This is becoming more and more of an accepted practice by employers, although I think most people are confused by the term "cultural" or "culture" and whether that has legal bearing.

What the hiring manager meant was that the applicant is not a good match for the culture of the company as opposed to "culture" as far as one's personal upbringing, beliefs, etc.

While a person may be a good fit for the job in terms of knowledge or skills, if they are not a good fit in terms of culture then the company has unhappy employees on their hands leading to the employee being terminated or quitting because they are not a good cultural fit.

There was a study done in 2005 that noted that the average cost per hire for a company was about $7100 when one took into account the advertising, manhours for interviews and selection, orientation and training. Considering that those funds come directly from a company's bottom line, it is not hard to see why a company is very particular in ensuring that a prospective employee is a good fit in terms of both being able to do the job as well as assimilating into the corporate culture of a company. Not many people realize that corporate culture is so important, and when considering applying for a position, it might be to the benefit to indicate both in the resume and the interview why one would be a good cultural fit. It might make all the difference between getting the job and not. Hope this helps.

I was terminated after a very brief employment at a completely dysfunctional software start-up due to not being a good "cultural fit".

It was a HUGE blessing. I was eligible for unemployment insurance as I didn't do anything wrong (there was no reasonable or just cause for being fired) and I got out of a horrible situation relatively quickly and unscathed.

My project teammates were hostile, rude, vicious back-biters who smoked their breakfast and drank their lunch. They were terribly dishonest to our customers, too. Listening in on conference calls as they lied through their teeth to our customers left me red-faced with shame. Getting thrown off that island was one of the best things that ever happened to my career.

The only thing better than being "cultured out" by these harpies and lunatics would have been never being hired in the first place. Consider yourself blessed and move on. You no doubt dodged a bullet.

These are great comments, but there are times when a cultural mis-fit might be not just be acceptable but even desirable. Companies that hire only like-minded people are less capable of transformational change. There is a good Harvard Business Review article called "Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of Social Networks" which delves into the reasons why companies should not always hire people just like the ones they already have.

From that article: "An experienced venture capitalist recalls the case of a very capable manager who hired individuals based on his personal affinity with them. 'His team had a great time going out for a beer, but the quality of their work was seriously compromised,' says the dismayed investor. 'If you keep hiring only people you like, you can kill a company.'"