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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 26 2017, @12:01AM
A complex task may require skills that are more likely to show up in a team.
Using a team over a single incurs a communications cost which may negate the advantage of putting multiple, equally skilled folks on board.
So which wins?
The team wins if you are not counting the cost of effort put into the job because it can work as either a person or team.
If you think about a project lifecycle, the team wins because the single person that can do everything won't be around to support the whole life of the project.
So what to do?
Staff a project with a mix of prime movers and not to bring a diverse set of skills and willingness to stick around.