The emphasis on cultural fit seems so strange to me, since when I was hiring I wanted cultural diversity, not cultural fit. I did want everyone to have technical ability, communication skills and "character," by which I meant honesty, open-mindedness, positive attitude, and ability to focus on work. But beyond that, I saw putting a programming team together like making a goulash: you want a variety of ingredients and flavors to make it come out right:

* Some programmers like following and trying out the latest and greatest tools ands versions; some like sticking with solid and established tools. * Some like knowing a little about everything. Some like knowing a lot about one thing. * Some like using databases for everything. Some avoid them. * Some like polishing and optimizing code. Some like rapid prototyping. * Some enjoy writing documentation. Some don't. * Some work at night. Some work early in the morning. * Some are extroverts. Some are introverts.

And I was happy to have a mix of all of them.

And as for whether they liked playing video games, knitting sweaters, playing softball, going to church, drinking beer, hunting deer, or reading science fiction or anything else, not only didn't I care about that, I felt it was ethically wrong to base hiring decision on what they did outside of work.

Perhaps calling it "culture fit" is the problem - it's not specific enough. Define more clearly the characteristics and signals you're looking for. Evaluate your team and culture to better identify the characteristics you're trying to match in a candidate. For instance, instead of "culture fit", say you are looking for signals that someone is "passionate about web development", then think about evidence that supports the characteristic: eagerly learning, involvement with development-community, excited about new technology, willing to experiment, etc. You can also provide evidence that shows a candidate isn't "passionate". Just a matter of semantics.