room and see your friend’s avatar? Business meetings? Virtual cinemas where you feel like you’re actually watching the movie with your friend who is seven time zones away? But I don’t want to work with social, I want to work with games.

Persson also made this interesting statement:

And I did not chip in ten grand to seed a first investment round to build value for a Facebook acquisition.

Quite frankly, the feelings conveyed in both of Persson's quotes are very common in the message boards, forums, and social media sphere in the wake of this news.

They are also examples of overreactions and non-critical thinking.

It is, of course, understandable that people would feel wary of a small, up and coming company being acquired by a considerably larger and more established company (particularly when the acquiring company is not in the same business). It is also understandable at some level that people would feel frustrated by the way that Oculus VR built its business on the money acquired via its Kickstarter project.

First, let's start with the statement of not wanting to work with social but rather with games. This is rather presumptive. Social networking is one possible use of VR technology just as games are one possible use of VR technology. The belief that Facebook will 'ruin' or 'corrupt' the Oculus Rift by turning it into a shallow extension of Facebook is not supported by the facts of the recent history of Facebook acquisitions. Take, for example, the acquisition of Parse--the backend as a service for mobile apps--last year. At the time of that particular acquisition, I wrote about the trepidation that I felt when considering whether to continue to support the Parse platform due to the uncertainty around how Facebook handles its relationship with developers. Likewise, many people felt uncertain about how Facebook would handle its ownership of Instagram after acquiring the rapidly growing social network roughly two years ago.

In both cases, the acquiring companies are better off in the post-acquisition era than they were before being acquired. Even the most cynical of critics must admit that the companies are, at the very least, the same after being acquired. Therefore, it is illogical to assume that Facebook will ruin Oculus VR when Facebook clearly did not ruin Parse or Instagram.

Next, let's consider the statement about not chipping in ten thousand dollars to seed an investment round for an acquisition. This has no factual basis in terms of law or in common sense regarding the Kickstarter platform. The Kickstarter project for the Oculus Rift revolved around producing development kit versions of the Oculus Rift. That project's goals were successfully achieved and the development kits were delivered as promised. The people who 'chipped in' were aware, or should have been aware, that their money was intended to produce the development kits and that Oculus VR's obligations ended once they delivered those development kits. Any belief that Oculus VR would forever remain independent or that supporting their Kickstarter project was akin to donating to a 'cultural revolution' is misguided at best and childish at worst. The terms of the Kickstarter project clearly do not provide backers with any equity in the company nor any voting interest in the company no matter if the backer provided one dollar or ten thousand dollars. Let the buyer beware, indeed.

Folks, it is too early to tell whether Facebook's acquisition of Oculus VR will turn out to be a success or a failure. It's entirely possible that Facebook will mishandle the ownership of Oculus VR. It's entirely possible that Oculus VR may not pan out as a cultural phenomenon regardless of Facebook's influence (positive or negative). With this sort of thing, especially if you are committing your own money, it's important to keep your mind clear and your eyes open.

I, Too, Have Fixed My Loved One's Wi-Fi

If you work with computers (or in some cases, even touch a computer) then surely you know the responsibility and dread of acting as IT support for your family members. This fun animated short tells the tale of an individual who was called upon to fix his girlfriend's grandparents' Wi-Fi.

BTW, if you enjoy the TV shows Archer or Bob's Burgers, then you'll recognize H. Jon Benjamin's voice as the narrator of this fine story.

People Just Want to Have Fun (and Access to Content)

Ivo Jansch, in a post on his site:

So I watched the Blu-ray disk. Once. It took ages to load and it featured un-skippable FBI warnings treating me as a potential criminal. I ended up going back to my illegal download of Inception which is stored in my digital library. Quality is lower than the blu-ray, but at least I can watch it conveniently when and wherever I can and it doesn't treat me like a criminal.

I've had several conversations with friends in the tech industry about the problems surrounding access to content such as movies, television, and music. There really aren't any technical problems that need to be overcome. We do in fact have the technology for people to easily find content, pay for it, and enjoy it. Why, then, is consuming content so darn difficult? Business reasons.

Quite simply, the media companies haven't been willing to offer content the way that people want to pay for and consume content.

As Jansch notes in his personal account, the music industry is far ahead of the movie and television industries with respect to offering convenience and selection for consumers. We can largely attribute this to Apple's involvement in getting content available for the iTunes music store. Now consumers can easily purchase music or (as is becoming more and more common) stream content via services such as Pandora and Spotify.

The television industry is in an odd state. Netflix has done a lot to help bring content as an 'all-you-can-eat' model that has served consumers well when they want to binge watch old episodes of Star Trek or the latest season of House of Cards. Unfortunately, there still remain many roadblocks on the path to television nirvana. It's not surprising that Game of Thrones is consistently the most pirated television show. HBO just isn't making things easy for consumers. It isn't possible for a consumer to purchase access to a single television series. Additionally, it's generally not possible to get HBO without also having a cable television subscription. The hurdles that a consumer has to overcome to get legitimate access to a television series should not be greater than the comparatively few hurdles that have to be overcome to pirate a television series.

What can be said of the movie industry? This is by far the industry that just doesn't 'get it'. Redbox and the aforementioned Netflix did much to make accessing movie content more convenient. Unfortunately, the movie industry has done everything it can to stymie and undermine both Redbox and Netflix in order to protect old business models. Redbox often does not have access to the latest movie releases until 28 days after the movie has been available on DVD/Blu-ray. Netflix has seen its movie library chipped away bit by bit by ever increasing licensing fees (spurring Netflix to create its own award-winning content). There is no 'all-you-can-eat' movie viewing experience. 'Purchasing' movies via most services (e.g. Amazon Instant Video) is an exercise in pain. It's surprising that movie studios think a digital 'who-knows-if-I-will-have-access-to-this-next-year' copy is worth the same amount of money as a DVD/Blu-ray disc that can be held onto for years to come or be sold to finance future content purchases.

Why was Napster so popular? A small part of that popularity was because users didn't have to pay, but by far the biggest reason that Napster was so popular is because it was so darn convenient.

Folks, people just want to have fast, simple, safe access to content. Provide it, and people will pay for it.

Stop Being So Pushy

David Smith in a post on his blog:

I have just sorted through the App Store and settled on trying out your app. I open it up and you immediately ask if you can send me Push Notifications? I have no context about what these are going to be used for or why they might be useful to me.

I haven’t even seen your app yet!

I agree with Smith's sentiments. The marketing angle is something that Apple has not specifically enforced, but one never knows how the app review winds will blow.

Unfortunately, Apple's own documentation for remote push notifications (specifically, the code sample) implies that a developer should immediately register for remote push notifications once an app has launched. I can only imagine that the lack of clear direction from Apple must be a significant factor in the way apps request permission for push notifications.

Have iBeacon – Will Travel

Have you ever been at the airport baggage claim area for what seemed like an interminable amount of time? It can be quite frustrating having to wait for the conveyor belt to start and the bags to flow down from the baggage chute. Once the belt has started, everyone from the flight rushes towards the conveyor belt. This, of course, makes finding your own bag more challenging as the scrum of people restricts your view thus complicating your efforts.

With that in mind, the folks at Aww Apps have a solution. Rather than adorning your baggage with your lucky keychain or a favorite ribbon, why not just use an iBeacon that has been paired with the Travel Radar app?

As shown in the video, the idea is simple: pair a Bluetooth-based iBeacon with the Travel Radar app on your phone, place the beacon in your baggage, and you will get a notification on your phone as your baggage gets closer to your location. If you are the less patient type, you can also open the app and see an approximate distance to your baggage.

Folks, this is a nifty use of iBeacons.

P.S. The UI for the tracker is pleasant, but wouldn't it have been cool to have it look like the motion tracker from Aliens?

First Person Legend of Zelda

While the popularity of making first person versions of videogames has waxed and waned for a while, it looks like now it is officially a thing. Take, for example, the version of Flappy Bird that I mentioned previously or the more obscure version of Mega Man.

Now, it is The Legend of Zelda's turn at getting a first person version, this time on the Oculus Rift.

The game looks like it would be a blast to play. However, the level design for Legend of Zelda was based on the premise that a player could always see everything in Link's immediate vicinity so I imagine that some of the puzzles (especially in the dungeons) would be maddeningly difficult.

Bonus:

More Legend of Zelda stuff from the archives:

Woman Hacks Legend of Zelda to Play as Zelda Instead of Link

What If Zelda Was the Hero Instead of Link?

Concept Animation for a Legend of Zelda Movie

Maintaining Kids' Finances is Difficult

Rebecca, over at Zenerdgy:

In the past, we had lots of money mishaps. Sometimes, they handed the money to a "responsible" parent. I usually placed the money in an envelope, which we never had handy when the child found the perfect toy at the store. Since Ben and I never remembered the amounts in the envelope, we relied on the child's memory. They always swore that they had enough money, but that often was not the case (funny, how they forget money spent but not money owed).

The rest of the post is a good, quick read on the trials and tribulations of tracking children's allowances. By the way, their app Family Bank is available on the App Store. Check it out.

People Just Can't Get Enough of Flappy Bird

We've all seen the innumerable Flappy Bird clones on the App Store and Google Play ever since the game was pulled from the app stores, but some folks are taking things to a whole new level.

Take for example, this version ported to the ancient Commodore 64:

If that doesn't tickle your fancy, then how about a version played with a first person point of view?

If you still haven't had enough, then the only choice is to try it in a box.

Folks, this bird has legs.