Let me tell you right now, they are NOT worth the risk. There are a number of maxims that ALL greatly align with this situation but one of my favorites is hiring “attitude over aptitude” This only works within reason, but I am a firm believer that you CAN make up for a FEW years of industry experience by having a great work ethic and attitude. Someone with a student mentality will prove to be a higher return on investment than the person that rides the waves of past successes.

Don’t obsess over “fit” too much. Different perspectives can shake things up in a good way. If they have great skills but skip happy hour, who cares? Focus on what they bring to the table, not whether they blend in. Sometimes a different perspective adds more value than "fitting in." Let your team weigh in. If they’re cool with it, give them a chance, a wider team often understands some of the culturul ‘musts’ vs the ‘nice to have’. Ask yourself ‘are the cultural gaps in areas you can coach them on?’ If they align on core values but have a different work style, it might be worth the risk. Once you have gone through this process, if they really don’t fit dont be afraid to let them go. A perfect cv can’t make up for long-term culture clashes

If you are afraid a candidate won't fit in with the culture, that's a good sign you need to add more diversity to your team. There is growth and beauty when each individual member of the team brings different personalities, opinions and ideas. Different socioeconomic, religions, cultures, zip codes, beliefs -- it's all what makes a productive, diverse workforce. And diverse teams do better.

Since you are evaluating on culture fit, why would you go ahead an hire if there is a red flag! Doesn't it undermine the evaluation itself? If one is still in a dilemma, on boarding the talent on a contract with real concrete time driven goals would be a good way to evaluate. At the same time, identify someone who'll observe the talent for Value traits which will confirm culture fitment. Regroup every month and re-calibrate the understanding with 3-4 direct stakeholder.

I've faced this challenge before with standout candidates who didn’t fully align with the company culture. What I’ve learned is that core values are crucial—if those don’t match, it’s hard to make it work long-term. However, when someone’s skills are exceptional, a trial period is the best way to assess how they adapt. We also made it a point to gather team feedback, as they worked closely with the new hire and provided valuable insights. Ultimately, if the candidate shares the company’s values and the misalignment is more about teachable behaviors, they’re worth the risk.

It depends on what defines a 'top' candidate. Even if someone possesses exceptional skills, if they lack interpersonal abilities, self-awareness, or effective communication, I wouldn't consider them top candidates. How will they impact the rest of the team? Are we willing to lose valuable team members because of them? Can we afford that? Too often, teams fall apart when companies prioritize a high performer with toxic behavior, driving others away. It's crucial to define from the start which skills are non-negotiable, and which can be developed. Otherwise, you'll constantly be managing the new hire's negative impact on team morale.