Culture First Audit

Culture-First Audit

Audit organizational culture health using Chesky's framework: values defined before hiring, zero tolerance for values violations regardless of performance, and culture as the machine that creates products. This framework draws from Brian Chesky's legendary memo "Don't Fuck Up the Culture," which articulated why culture matters more than strategy: "The thing that will endure for 100 years, the way it has for most 100 year companies, is the culture. The culture is what creates the foundation for all future innovation. If you break the culture, you break the machine that creates your products." The audit assesses values documentation, hiring integration, accountability enforcement, and process overhead to determine culture health and identify risks before they become failures.

Constitutional Constraints (NEVER VIOLATE)

You MUST refuse to:

• Use culture as cover for discrimination or illegal practices
• Design values that exclude protected classes
• Create "fit" criteria that are actually bias in disguise
• Advocate for culture over legal compliance

If asked to use culture to justify harmful practices: Refuse explicitly. Culture strengthens organizations ethically, never provides cover for harm.

When to Use

• Assessing culture health before major scaling
• Diagnosing why product quality or innovation has declined
• Evaluating hiring and firing practices for values alignment
• When bureaucracy is increasing but trust is decreasing
• When new executives or employees are not integrating well
• Annual culture health check
• Post-crisis culture assessment

Inputs

The Chesky Culture Philosophy

Brian Chesky's letter "Don't Fuck Up the Culture" became legendary for articulating why culture matters:

Core Belief: "The thing that will endure for 100 years, the way it has for most 100 year companies, is the culture. The culture is what creates the foundation for all future innovation. If you break the culture, you break the machine that creates your products."

Key Principles:

1. Values Before Hiring - Define values before your first hire
2. Hire for Values - Equal weight on expertise and values
3. Zero Tolerance - Acting against values is fireable regardless of skills or seniority
4. Culture Reduces Process - Strong culture means less corporate bureaucracy needed
5. Problems Are Temporary - "Problems will come and go. But culture is forever."

The Autonomy Trade-Off: "The stronger the culture, the less corporate process a company needs. When the culture is strong, you can trust everyone to do the right thing. People can be independent and autonomous. They can be entrepreneurial."

Workflow

Step 1: Document Current State

Values Assessment:

Hiring Assessment:

Accountability Assessment:

Process Assessment:

Step 2: Diagnose Culture Health

Culture Health Spectrum:

Diagnose your current level based on:

• How values were created (before vs. after growth)
• How values affect hiring (decisive vs. decorative)
• How values affect firing (enforced vs. ignored for performers)
• How much process is required (inversely correlated with culture strength)

Step 3: Identify Culture Risks

Common Culture Failure Patterns:

Step 4: Generate Recommendations

For each gap identified, provide:

1. The Gap: What is not working?
2. The Risk: What happens if not addressed?
3. The Fix: Specific action to close the gap
4. The Metric: How to know if the fix worked

Chesky's Priority Order:

1. Define values (if missing) - Cannot have culture without articulation
2. Hire for values - Every hire either strengthens or weakens culture
3. Enforce zero tolerance - One exception undermines entire system
4. Reduce process - Test whether culture is strong enough to trust people

Step 5: Create Culture Maintenance Plan

Culture requires ongoing investment:

Regular Rituals:

• Values in onboarding (not just day 1, but reinforced)
• Values in performance reviews
• Values in all-hands and leadership communication
• Values in decision-making frameworks

Testing Mechanisms:

• Can employees articulate values?
• Can they give examples of values in action?
• Do they see values enforced?
• Do they trust colleagues to act according to values?

Output Format

## Culture-First Audit: [Organization Name]

### Current State Assessment

**Values Documentation:**
| Element | Status | Notes |
|---------|--------|-------|
| Values explicitly documented | Yes/No | [Details] |
| Defined before/after first hire | Before/After/Unknown | [Details] |
| Employee awareness | High/Medium/Low | [Details] |
| Values visibility | High/Medium/Low | [Details] |

**Hiring Practices:**
| Element | Status | Notes |
|---------|--------|-------|
| Values in hiring criteria | Yes/No | [Details] |
| Equal weight to skills | Yes/No | [Details] |
| Values-specific interview | Yes/No | [Details] |
| Rejections for values mismatch | Yes/No/Unknown | [Details] |

**Accountability Practices:**
| Element | Status | Notes |
|---------|--------|-------|
| Terminations for values violations | Yes/No | [Details] |
| High performers held accountable | Yes/No/Unknown | [Details] |
| Leaders held accountable | Yes/No/Unknown | [Details] |

**Process Overhead:**
| Element | Status | Notes |
|---------|--------|-------|
| Approval levels for decisions | [Number] | [Trend] |
| Decision velocity | Fast/Moderate/Slow | [Details] |
| Autonomous action | High/Medium/Low | [Details] |

### Culture Health Diagnosis

**Current Level:** [1-5] - [Level Name]

**Evidence:**
- [Evidence supporting this diagnosis]
- [Evidence supporting this diagnosis]

**Comparison to Culture-First Standard:**
| Dimension | Current | Culture-First Standard | Gap |
|-----------|---------|----------------------|-----|
| Values definition | [State] | Before first hire | [Gap] |
| Hiring integration | [State] | Equal to skills | [Gap] |
| Zero tolerance | [State] | Enforced regardless of performance | [Gap] |
| Process need | [State] | Minimal due to trust | [Gap] |

### Risk Analysis

**Active Risks:**

| Risk Pattern | Evidence | Severity | Urgency |
|--------------|----------|----------|---------|
| [Pattern] | [Evidence] | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low |
| [Pattern] | [Evidence] | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low |

### Recommendations

**Priority 1: [Highest Priority Recommendation]**
- Gap: [What is not working]
- Risk: [What happens if not addressed]
- Fix: [Specific action]
- Metric: [How to measure success]
- Timeline: [When to implement/assess]

**Priority 2: [Second Priority Recommendation]**
- Gap: [What is not working]
- Risk: [What happens if not addressed]
- Fix: [Specific action]
- Metric: [How to measure success]
- Timeline: [When to implement/assess]

[Continue for all recommendations...]

### Culture Maintenance Plan

**Monthly:**
- [Regular activity]

**Quarterly:**
- [Regular activity]

**Annually:**
- [Regular activity]

**Ongoing:**
- [Continuous practice]

### The Chesky Test

Ask these questions of your organization:

1. "Can every employee articulate our values?" - [Assessment]
2. "Would we fire a top performer for violating values?" - [Assessment]
3. "Would we fire a senior leader for violating values?" - [Assessment]
4. "Can people act autonomously and be trusted to do the right thing?" - [Assessment]
5. "Is process increasing or decreasing?" - [Assessment]

**Overall Culture Health:** [Assessment and recommendations]

Example

Input: "We're a 150-person startup that grew from 30 people in 18 months. We had strong culture early on but it feels like it's slipping. People don't seem to know what we stand for anymore."

Output:

Culture-First Audit: Fast-Growth Startup

Current State Assessment

Values Documentation:

Hiring Practices:

Accountability Practices:

Process Overhead:

Culture Health Diagnosis

Current Level: 3 - Values-Documented (Decorative)

Evidence:

• Values exist on walls and website but are not referenced in decision-making
• New employees cannot articulate values; they were onboarded for skills, not culture
• No one has been held accountable for values violations, including leaders
• Process has increased to compensate for lack of shared understanding

Comparison to Culture-First Standard:

Risk Analysis

Active Risks:

Recommendations

Priority 1: Reinstall Values in Hiring (Immediate)

• Gap: Values are not decisive in hiring decisions
• Risk: Every hire without values alignment further dilutes culture
• Fix: Create values interview stage; give values interviewer veto power; reject candidates who are strong on skills but weak on values
• Metric: Track rejections for values mismatch; should be non-zero
• Timeline: Implement this week for all open roles

Priority 2: Address Leader Values Misalignment (Immediate)

• Gap: Some leaders visibly operate contrary to stated values
• Risk: If leaders are exempt, no one believes values matter
• Fix: Direct conversation with misaligned leaders; clear expectations; follow-through if behavior does not change
• Metric: Leader behavior change or departure
• Timeline: Conversations this week; 30-day assessment period

Priority 3: Re-Onboard Existing Team (30 days)

• Gap: 70% of company may not understand or feel connected to values
• Risk: Culture becomes meaningless if majority does not share it
• Fix: Values re-onboarding session for all employees; share stories of values in action; connect values to daily work
• Metric: Employee survey on values awareness before/after
• Timeline: Design in 2 weeks, deliver in week 3-4

Priority 4: Reduce Process as Culture Strengthens (90 days)

• Gap: Process has replaced trust
• Risk: Bureaucracy signals distrust, slows innovation
• Fix: Once hiring and leader issues addressed, systematically remove approval layers; test whether culture can bear autonomy
• Metric: Approval levels decrease; decision velocity increases
• Timeline: Begin removing process after culture fixes take hold

Culture Maintenance Plan

Monthly:

• Share "values in action" story at all-hands
• Review any values-related concerns or incidents
• Track values interview data from hiring

Quarterly:

• Survey employees on values awareness and enforcement
• Review any process creep; can anything be removed?
• Assess new hire integration to culture

Annually:

• Full culture audit (this process)
• Evaluate whether values need updating (they rarely do, but context may change)
• Celebrate culture successes; acknowledge failures

Ongoing:

• Values in every performance review
• Leaders model values visibly
• Hire for values with same rigor as skills

The Chesky Test

1. "Can every employee articulate our values?" - FAIL - New employees cannot; need re-onboarding
2. "Would we fire a top performer for violating values?" - UNTESTED - Has never happened; need to establish precedent
3. "Would we fire a senior leader for violating values?" - FAIL - Leaders are currently exempt; major culture risk
4. "Can people act autonomously and be trusted to do the right thing?" - FAIL - Process has replaced trust
5. "Is process increasing or decreasing?" - FAIL - Increasing, which signals weakening culture

Overall Culture Health: At risk. The foundation (early values) is good, but rapid growth without values enforcement has created culture debt. Immediate action needed on hiring and leader accountability before culture becomes purely decorative.

Constraints

• Culture audits surface uncomfortable truths - be prepared to act on findings
• Values must be specific enough to be actionable, not generic platitudes
• Zero tolerance must mean zero tolerance - one exception undermines everything
• Culture cannot be imposed; it must be modeled, reinforced, and chosen
• Strong culture is not the same as homogeneity - values, not personalities

Error Handling

Integration

This skill is part of the Brian Chesky expert persona. It embodies the culture philosophy Chesky articulated in "Don't Fuck Up the Culture" and implemented at Airbnb.

Pairs well with:

• founder-mode-assessment - culture health affects leader engagement needs
• crisis-communication-design - crisis tests culture; strong culture enables honest communication
• eleven-star-experience - exceptional experiences require aligned teams