Complicated People in Software Development and how to get them right?
You just kick off working not messing with anyone.
Then lose a point and bog down in the deadline.
Then there is a point, and you realize that no one can do it, you are the one. Otherwise, why the hell do I have to bust my butt?
Then your capacity faces depletion and you turn to your natural stash: your precious immune system and psychological resilience.
You died at work, but your empty body goes to the workplace.
The anger grows when you see the carefree faces of your colleagues.
“Burned-out, just let him go” is what you hear uttered close to your inflamed brains. Managers contradict, as you contribute a damn lot, and they can’t just fire you.
Your soul seems like going to pieces poisoning others’ moods with your nagging and muttering.
HR allures you to get a walk in your free time… “Which kind of time?” mumbling you, trying to remind when was the last normal healthy sleep….
Disgust, contempt for all these conventions, wrath, and anger start teaming up instead, giving rise to a dark team lead.
He freaks out at every word he hears, and every smile makes him go ballistic.
He suffers from the lack of tech specifications and the overall logical malfunction of people around him.
Only his perfect code lets him zone out for a while.
“Kill’em all” whizzes here and there in his mind, while а pet project acquires features of a “conquer the world” plan.
— -
Send your brain on vacation, and save the world from the rise of dark team lead!
Today I’d like to talk about those unlucky ones who failed to escape into a well deserved vacation… And even those whose parents couldn’t make it in time. Actually, I dedicate this article to all who it is so hard to work with at times.
Now, here is our agenda for today:
— mood hoovers, experts, tyrans, their classification and ways to deal with, — all generously seasoned with the first-hand stories;
— a bit about in-house classifications;
PEOPLE
Here it should be noted that all complicated people have certain ground to behave this way. You must have seen that story above where I showed how an ordinary employee becomes a complicated one and may go hard on the others. It seems like every stage is logical and natural, but there is definitely something wrong with the result. Does this person deserve sympathy? He may quite well do. Should we feel sorry for those who work with such a person? Quite possibly we should, yet, here the question arises — why are these still around and haven’t run for their lives?
The time has come to look in detail what kind of people work in software development. All the illustrations are based on real life experience. Nope, no names. If something sounds damn familiar — that’s a happenstance, you’d better not read this part of the text:)
MOOD HOOVER
«Deadlines are always missed. It’s a time for top managers got used to it and learnt to deal with their own hyped expectations» © developer
Mood hoover is known to blast ideas and circumstances. His more aggressive counterpart may turn out a troll blasting people and personalities. Things you are likely to hear from a mood hoover are something like «duct tape solutions again», whereas a troll would rattle on «your idea to slap shit together and deploy may have come from a sinful child of the kinky nexus between Microsoft and programming languages», in a nutshell — «you’re a piece of shit».
SO, WHAT’S THE FUSS?
Does a mood hoover hurt? What can he do? He can, at best, write a poster «noone cares about your ugly code» howling around sadly. I can’t imagine anything beyond this reaction. I can ignore the poster, I can put on my headphones and not hear his grumpy howling. At the end of the day, I am a father of three, ignoring the noise around has grown into a second nature.
Alas, mood hoover does manage to brainwash, eating your brains and sucking out your energy. Moreover, those who never had any reason for discontent may get suspiciously silent. Well, if the manager preaches that everything is rosy — that’s one of the managers’ features.
An experienced comrade would pull at a cigarette, jetting smoke into the starlit sky, sad wisdom in his glance, will look a newby into the eyes and say: “The hell with it. We’re down in the dumps. The board doesn’t seem to care. D’you know how many times I tried to change something?“ That’s a proven path to the company’s death
UPSIDES?
Mood hoover has to be given a credit. He is never afraid to speak about problems and risks. He exaggerates a bit, but always from his heart.
WHAT TO DO:
— For colleagues: a single whiner sets the fashion. If we deal with a bunch of whiners can spark a massive outcry in the most inappropriate moment, for instance, a deadline crisis. That’s why you should not go in the dumps yourself and should not allow anyone else to start lamenting. It’s viral. To point out positive sides in the company is a good thing to do. If there were not any, what the hell are you doing here? Quit, and go find yourself a better job!
— For wreckers: you could choke the company with these games. Top managers wouldn’t feel the harm until team velocity dropped to next-to-zero. And it would be too late to change the corporative culture at this stage. Unfortunately, quite often those who have never created problems would be taking the rap.
Note: I’ve never met a wrecker type people in software development.
— For managers: you have to deal with negative talks like with a dangerous insect, — neutralize them fast. The best way to do it is by clearly understanding the motives of your people. Thea are most likely whining because of some particular reason, because there’s something they are bothered by, something that doesn’t let them feel happy. You find it, and the life will change for the better :)
DAB HAND
A dab hand deserves his laurels; he likes and knows how to stand up for his opinion. However, if bombarded with reasonable arguments from colleagues, he may quite well change it. He is a loner by nature and steers clear from giving out tasks. He is often criticized for surliness and a rare ability to spot shortcomings in solutions of others, yet he is definitely respected for profound knowledge. But, again, his obsessive idea to follow best practices and demand the same from others seriously pisses off.
WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— no fun. Whatever hard you jumped out of your skin, from the helicopter view of the master it looks like a kids’ stuff.
— no career growth. Think about it: if we have a superhero out there, the police can relax and have a doughnut. It may actually boil down to trying to do the tasks instead of actually completing them. If it worked out — well done, if it didn’t — there is always a master ready to cover.
For the company:
— It seems like a vicious circle since professional growth is not a fast process, whereas the technique for cloning a professional hasn’t been invented yet. Besides, having someone who always know how to do things relaxes and threatens to drag down other projects;
— if we speak of outsourcing, the client soon gets the idea that there is an expert out there, — and expects the same level of expertise form the rest of the team. The picture is seen the following way: the salary range is not that wide, though the difference in result is huge… I want the others work the same efficient! They take their time with projects and have the audacity to leave for vacation!
— a dab hand is usually someone of a narrow focus. Yes, they can know a number of programming languages, but they do not bother much about such things as estimation, communication and some other important ingredients. Consequently, there supposed to be someone else who would do these things instead of the expert and, of course, to get paid for this;
— not everyone can correctly interpret the written by him: «It’s some sort of magic, I can copy paste it and utilize. But it will take a while to figure out how it actually works».
For the dab hand himself:
— he can’t get rid of the feeling like «no one understands me» or «there is no one around me but dead-enders. My life is hard and lonely».
WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— It is awesome to have someone with an extraordinary expertise and experience at hand. The one we can learn from. The one who can help out… Can’t avoid his grumbling, yet everyone seeks his knowledgeable support. If a dozen during a day — no time to work at all!
For a company:
— As a matter of fact, he is an expert! The one to be sent to conferences with reports, the one to be proud of. That’s his regular magic that makes the world go around.
For himself:
— paycheck;
— genuine respect. Then again, there is an oddity: a dab hand often has a modest personality and believes this respect is not really deserved. As a result, respect may not bring satisfaction as it is expected to. See Dunning–Kruger effect
WHAT TO DO?
Colleagues:
— keep on studying, indeed. Experts rather often fail to communicate properly, and at times it is really difficult to learn from them… In a couple years, working on something brand new, working on your own, you’ll fully realize how much you have embraced from that grumpy guru at your office
For the company:
— in-house staff development. Seminars and lectures are able to significantly pump up professional skills. If to launch those initiatives with due monitoring, it will sure be beneficial.
— training for freshmen. It is crucial to seize the right moment when the new guy has got tired of the expert’s art, and come forward with a fresh project, keeping all ingredients in a healthy balance. The new guy may not agree right away, but people appreciate being given options to choose from.
For themselves:
— learn to communicate in a more down-to-earth fashion. They might learn something valuable and practically applicable things from management — a lot of interesting things to discover;
— meet and socialise with other experts more frequently;
— read more about perfectionism and its dark sides — see below
TYRANT
Should a good plan for capturing the world include autotests?
© challenging question for the job interview.
There is a certain type who knows how to whip people into shape. «There are two ways, my way and the wrong way. You have to listen to me». He is certainly right to a certain extent for he indeed has an expertise. However, along with that he can sometimes engage into personal remarks, for instance, «your solution is not quite smart, because you yourself are not a genius, alright?». You can hardly contradict, because he is an old bird in the company or in the project. On a bigger scale, the moment colleagues see the chance to change the job they do it. Well, juniors can not use this option. Tyran settles for that: juniors’ personal loyalty and attention to his decisions make up for all possible downsides of the situation. Mainly tyran is involved in assigning tasks, simultaneously grumbling about organizational foot dragging, for example «you can’t even create a to-do list yourself».
WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
For employees:
— no one is going to be superior to Tyrant. Far from everyone can be ready to waste their own potential while blindly obeying orders.
For the company:
— the middles are leaving. These are exactly the valuable people, who do not cost the company too much, but they already can execute 80% of tasks the same efficient as seniors do it;
— possessing unique knowledge and skills, enjoying zero competition from middles with more reasonable appetites, a tyrant can put the screws on the company as much as he pleases. Doubled paycheck — why not! You don’t want to make this feature — okay, fine! Another thing to deal with is that tyrans do not like vacations. And rightly so, by the way — being constantly pushed around, subordinates may unleash like a coiled spring asking themselves perennial questions «how did I wind up here? what am I doing here? what’s next for me here? how many job interviews I can attend while he is on vacation?».
For themselves:
— professional growth is possible only within the framework of a certain project. When the project comes to completion, a new one will always require a massive training. And if the tyrant is not the lucky one, — they can quite well meet grown up middles who they used to push around.
WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues and subordinates:
— no need to think too much and make too much effort, personal loyalty will do, if sweetened with signs of obedience and thorough blockage of any inner rebellion. When you meet people who feel absolutely comfortable with a tyrant, it means they feel absolutely fine economizing their energy. It’s not good judging them, as all of us at some point have a desire to melt and go with the tide. Besides, there are always some other exciting things where this energy could be diverted to: hobbies, pet projects, games, family and so on.
For the company:
— tyrants are highly efficient and stress-resilient in times of crisis. Before any rescue action is taken, they are consulted first. It should be noted, crisis of such kind is not typical of software companies. From the other hand, a «good decision now» is usually more beneficial for the project than a «perfect solution in a month»;
— they know what discipline means, and they are always ready to maintain it, which is usually uncommon for software companies. No belated arrivals at the office, no delayed timesheets, no delayed reports.
For themselves:
— Oh, come on, sure thing it is pleasant to realize that you are a decision maker and the only magician in the minstrel troupe. Abundant attention from potential partners is another bonus.
WHAT TO DO?
For subordinates:
— changing job looks like a suitable way out. It is a wise idea to discuss it with top managers before burning the bridges , as it is possible that they also view it as a problem, and you can find a solution together.
For the company:
— At many management conferences the issue of tyrants has become a regular. «Life with him has become unbearable, and we can not get rid of him. The situation has got out of hand». I do not have quick solutions for this so far. There are complex one, but they don’t fit in here.
For themselves:
— micromanagement is exhausting. Tyrant is detail obsessed and he won’t let go of the situation. Everyone needs to normally coexist and cooperate, whereas tyran’s unrealized safety need pushes the tyran to overcontrol everything. What can I say, there are no quick fixes here, you had better off consulting a specialist :)
PERFECTIONIST
It is natural for a decent specialist to strive for a perfect code/process/text etc. Mood hoovers, Dab Hands, and Tyrants often have one thing in common: there is an inner Perfectionist governing their choices and solutions.
WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT IT?
Perfectionists are true experts. Their opinion is something the team can rely upon…
WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
— perfectionism tends to be preoccupied with other colleague’s tasks and responsibilities, which means he leaves little chance for both them and himself to normally develop;
— there are always many tasks for perfectionist, and always no time. As a consequence, some tasks are bound to be stuck in the line for a really long time that makes a pain;
— perfectionist is doomed to be dissatisfied with what he is doing. He is like an astronomer who sees even the smallest spots in the brightest sunny day. He notices all the shortcoming in the work done, excessive concentration on it soon leads to a burn-out. Due to extreme demands to himself a perfectionist thinks in extremes, noticing only two wedges of truth, his own imperfection and perfection of etalon.
— perfectionist evades errors. He is risk-averse and always cautious, which often prevents him from reacting fast to the changing environment;
— the number of actually completed tasks inevitably slums staggered by his desire to do everything in the best way possible or impossible. “The first 90% of work take the first 10% of time”.
HOW TO DEAL WITH SUCH PEOPLE?
— promoting them to a managing position does not sound like a good plan. They are two slow trying to cover all possible upcoming corner cases during the first iteration, so their MVP will be done in years;
— do not provide much time for research and preparation. Introduce frequent deployment;
— delegate tasks to juniors to polish the result. The benefit is obvious: juniors learn, senior is busy with the actual job:
— monitor closely slightest changes in complaints, it is quite possible that we are losing him;
— give due respect and appraisal for the work done. Intimidating won’t help;
— occasionally treat him to some tasks that actually can be executed perfectly, as his soul desires.
What to do if I’m a perfectionist?
— cough yourself on perfectionism, evading tasks, or strange self-delays.;
— split tasks into milestones and MVPs;
— do not be too hard on yourself and stop demanding the impossible;
— consult a specialist;
CHATTERBOX
«Ammm, there is something I wanted to say… We talked about it tomorrow, I guess… I’d like to get back to the topic… Ouch, I guess, I lost the train of thoughts? Ah, yeah, got it… No-no-no, don’t interrupt, I’m just trying to lay it down» © cited one talented developer from syncup. No sooner than he finished, he could actually communicate.
«I do my usual tasks. I have completed couple methods, nothing special, well, someone had to do it. Did tests, like we always do. Well, it is always done like that. Of course, I also got through emails and our chat. We had Code Review yesterday as well.» © another talented developer at another project. The same case, where he kept blabbering about something that eventually did not make a point. This is just a universal description that might describe 90% of his days.
Talks a lot. Yakking incessantly, to be honest. Not that there was something particular to speak about, it happens simply because he is unable to formulate thoughts adequately, or he experiences a necessity for long wordings or he demands mere attention.
WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— boring.
For the company:
— eating up precious time, makes you drowsy. You just can’t shut him off, he is a professional worth listening to. If you interrupted hard the chatterbox, others might stay silent as well and you will wind up at a deadlock.
For themselves:
— people around you lose interest in you rather quickly. They feel ignored and neglected, and will try to ignore you as well. You’ll feel lonely and will start to talk even more. Deadlock.
WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT IT?
At many introvert meetings a chatterbox is a perfect person to fill the gaps in conversation.
WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT?
For themselves:
— learn how to speak briefly. Make yourself clear in sync-up and prepare your thoughts in writing, whatsoever. It will bring the desired attention :)
For colleagues:
— learn how to interrupt politely. Don’t be afraid to cut in. While most people actually notice the interlocutor’s attempt to speak out, chatterboxes do not seem to be quite sensitive in these issues.
For colleagues, one level deeper:
These people are sure: if they skip at least one conversation — they will cease to exist.
That is the thing. Some people get the following idea fixed in their heads «you are alive only as long as others pay attention to you». Different people actually draw different conclusions from this idea: from «live fast, make people talk about you, die young» to «make every conversation yours».
I would advise the following:
0. Ignoring doesn’t always help, really. Such a person will anyway find a victim. «I’m neglected -> means I’m not heard -> means +10% to my persistence won’t hurt». Isolating headphones will either lead to a new victim, or he just sits between the victim and their monitor for the hell of it.
1. Do not bother interrupting. Genteel habits do not really work here. It sometimes resembles the way you deal with hoodlums.
2. Give them some attention in advance. Being ignored for many years chatterboxes, as a rule, prove to be unprepared for such a turn of events, and faced with “attention in advance” they have a brain freeze and feel reluctant to continue. They feel full. Attention in advance feds much better than the attention taken by force.
3. Learn to talk in random-nonsense-generator style. It is a pretty handy skill, but those around you may go hysterical with laughter.
SILENT PLAYER
They stay schtum all the time as if there is a hidden tariff which stipulates a certain price per word uttered.
WHAT’S BAD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— It is hard to trust such team member. Even after a year of work together you still can’t get used to relying on them.
For managers:
— silent players often have a clever thing to say but seem reluctant to make themselves heard.
For themselves:
— on the one hand, there is always someone ready to talk from dawn to dusk. On the other, however, the moment you open your mouth to say something, everyone perceives it like a breach of the agreement «I do the talking, be so kind to listen»;
— you can really be a dab hand, but nobody seems to either notice it or appreciate it. It is your paycheck that grows so slowly, it is your valuable suggestions that are left unheard, whereas some chatterboxes get their ideas implemented.
WHAT’S GOOD ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— you can work in a quiet atmosphere at last.
For managers:
— no ideas without direct request , so no unexpected problems.
For themselves:
— it’s a good time to think while everyone is talking;
— nice chance to gaze at people around, as if they were parrots in the cage: they are tweeting chirping, babbling over some unimportant things. Entertainment, alright? :)
WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT?
For colleagues:
— your silent team members do have something to say, they just don’t feel at ease to interrupt. Or they may be too humble and do not regard their ideas important. Whatever it was, it is advisable to always give him a chance to speak out, and, probably you will get a great support.
For managers:
— always give the floor to the silent prayer at the meetings. You can be absolutely sure, if he made an effort to voice his thoughts, he feels strongly about them and they are definitely worth listening.
For themselves:
— do not feel shy to talk and to cut in.
NOT SO COMMON OR NOT SO EXPLICIT
HELPLESS
This guy does not seem too zealous about anything, he does not argue, or contradict anything. His honest eyes say «I do my best», «I make effort», «I try», but at the end of the day he just rolls back and admits he can not complete the task. He just can’t do that. Here it is important to identify whether the guy actually made effort, or it was just smoke and mirrors. Well, technically, he has done the work. He turns to the help from others, a lot. It is brought to the point where the bush leaguer is just sitting next to an actually effective developer, who is helping-doing his job for him.
Such type of an employee can actually be shaped up, but it often appears troublesome and time-consuming. There may be two reasons why the company does not get rid of him:
— no goddamn time to be bothered about it at all;
— in a company easier to keep as is in comparison to fight with a boss about cutting. Bosses sometimes like to say “Just motivate him”;
— in outsourcing, the client is paying for the job done by your lame duck, while negotiating any replacements does not seem reasonable for the time being.
A “CAN-DO” MAN
I used to work with a guy. He was not the brightest crayon in the box, but he was conscientious and reliable. Once the autotest was failed, and I asked him to «sort it out, fix the build». After some time he reported that autotests were okay. Another week later we got a similar bug popping out. After careful investigation we discovered that the bug was the same, whereas the test that was supposed to detect the bug was simply switched off.
Another employee despite the request to «do it like it was done there» just wrote an adapter for the API. It’s a bunch of code that converts one call format into another. He has done it instead of remaking the level below.
Overall, this type of employees — useful and diligent — has its benefits, however they require close control and do not really generate any great ideas.
It’s pointless requesting to «exercise independence» because a can-do mode guy is not about creating, for him it is is all about executing. As soon as he withdraws from the executor mode, he stops responding. If you wish to understand it better, consult the ego states model.
Another curious point to be noted is that it is difficult to encourage someone for exercise independence or any creative efforts in they feel guilt.
A case: you, as a Project Mama, set a task to “go and find out the details”. The problem is indeterminate. Your immediate instruction is: «Here is a major fuck-up, the deadline has been missed for three times. Be so kind, read the doc on the topic and see how we have done it in the previous modules». It is way more effective to specify the docs and titles of sample modules.
ACTION IMITATOR
While working at a new project we outsourced some tasks for database architects. They were working separately from us, and they worked a lot, bombarding us with enormous PDF with new base schemes. I clearly understood the client’s motives — he had experience working with them, while he had never worked with us before, so he didn’t want to take chances. However, it turned into a real nightmare for our team. I am not exaggerating here, there were hundreds of identical tables in the base. It should not sound so intimidating, but every new version brought about significant changes to those tables. Modification of the actual base to correspond with the new scheme took up a hell lot of time. For quite a long time we were unaware of what actually was going on, but in a couple months they confessed, saying «that’s your work that is clear for the client. What we do does not look so impressive. Therefore, we have to emphasize our contribution». The issue was sorted out, but…what the hell?
If you have recognized this type of person among your company staff it means, the company has been in a real trouble and it is high time to start doing something about it.
TERMINATOR
He does not know the rest until he finishes what he has to. The merciless engine man. He gets up-to-speed slowly so he doesn’t work well with interruptions. Unexpected tasks and requests like «drop everything, take a look at this bug, that’s urgent» prove to be rather painful for him, because it is like throwing a screwdriver into a hot blazing mechanism. A machine of a man.
RESCUE RANGER
Exercising the opposite behavior pattern to the Terminator he is a right man for dealing with wildcards, formidable emergencies and deadlines. Special feature: Ranger type is a sprinter, which means he fades away quickly.
LAME CODER
It is a type of employee for whom «slap shit together and deploy» is actually a natural approach. He might have been through a hard time while procrastinating on some previous projects. Speed as a justification of lack of actual expertise can also be the case. This is the type of employee who is not really appreciated in companies and pretty soon gets fired. However, a lame coder may be just what you need for duct tape solutions. In case where perfectionist is going to meticulously work during two weeks with all due tests and no bugs, lame coder will make a slapdash for two days with some bugs, but generally up and running. This fix going to be cursed for quite some time, but, we have to admit it, the project has survived.
SCAPEGOAT/CLOWN
That’s the type of person who makes you laugh. He is the one to laugh with, to laugh at, he is the one responsible for quotes like “why did the build break? Was that Billy who screwed it?»
Some said that this type of teammates always present at any human group as it’s a part of a human nature. I am not sure about that. I am more inclined to believe that being a scapegoat is not a nature, it’s rather a role, which is highly transitory depending on the circumstance. It arises most often in cases where people feel danger or they are overwhelmed with tasks and feel under stress. When they feel they can not cope with.
For certain people the role looks just karmic.
If you often see such person appears it ‘s better to be alerted. My assumption is that there are issues inside the team, there may be anger and fear that are just too tough to cope with or discuss openly.
BLUE GNOME
People tend to have a subconscious automatic scheme that brings about recollections that are closer to the current emotional state. If things go right, then first that comes to mind is something of a similar colors, like some past scores or success — «I’m the king of the hill!». If there is a flop coming out they immediately recall past failures — «I am a loser, I can’t do things properly, I am a lost cause!». The same goes with some outer factors, for instance, people on the dole tend to notice the same unprivileged ones, like jobless or homeless people, whereas successful businessmen will more likely notice that everyone around them is also striving to succeed.
There is another subconscious scheme that is responsible for our survival in harsh conditions. When a disaster strikes triggering a seemingly endless chain of negative responses, it is natural for many people to turn to a sleep mode, they start moving less, thinking less, but eating more.
To add insult to injury, exactly this scheme of contextual association brings person to the condition where everything around is hopeless and a sleep mode is switched on automatically. Thoughts are running inside the vicious circle of negative, and it seems no power is left to break out of it. Such descending spiral is actually known as depression.
Depression is often a prerequisite for getting a Mood Hoover in your team.
SLACKER
These are a popular guys at the office, witty and communicative. It is quite hard to guess how they wound up in the software development, because to say that their code is cool would be an exaggeration. Little by little they earn their keep in terms of salary.
There is also an implicit an benefit this type of employee brings. People around them tend to get relaxed, tend to communicate better, and overall become more positive about things, which is definitely conducive to the project outcome.
CASTLE BUILDER
Just a story:
He is a middle, who has been grilling the project for the second week. A heavy pull request comes from him: «I’ve refactored it all for microservice architecture». Initiative is usually appreciated but when it is not so mind-blowing. He should have consulted someone before making such decisions. The project was massive, and he is a middle who saw it only two weeks ago. Major alterations require long time to prepare and check afterwards. And deadline was too close. His idea was rejected, he was lectured for a good cause, kindly asked to wait just a few months till he gets a feel of it in the given project. Incidentally, it did not work, he kept on doing what he did according to his personal style, ignoring all the team standards. So, to save the ship, he had to be given a sack.
CLASSIFICATIONS
Once, while developing a medical project that, of course, required a patient record. You surely expect the entry “sex”. In most case you would simply see a field for entry, like “male” or “female”, that sounds okay, right? I have to tell you, not even close! For massive projects it is split into a few categories, such as “current sex”, “sex at birth”, “sex by self-identification”, “chromosome set sex”, “visual sex”, and so on. I do not recall the details, but it was really complicated.
In the first place, any kind of classification tends to simplify the reality by getting rid of all those tricky shades and nuances, which actually are inherent to human relations. It inevitably distorts a picture, especially, if a classification has not been tested by the scientific method. In a traditional way standard deviations are better off overlooked: we often seem to have no time for these tiny nuances, which, actually, can result in failures. A statement that says «all developers are introverts» is not quite true, because there are simply too many constituents that influence or determine how communicative we tend to be. Here we can think of alcohol, fatigue, mutual understanding, and trust, and many other no less important things.
The way employees are classified as “dab hand”, “mood hoover” or “silent player” is convenient specifically for this article, and is based on individual experience. It is not ultimate, so you do not have to try to apply it everywhere. I often see non-issue classifications, which claim to be a key to your understanding of how to run businesses and manage people, but they are totally evidence-free. Fifteen years ago people liked digging in the theory of information processing and personality type, so called, socionics. Later, though, it was blasted for the lack of evidence that comes only from real life application. It does not take much to build a classification, yet, it is really difficult to make it valid.
BOTTOM LINE
— All of us are different. When some people were hired to work on your project, the key idea was that they can write a good code, not because they are great pals.
— It is nice when you have a chance to choose whom to work with. The truth is, even a manager seldom has it.
— The value of a manager increases along with the increasing number of various types of people he works with.