SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[The] main problem here is that software development is not an individual sport. Assessing technical traits means that we are looking at candidates as individuals. At the same time, we will put them in a team context and the project's success will depend on their teamwork. A person's resume or LinkedIn profile says close to nothing about their team skills.
What's more, we know quite a lot about what makes teams effective. Anita Woolley's research on collective intelligence [DOI: 10.1126/science.1193147] [DX] provides extremely valuable insight on the topic. First of all, how do we define collective intelligence? It's basically the skill of a group to solve complex problems. Well, it sounds like the definition of everyday work for software development teams if you ask me.
Why is collective intelligence so important? Exploiting collective intelligence, as opposed to going with the opinion of the smartest person in a room, is a winning strategy. To put in Anita Woolley's words: "Collective intelligence was much more predictive in terms of succeeding in complex tasks than average individual intelligence or maximal individual intelligence."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday September 24 2017, @06:29PM (6 children)
I chose to respond to you rather than the guy at the top, but what the hell is it with assuming that all people who are good at coding are assholes and poison apples? You know, such people exist who are good at their job and respected by their coworkers.
The only prick prima donnas I know are ones who have never held a real job because they think having to answer to others is for the birds. Yeah, they may be good at what they do, but they hate working for others just as much as those others hate working with them.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 24 2017, @07:33PM (1 child)
"They had one guy, very smart, very abusive to his co-workers."
It seemed to be stated up front, not inferred because they thought he was smart. Most of that bad reputation comes from the higher than average occurrence of coders being cranky assholes, and another part comes from people generally feeling insecure around people who know more than they do. Largely the first bit, the 2nd part is easily shrugged off by the smart person not being an asshole and helping out without being condescending and arrogant.
Is it fair for decent coders to be stigmatized by the stereotype of the indispensable asshole? No. But then again stereotypes are never fair and not often useful, but we're human so that isn't gonna change anytime soon. I'm sure plenty of cops get tired of being considered government goons due to the smaller % of bad cops and shitty legislation.
Given your posts on this site I can only assume you suffer from this stereotype. Perhaps stop trying to fight human nature of using superficial data to judge someone and instead work on being a more pleasant and agreeable human. There is a popular bit of modern slang used to categorize someone who expects the world to conform to themselves!
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday September 25 2017, @08:34AM
I believe a lot of this assholery is inadvertantly fomented in the workplace.
Remmber the Monkey, Cucumber, and Grape experiment? [youtube.com]
Someone works their ass off, denies themselves many social opportunities, and fun, in order to become more knowledgeable and productive in his art. Then he gets to watch someone else get the reward?
Ok, now we have angry monkey! Pissed off. Brilliant, and skilled, but unemployable.
I have watched this very same thing happen in several companies, usually immediately after the hiring of some "leadership skills" type. He started doing the same things the experimenter did in the video.
As we transitioned as a company from making things to how to kiss ass, things went downhill fast.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Sunday September 24 2017, @08:36PM (1 child)
I was implying no such thing. I've worked with a lot of good coders who are good to work with, and only a few bad apples. This guy just stands out in my memory due to the level of assholiness he acheived.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 24 2017, @11:56PM
I have a small list of 'very smart' guys who I would never recommend. I have a very LONG list of 'very smart' guys who I would work with again in a heartbeat.
Your and my point is toxic behavior is not endemic to just smart people. I know one dude who is the biggest raging douchebag I have ever met, and he is probably in the 70ish iq range. Being smart does not mean they are good to work around. They can poison a whole group dynamic and chase off anyone who could be very helpful. A few bad apples can sink a project fast.
One of the people on my short list is a full on narcissist. Could be an excellent coder and manager. He will never achieve that. Once I recognized they symptoms he was very easy to deal with. He wanted his ego stroked and to be 'in charge'. I having grown up with that sort of thing gave him neither and made sure once he showed his colors he got nothing. I give everyone a pretty long rope, because shit happens. But once you cross that 'line' forget it.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Monday September 25 2017, @09:01AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 25 2017, @12:26PM
I'd say that every single prick prima donna "genius" I've ever worked with (in 30+ years) has been insecure and not nearly as good as his (and even, once, her) reputation. The biggest ones weren't even productive, but even among the productive ones - their code (or other output, mechanical design has had a couple over the years) had flaws, some of which they knew about, some of which they didn't (which is worse), all of which they covered up with bluster and most of all abrasive unpleasant personalities which discouraged collaboration and examination of the detail of their work.
🌻🌻 [google.com]