And if performance is the issue, why even mention cultural fit during the firing? Items 1,2 and 4 are perfectly justifiable reasons for firing without invoking the "cultural fit" clause. Why not simply stick with the observations of (non-)performance rather than offering your judgements of the cause(s) of the non-performance? I can understand quitting because of reason #3, but not being fired because of it, unless it leads to poor performance. So again, fire me for poor performance, not because you believe - rightly or wrongly - that I'm not as motivated by your goals as I used to be. As long as my performance does not taper off one iota, it should not matter to you. And yes, for some people, loss of passion for company goals would lead to decreased performance. But other people might have additional motivating factors that allow them to maintain enthusiasm and continue to perform at a high level. Why should that be a problem?
Yes, I recognize that my refusal to accept that we must all have the identical motivating factors is a prime example of why I would be a poor cultural fit with many start-ups.
Exactly, that's what I mean when I say that "cultural fit" should never be considered or offered as the cause of firing. However,
> Why not simply stick with the observations of (non-)performance rather than offering your judgements of the cause(s) of the non-performance?
Because I expect any decent manager & company to at least try to (a) identify the reasons for low performance, and (b) discuss possible correction plans together with the employee. Actively identifying and correcting causes for low performance is in my opinion essential to maintain perspective on how and why your company works. This perspective is necessary to understand and strengthen the practices and pillars that increase your team's performance.
Yes, I recognize that my refusal to accept that we must all have the identical motivating factors is a prime example of why I would be a poor cultural fit with many start-ups.