12 ms·

How to deal with difficult people on software projects

207 points by SimplyUseless 6y ago

austinbeer 6y ago
THIS IS SOOO GOOODDDD!!! I'm thinking how to make this a team activity to kindly label each other and understand how to address them as a group. Though i guess this requires a maturity that is rare...
- motohagiography 6y ago
  Michael Scott, is that you?
kfk 6y ago
what about finance?
- rideontime 6y ago
  What about it?
acvny 6y ago
I don't see the Seagull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagull_management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagull_management
mrrv 6y ago
How do I go about using this without knowing which label I fall under? I would assume that to know how to work with X I need to know how my strengths and weaknesses as Y relate to them—otherwise this is just another way to see the world as 'me vs them'
- bluefirebrand 6y ago
  There's some kind of online quiz in that site to find what type you are. The interesting part to me is that I don't think a person is necessarily just one type at a time. And there's another list of "these are the great types of developers" and I think people can probably be one or more of those good types and one or more of the bad types at the same time.
- rideontime 6y ago
  If you can't tell which of these labels applies to you, try asking your coworkers :)
- kristopolous 6y ago
  I think they're more patterns we're all susceptible to
  - pawelduda 6y ago
    Would be much better if the website stated it explicitly. The current description is rather unfortunate.
- NotPavlovsDog 6y ago
  There is a view that the ego, being non-existent, is constantly shifting and re-framing. Observe the roles/personas you shift to throughout the day, how and why? I find the Actor theory applicable - in the end, everyone in an org has dominant interests, usually not many. And the most dangerous are the systems players - because organized groups can take out and dominate any individual. One of the reasons why those playing the system vs the value creators take over in most large organizations.
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  > otherwise this is just another way to see the world as 'me vs them' I think you hit the nail on the head. Personally, I'm really nervous of anything which further deepens "me vs them" dichotomies. They're really unproductive. If you're acting as a leader in any capacity building a product, you have to figure out how to nip these things in the bud before they metastasize like cancers.
- MattGaiser 6y ago
  Take a look at the The Problem header. There is usually a list under there discussing the actions/motivations they take. I have found myself in a few of them.
yowlingcat 6y ago
I have the same categorical feeling of revulsion seeing this kind of pseudoscience today as I did when I first saw it a year ago. This is basically corporate astrology. It's unfalsifiable, patronizing, reductionist and amounts to unwarranted adversarial psychological aggression. If you ever used this in the corporate setting at any place I've ever worked at, you'd be laughed out of the room so fast it would make your head spin. Stereotyping people into these jungian archetypes makes the error of presuming personality flaws and individual agency rather than load bearing organizational sociopolitical vectors, historical decisions and cruft that needs to be unwound, high level executive directives, and market conditions. That is to say, context, history, and structure; goals and incentives -- all this rather than theory which sounds good but is unfalsifiable (much like modern astrology). It's borderline irresponsible and unethical to give these ideas the time of day, because they are intrinsically unfalsifiable and based on stereotypes. Constructively approaching any of the issues seen here requires concretely addressing reality -- how can you find evidence of previous challenges, how can you bring said person to understand those challenges, what are they interested in from their perspective (rather than what your stereotype presumes), and is there materially enough to work with to move forward with the working relationship in a constructive manner? This kind of management consultant voodoo is a pox upon the industry. We should leave it in the past, where it belongs. You've got to ask yourself, what's your goal with these situations? Is it to be /right/? Or is it to /fix problems/? If you want to do the latter, you've got to connect with the other person, and get the solution to come from within /their head/. And frankly, drawing facile, degrading comparisons between them and barnyard animal stereotypes rooted in some blogger's desire to pathologically taxonomize isn't going to get you anywhere. To end on a constructive note, I'm a fan of Camille Fournier's writing on management. I have found it to be very practically focused with a good blend of strategy as it pertains to the people side of things. If you're interested, read her blog [1] and her book [2]. There are also other classics like Moral Mazes [3] that I've seen come highly recommended from my network but haven't had the time to fully complete (and yet have liked so far). Start there rather than with this stuff. [1] https://www.elidedbranches.com/ https://www.elidedbranches.com/ [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369254-the-manager-s-path https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369254-the-manager-s-p... [3] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/279812.Moral_Mazes https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/279812.Moral_Mazes
motohagiography 6y ago
Can recommend another couple of anti-pattern archetypes, but maybe adding a level above product about the form the organizations themselves take could provide some additional insight. It could be helpful to look at the incentives for why these figures emerge. Nobody wants to become these, but they do it to survive. They only do it because it works for them, and we get what we reward. These political animals also need a habitat, which means food/water, cover, and space. The stage of the organization sets up the conditions for these anti-pattern characters to thrive. The main incentives I've seen in organizations have to do with company stage. Institutions are their own kind of pseudo-soviet crazy, but companies have a life cycle with a finite set of stages, outs, and consequent incentives. It depends on things like how much runway you have, committed revenue, investor horizon, and executive management character. Maybe there's a potential update.
yalogin 6y ago
I got stuck on the first one "Product Manager". Do the newer companies have this role? I mean, for the companies that are consumer facing and not enterprise oriented. IMO, this is a spillover role from the enterprise heavy 90s/2000s into today. Am I wrong?
- gowld 6y ago
  Run a web search for "product manager jobs" or "$STARTUP product manager jobs" and try to find one that doesn't match.
- awillen 6y ago
  I spent about a decade as a PM at startups, so I can definitely attest they do. Obviously I'm biased here, but the PM role isn't just some spillover, it's work that needs to be done. Someone has to talk to stakeholders, gather and document requirements, work with customer-facing teams on launches/preparation/etc. and so forth. If the product manager isn't doing it, then engineers are doing it, which means they aren't doing engineering, which is of course not great. The definition of a product manager (and project manager/program manager) changes from company to company, but the work of defining the thing to be built is always being done, otherwise you're not building anything. It may be done by committee, by engineers, by engineering managers, by the CEO or via some other method entirely, but it's always happening.
  - dnndev 6y ago
    From my experience PMs serve one true purpose well. That’s reporting to the higher ups (execs building a moat) and being a single point of contact for the devs. Everything else is red tape. Gathering requirements is hard and a PM digesting it first is never optimal.
    - kodah 6y ago
      I'll second that. Any time I've seen PMs involved in dev work (like requirements gathering) it's a shit show. PMs can usually have shallow conversations about software, but not deep enough to do requirements gathering.
stevecalifornia 6y ago
This is a horrible website and you will likely experience diminished tenure if you follow it's advice. First, there is a complete lack of empathy for the person being labelled. What are the motivations and constraints that led to this person acting this way? A key question and the foundation for building healthy productive relationships. Second, the 'solutions' are horrible. "Go around the person" is terrible advice for anyone on a team. If you follow the advice from this website you will end up being the problem. I would argue that this website is almost sociopathic-- completely ignoring the perspectives of anyone but the reader and suggesting damaging solutions and labels.
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  Go around might be the only option available to you if you don’t want to quit your job. I have been lucky enough to experience only a few difficult co-workers in my career but a few of them were toxic beyond belief. And not even “rationally toxic” as in doing it to further their own interests (they would regularly sabotage themselves on top of sabotaging everybody else).
- awillen 6y ago
  Seriously - the "Patent Author" PM may well have come to be that ways because if he doesn't, the engineering team just makes assumptions (that are wrong) and build the wrong thing, instead of checking with the PM. When I've worked with dev teams in India (with me in CA), I have written extremely detailed and specific product specs, because I'm asleep while they're working, so if something is unclear it can waste a whole day of a dev's time.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - lobstrosity420 6y ago
    The article on Patent Author does mention as one of the exceptions exaclty that - working with teams on different time zones may require a Patent Author attitude. However, I do have to agree with the original comment in this chain, that website is filled with bad advice and slightly sociopathic in nature.
Kaotique 6y ago
What archetype can we attribute to someone categorising their colleagues into some pseudoscientific archetype? This is an extremely toxic way of dealing with other people and should be avoided. People are much more than a stereotype.
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  We all have simplified models of other people in our heads. Without it we wouldn’t be able to function. You do too. However you might be fooling yourself into believing that your understanding of other people is somehow better than everybody else. That is another common characteristic of people: thinking that your understanding of the world and people skills are better that most. Most people think so but it obviously can’t be true. We aren’t aware of the automatic non-reflective categorisations that our subconscious makes for us before our “thinking” kicks in.
toomuchtodo 6y ago
Previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24792568 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24792568
zests 6y ago
This website led me to a bit of self reflection, I enjoyed figuring out which categories I could place myself in.
jimmyvalmer 6y ago
All these archetypes can be consolidated to one: "narcissist".
- AtlasBarfed 6y ago
  Capitalism is fundamentally about self-interest. Narcissism is fundamentally about self-interest. In corporate workplaces, teamwork is simply a temporary treaty imposed by higher level capitalists/narcissists so that you do their bidding, not yours. If you are working in a corporation, you are almost certainly doing things for narcissistic reasons (for some definition of narcissism/self-interest/self-gratification/self-actualization). Many of the "antipatterns" are really defense mechanisms from the fundamental hobbesian nature of a workplace.
dnndev 6y ago
Speaking from experience. Talk to your superior about the issue. If they are the issue (my case) or if the issue is not addressed as you see fit then leave the company. This is not an extremity. There are plenty of companies looking for good devs- even remote. You will be happier and perform better. Let the swamp be the swamp - not your job to fix it.
onnnon 6y ago
I hovered over each item under the appropriate category, and I clicked the one that best described me. The description was 100% accurate, and outlined my flaws perfectly. Now I know what I need to do, thanks.
throwaway194729 6y ago
Throwaway as I don’t want to admit I am one of these negative ones (soldier) with my main. The negative reaction to this seems like ego. “I’m special, unique, and complex so you can’t profile me this way.” The thing is, people aren’t. Social media companies have demonstrated that most people can be broken down into categories and targeted in very specific and effective ways. And yes, as the article says, try as people might, if you work with me, you will never learn why I am that way.
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  You are absolutely right. It has been shown again and again that people in general overestimates their own intelligence, skills, people skills etc. And (in general) that the more incompetent you are, the more you inflate your own believes of competency.
mvzvm 6y ago
What a toxic little website. Do not follow the advise here. Do not label your co-workers. Trust them, listen to them. If you see them exhibit traits you perceive as negative (and fall into these crude buckets) - talk to them, and give them feedback. Chances are, they will appreciate it, and your working relationship will improve.
- duosonic 6y ago
  Thanks for calling that out. I was beginning to get sucked into it.
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  Have you actually experienced working with co-workers who exhibit all the symptoms of sociopaths/narcissists? They will take your trust and good intentions and do whatever they can to take advantage of it. Most people are worthy of trust. But the 3% that aren’t are toxic/dangerous in ways you will only realise after the damage is done. So assume the best but don’t be naive.
  - yowlingcat 6y ago
    While this is true, you do yourself no favors by remaining there and "surviving" the dysfunctional work environment. As the old canard goes, your best option is to either "change your job, or change your job." And I think beyond that, the answer is to try to work hard to change your life circumstances (where you live, how much effort you put into your network, what skills you develop, how often you switch jobs) so that if you do want to make lateral moves within roughly the same role, it's straightforward. This heavily de-risks the possibility of getting stuck with people who aren't great. It might be common, but it's /not/ every team, it's /not/ every company. The labor market is still very favorable for technologists. Using the market momentum to find your way into a healthy team environment at a company with a healthy culture is highly advised!
    - mbrodersen 6y ago
      Yep I completely agree. My point wasn’t that you shouldn’t get away from the situation. My point was that believing you can change/improve all people is naive and potentially dangerous.
effnorwood 6y ago
Fire them
TameAntelope 6y ago
Almost every single one of these problems can be solved by talking to the groups involved. How do you talk to people about actual issues in a way that'll get them to be honest/realistic with you? Create safety. Make sure it's clear that nothing they do/say will hurt them or you, or come back to do so later. What I don't see here, what I don't see anywhere, is how to deal with a legitimate bad actor. I wish more of these kinds of things would talk about how destructive a person with intent to do damage can be, and how to effectively handle someone like that when you can't simply get rid of them.
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  Agree. Most of the time you can simply have a quiet polite conversation with difficult people and they will realise that they need to change and sometimes even thank you for letting them know. But I have experienced cases where co-workers don’t give a f** about anybody but themselves, will hate the fact that you approached them, and will go out of their way to sabotage you and everybody else in the future.
TameAntelope 6y ago
The author is clearly a developer, as there are some positive stereotypes in that category, but no positive stereotypes in any other category. I'm guessing their perspective on the related roles is either only through the lens of a developer, or through no lens at all, just squinting from afar.
- outworlder 6y ago
  ~There are no positive stereotypes in that category.~ Scratch that, you are correct. The entire website does have some, outside of that "difficult people section". But there are way more stereotypes there, so I agree that they are probably a developer.
- mywittyname 6y ago
  The site is titled "how to deal with difficult people..." Not nice, competent, or all people, just a specific negative subtype. I totally agree with the comments about not stereotyping coworkers. The way this site is setup is naturally contrarian to that idea.
  - haswell 6y ago
    While that is the title of the site, the site also has an entire section dedicated to "Dev Types" which all sound like a one-sided glorification of highly questionable developer behaviors. Everything about this site feels gross.
ArtDev 6y ago
Its funny but you may find you might take some of these negative labels over your career. I have been a number of these but it depends where I am in my life, career and the project. Currently I am a "Rockstar" developer.. and looking at the door. Luckily this project has a specific end date I can plan on.
williesleg 6y ago
Just do the needful and move on, you'll get your big payday and they'll all go out of business eventually.
thrower123 6y ago
This gets posted every few months. I'm surprised to see that it's getting such a negative reaction this time.
pawelmi 6y ago
While most of those advices (or rather tricks like go around or hire replacement and ask to train them) would work sometimes, they lack empathy and reproduceability. In fact might even be counter effective. From my experience it works best to build good relation, give honest feedback and ask for reasons of bad behaviour. It might be because of some factor that we do not know or control (eg someone has problems at home, has different understanding of their role, are not aware of the scale of effect of their actions). Only after, if it won't improve, clear boundaries should be shown, which when overstepped would result in well defined consequences. If behaviour is noxious to the team, it is much better to let offender go early on clear notice, not as results of playing some psychological ticks on them.
darth_avocado 6y ago
I think its a great Illustration of the different problematic behaviors you encounter when you work pretty much anywhere. However, the solutions although quite straightforward and make sense, in real the situation is not so simplistic. For e.g. you have the dictator PMs that refuse to do anything that didn't come from them. The solution is to have the upper management talk to them. In my work, we have a PM who is literally sitting at the top of the chain (reports to CEO) and displays those characteristics. Pretty everything anyone has tried to solve this problem in the last 10 years, hasn't worked and people have destroyed their own careers over trying to fix the behavior. In cases like this, the only thing that works is either do what they say or find another job.
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  If the dev team reports to a non-technical PM, your organization has bigger issues than just a rogue PM.
  - darth_avocado 6y ago
    The entire org reports to a non technical person. That's how almost every company operates.
    - 908B64B197 6y ago
      Most companies won't ever go close to a trillion in valuation either.
ChicagoDave 6y ago
I'm fine being labeled an idealist. Depending on the client or employer, this role has served me well. On occasion, there is no space for an idealist and if alignment can't be carved out, I'm happy to move on. Now. Where can a 57yo idealist find a job in today's world?
- archduck 6y ago
  Ha! In your dreams.
failboat 6y ago
Where is the category for devs that will weasel out of any work by claiming a ticket is out of scope, or that the responsibilities for handling a certain piece of work lies with some other team, or that you should go through the project manager so that the work can be done 5 sprints later?
- vp8989 6y ago
  Hah, that is definitely a category. The person who always creates a "follow up ticket" but never, ever does any of them.
- leetcrew 6y ago
  the first thing I ask myself in this sort of situation is whether the person is actually correct. part of being effective in a specific role is refusing to take on random work people throw at you. estimates can't be valid if key players are spending lots of time on stuff that wasn't on the schedule. if the person is really just being obstructive, explain to their manager (or have your manager explain to that manager) why you think that team should fix the issue. keep going up the chain until someone with authority knows who ought to fix the issue. it's possible you get all the way to the CEO without finding someone responsible for fixing the issue, but in this case the problem is with the organization, not the IC.
  - nullserver 6y ago
    Worked in an environment were anything vague in ticket/story would cause team to reject considering it. At first I was horrified at this. “You can’t tell the boss no!” Six months later I had to admit it was by far the most productive team I had or have ever been on.
    - Redsquare 6y ago
      huh, they should be writing up their own after building a shared understanding of the problem in hand, what you experienced was a top down ticket factory
morelisp 6y ago
I'm sensing a pattern in these answers: > There is no “solution” to The Rockstar Developer > It is impossible to solve The Aspiring Manager > The Extreme Overestimator... is fixable, but there is no will to fix it. > if The Incompetent Developer had the capacity to learn software development, they would have already > All in all, [The Soldier is] nearly an impossible problem to fix. > There is no fixing The Legacy Maintainer At least having disabused ourselves of the ability to actually try to address issues, we can now get rid of management since they clearly have no work to do!
- throwaway194729 6y ago
  I read the soldier one differently. While the soldier is not fixable as an individual, their personality can work by fixing leadership. I say this as a soldier myself.
goatcode 6y ago
It's interesting that you can categorize a number of the top comments according to this list.
scudd 6y ago
If this is made for a quick, tongue-in-cheek laugh I think it's pretty harmless and kind of funny. If this is posited as actual guidance for interpersonal communication, run.
jibbit 6y ago
The Disenfranchised Designer is spookily good
mkl95 6y ago
Software engineers have the privilege of being at or near the top of the food chain when it comes to job mobility. I follow a very simple rule - if I hate something about my job and it can't be fixed in the mid term, I look a new job. Overthinking this easily leads to burnout and frustration.
- marcogarces 6y ago
  "If you can't change your job, change your job"
lrvick 6y ago
I for one want to see a Security section. I am the PITA security guy that never has good news.
invalidOrTaken 6y ago
I kind of like it. All the comments saying not to categorize your co-workers are right, but---to an extent, we are what we do. I think it's a useful list of behaviors people can fall into, without making comment on their eternal soul.
gitowiec 6y ago
Which personalities displayed in this article sum up for a developer which is also lead developer, CTO, very oriented on functionalities delivery, strict about new ways (always wants to write an article about something, always wants to do research, to the point where I as a 10 years of experience dev feel like he does not trust me)? And yes he is someone who does not trust if I do not back my ideas, opinions or methodologies with googled articles. He also has no sense of humour, or does not show up with it in the team. I sometimes think about him he is a robot...
whywhywhywhy 6y ago
How do I deal with working with the sort of person who would make this website?
- mbrodersen 6y ago
  I would love to work with the author of the website. He/she/it clearly has great observational skills and try to see the world as it is.
hitekker 6y ago
Curiously, the author doesn't bother to categories difficult executives. He exhibits a willingness to criticize everyone except for the ones far above him. The rest of his advice reads pretty poorly. He claims that non-technical managers don't hurt projects and that the remediation is just for developers to not rely on them to arbite technical disputes. At this point in my management career, I've witnessed several non-technical managers unknowingly misrepresent their teams capability, causing projects to fail without developer meddling. I wouldn't take this website seriously.
alexk 6y ago
If the author is reading this. I think this website would have been much better if you presented these flaws as biases as opposed to labels. You can also make it clear that bias is something that you can change about yourself by being conscious about it and changes over time.
sjg007 6y ago
I'd be interested in discussions on the Silos, the CYA , the NIMBY and the NIH archetypes. Silos is generally indicate a bigger org problem. CYA blames everyone else, the NIMBY refuses change, and NIH reinvent everything. Nothing more frustrating when working with soldiers who say they were just following orders and miss the forest surrounding the tree. In the end multiple levels of missed opportunity to provide feedback which points to a process problem. Also don't let your QA team get too powerful...
jareklupinski 6y ago
thank you for confirming that my "Rockstar" status is ironically the only problem that I can't solve :)
CodeGlitch 6y ago
Whilst technically leading a software project, I worked with a contractor who was so arrogant it defied belief. He told me he was smarter than everyone else in the organisation, and repeatedly told me that he used to work "at board level" whenever he wanted to override my decisions. You know what - I'm fine for anyone in a team to express different opinions and happy to take them on board, but there's a way of going about this without being so hostile. You don't accuse colleagues of being "stupid" (which he repeatedly told us) and then go on to make massive errors in the codebase, over-engineer everything and refuse to read documentation because "I know better". He seemed to really have it in for me, which is odd considering I've worked with plenty of software contractors some of which still message me years after they left just to say "hello". I was ready to walk out the org but then COVID hit and thankfully I no longer manage him. I was ill SO much during the time I worked with the guy - my body was definitely trying to tell me something. I guess he would fall under "The Diva"?
- nmfisher 6y ago
  If you were his manager, why couldn’t you can him?
e2e4 6y ago
Author's podcast: https://neilonsoftware.com/category/podcasts/ https://neilonsoftware.com/category/podcasts/ p.s. interesting views, so am looking forward to learning more
steve76 6y ago
Learn from the best: Force difficult people to borrow money from adversaries, the marxists, the jihadis, the drug cartel. Take the difficult people's money. When the loan comes due, dump them in the ocean. Good luck collecting. There will be a standoff with your adversaries. To hell with nuclear weapons. How about using recent developments in fusion and matter waves to turn the sun into a giant microwave? Or, better yet, pair production and coherent control to turn the black hole the sun orbits into a giant microwave, and then melt a couple billion people off the earth as easy as adjusting the volume on my speakers. The article mention heart surgeons. Not like any heart surgeon ever defrauded the public, cashed out in crypto, and flew to Mumbai from Canada with USB stick in their shoe. And not small town surgeons either. Heads of big pharma and research universities.
AtlasBarfed 6y ago
I don't see a single reference to backstabber, empire builder, or middle management machiavelli. Maybe ladder climber, but who in "management" isn't in the ladder climbing business?
ttz 6y ago
Reading some of the comments here (and the vitriol), am I wrong in thinking that this site was meant as a joke? Because I totally read it as such...
- test1235 6y ago
  I read it as a bit of fun ... I feel everyone's maybe taking this a bit too seriously.

207 points by SimplyUseless 6y ago

THIS IS SOOO GOOODDDD!!! I'm thinking how to make this a team activity to kindly label each other and understand how to address them as a group. Though i guess this requires a maturity that is rare...

motohagiography 6y ago
Michael Scott, is that you?

kfk 6y ago

what about finance?

rideontime 6y ago
What about it?

acvny 6y ago

I don't see the Seagull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagull_management https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seagull_management

mrrv 6y ago

How do I go about using this without knowing which label I fall under? I would assume that to know how to work with X I need to know how my strengths and weaknesses as Y relate to them—otherwise this is just another way to see the world as 'me vs them'

bluefirebrand 6y ago
There's some kind of online quiz in that site to find what type you are. The interesting part to me is that I don't think a person is necessarily just one type at a time. And there's another list of "these are the great types of developers" and I think people can probably be one or more of those good types and one or more of the bad types at the same time.
rideontime 6y ago
If you can't tell which of these labels applies to you, try asking your coworkers :)
kristopolous 6y ago
I think they're more patterns we're all susceptible to
- pawelduda 6y ago
  Would be much better if the website stated it explicitly. The current description is rather unfortunate.
NotPavlovsDog 6y ago
There is a view that the ego, being non-existent, is constantly shifting and re-framing. Observe the roles/personas you shift to throughout the day, how and why? I find the Actor theory applicable - in the end, everyone in an org has dominant interests, usually not many. And the most dangerous are the systems players - because organized groups can take out and dominate any individual. One of the reasons why those playing the system vs the value creators take over in most large organizations.
yowlingcat 6y ago
> otherwise this is just another way to see the world as 'me vs them' I think you hit the nail on the head. Personally, I'm really nervous of anything which further deepens "me vs them" dichotomies. They're really unproductive. If you're acting as a leader in any capacity building a product, you have to figure out how to nip these things in the bud before they metastasize like cancers.
MattGaiser 6y ago
Take a look at the The Problem header. There is usually a list under there discussing the actions/motivations they take. I have found myself in a few of them.

yowlingcat 6y ago

I have the same categorical feeling of revulsion seeing this kind of pseudoscience today as I did when I first saw it a year ago. This is basically corporate astrology. It's unfalsifiable, patronizing, reductionist and amounts to unwarranted adversarial psychological aggression. If you ever used this in the corporate setting at any place I've ever worked at, you'd be laughed out of the room so fast it would make your head spin. Stereotyping people into these jungian archetypes makes the error of presuming personality flaws and individual agency rather than load bearing organizational sociopolitical vectors, historical decisions and cruft that needs to be unwound, high level executive directives, and market conditions. That is to say, context, history, and structure; goals and incentives -- all this rather than theory which sounds good but is unfalsifiable (much like modern astrology). It's borderline irresponsible and unethical to give these ideas the time of day, because they are intrinsically unfalsifiable and based on stereotypes. Constructively approaching any of the issues seen here requires concretely addressing reality -- how can you find evidence of previous challenges, how can you bring said person to understand those challenges, what are they interested in from their perspective (rather than what your stereotype presumes), and is there materially enough to work with to move forward with the working relationship in a constructive manner? This kind of management consultant voodoo is a pox upon the industry. We should leave it in the past, where it belongs. You've got to ask yourself, what's your goal with these situations? Is it to be /right/? Or is it to /fix problems/? If you want to do the latter, you've got to connect with the other person, and get the solution to come from within /their head/. And frankly, drawing facile, degrading comparisons between them and barnyard animal stereotypes rooted in some blogger's desire to pathologically taxonomize isn't going to get you anywhere. To end on a constructive note, I'm a fan of Camille Fournier's writing on management. I have found it to be very practically focused with a good blend of strategy as it pertains to the people side of things. If you're interested, read her blog [1] and her book [2]. There are also other classics like Moral Mazes [3] that I've seen come highly recommended from my network but haven't had the time to fully complete (and yet have liked so far). Start there rather than with this stuff. [1] https://www.elidedbranches.com/ https://www.elidedbranches.com/ [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369254-the-manager-s-path https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33369254-the-manager-s-p... [3] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/279812.Moral_Mazes https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/279812.Moral_Mazes

motohagiography 6y ago

Can recommend another couple of anti-pattern archetypes, but maybe adding a level above product about the form the organizations themselves take could provide some additional insight. It could be helpful to look at the incentives for why these figures emerge. Nobody wants to become these, but they do it to survive. They only do it because it works for them, and we get what we reward. These political animals also need a habitat, which means food/water, cover, and space. The stage of the organization sets up the conditions for these anti-pattern characters to thrive. The main incentives I've seen in organizations have to do with company stage. Institutions are their own kind of pseudo-soviet crazy, but companies have a life cycle with a finite set of stages, outs, and consequent incentives. It depends on things like how much runway you have, committed revenue, investor horizon, and executive management character. Maybe there's a potential update.

yalogin 6y ago

I got stuck on the first one "Product Manager". Do the newer companies have this role? I mean, for the companies that are consumer facing and not enterprise oriented. IMO, this is a spillover role from the enterprise heavy 90s/2000s into today. Am I wrong?

gowld 6y ago
Run a web search for "product manager jobs" or "$STARTUP product manager jobs" and try to find one that doesn't match.
awillen 6y ago
I spent about a decade as a PM at startups, so I can definitely attest they do. Obviously I'm biased here, but the PM role isn't just some spillover, it's work that needs to be done. Someone has to talk to stakeholders, gather and document requirements, work with customer-facing teams on launches/preparation/etc. and so forth. If the product manager isn't doing it, then engineers are doing it, which means they aren't doing engineering, which is of course not great. The definition of a product manager (and project manager/program manager) changes from company to company, but the work of defining the thing to be built is always being done, otherwise you're not building anything. It may be done by committee, by engineers, by engineering managers, by the CEO or via some other method entirely, but it's always happening.
- dnndev 6y ago
  From my experience PMs serve one true purpose well. That’s reporting to the higher ups (execs building a moat) and being a single point of contact for the devs. Everything else is red tape. Gathering requirements is hard and a PM digesting it first is never optimal.
  - kodah 6y ago
    I'll second that. Any time I've seen PMs involved in dev work (like requirements gathering) it's a shit show. PMs can usually have shallow conversations about software, but not deep enough to do requirements gathering.

stevecalifornia 6y ago

This is a horrible website and you will likely experience diminished tenure if you follow it's advice. First, there is a complete lack of empathy for the person being labelled. What are the motivations and constraints that led to this person acting this way? A key question and the foundation for building healthy productive relationships. Second, the 'solutions' are horrible. "Go around the person" is terrible advice for anyone on a team. If you follow the advice from this website you will end up being the problem. I would argue that this website is almost sociopathic-- completely ignoring the perspectives of anyone but the reader and suggesting damaging solutions and labels.

mbrodersen 6y ago
Go around might be the only option available to you if you don’t want to quit your job. I have been lucky enough to experience only a few difficult co-workers in my career but a few of them were toxic beyond belief. And not even “rationally toxic” as in doing it to further their own interests (they would regularly sabotage themselves on top of sabotaging everybody else).
awillen 6y ago
Seriously - the "Patent Author" PM may well have come to be that ways because if he doesn't, the engineering team just makes assumptions (that are wrong) and build the wrong thing, instead of checking with the PM. When I've worked with dev teams in India (with me in CA), I have written extremely detailed and specific product specs, because I'm asleep while they're working, so if something is unclear it can waste a whole day of a dev's time.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lobstrosity420 6y ago
  The article on Patent Author does mention as one of the exceptions exaclty that - working with teams on different time zones may require a Patent Author attitude. However, I do have to agree with the original comment in this chain, that website is filled with bad advice and slightly sociopathic in nature.

Kaotique 6y ago

What archetype can we attribute to someone categorising their colleagues into some pseudoscientific archetype? This is an extremely toxic way of dealing with other people and should be avoided. People are much more than a stereotype.

mbrodersen 6y ago
We all have simplified models of other people in our heads. Without it we wouldn’t be able to function. You do too. However you might be fooling yourself into believing that your understanding of other people is somehow better than everybody else. That is another common characteristic of people: thinking that your understanding of the world and people skills are better that most. Most people think so but it obviously can’t be true. We aren’t aware of the automatic non-reflective categorisations that our subconscious makes for us before our “thinking” kicks in.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

Previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24792568 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24792568

zests 6y ago

This website led me to a bit of self reflection, I enjoyed figuring out which categories I could place myself in.

jimmyvalmer 6y ago

All these archetypes can be consolidated to one: "narcissist".

AtlasBarfed 6y ago
Capitalism is fundamentally about self-interest. Narcissism is fundamentally about self-interest. In corporate workplaces, teamwork is simply a temporary treaty imposed by higher level capitalists/narcissists so that you do their bidding, not yours. If you are working in a corporation, you are almost certainly doing things for narcissistic reasons (for some definition of narcissism/self-interest/self-gratification/self-actualization). Many of the "antipatterns" are really defense mechanisms from the fundamental hobbesian nature of a workplace.

dnndev 6y ago

Speaking from experience. Talk to your superior about the issue. If they are the issue (my case) or if the issue is not addressed as you see fit then leave the company. This is not an extremity. There are plenty of companies looking for good devs- even remote. You will be happier and perform better. Let the swamp be the swamp - not your job to fix it.

onnnon 6y ago

I hovered over each item under the appropriate category, and I clicked the one that best described me. The description was 100% accurate, and outlined my flaws perfectly. Now I know what I need to do, thanks.

throwaway194729 6y ago

Throwaway as I don’t want to admit I am one of these negative ones (soldier) with my main. The negative reaction to this seems like ego. “I’m special, unique, and complex so you can’t profile me this way.” The thing is, people aren’t. Social media companies have demonstrated that most people can be broken down into categories and targeted in very specific and effective ways. And yes, as the article says, try as people might, if you work with me, you will never learn why I am that way.

mbrodersen 6y ago
You are absolutely right. It has been shown again and again that people in general overestimates their own intelligence, skills, people skills etc. And (in general) that the more incompetent you are, the more you inflate your own believes of competency.

mvzvm 6y ago

What a toxic little website. Do not follow the advise here. Do not label your co-workers. Trust them, listen to them. If you see them exhibit traits you perceive as negative (and fall into these crude buckets) - talk to them, and give them feedback. Chances are, they will appreciate it, and your working relationship will improve.

duosonic 6y ago
Thanks for calling that out. I was beginning to get sucked into it.
mbrodersen 6y ago
Have you actually experienced working with co-workers who exhibit all the symptoms of sociopaths/narcissists? They will take your trust and good intentions and do whatever they can to take advantage of it. Most people are worthy of trust. But the 3% that aren’t are toxic/dangerous in ways you will only realise after the damage is done. So assume the best but don’t be naive.
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  While this is true, you do yourself no favors by remaining there and "surviving" the dysfunctional work environment. As the old canard goes, your best option is to either "change your job, or change your job." And I think beyond that, the answer is to try to work hard to change your life circumstances (where you live, how much effort you put into your network, what skills you develop, how often you switch jobs) so that if you do want to make lateral moves within roughly the same role, it's straightforward. This heavily de-risks the possibility of getting stuck with people who aren't great. It might be common, but it's /not/ every team, it's /not/ every company. The labor market is still very favorable for technologists. Using the market momentum to find your way into a healthy team environment at a company with a healthy culture is highly advised!
  - mbrodersen 6y ago
    Yep I completely agree. My point wasn’t that you shouldn’t get away from the situation. My point was that believing you can change/improve all people is naive and potentially dangerous.

effnorwood 6y ago

Fire them

TameAntelope 6y ago

Almost every single one of these problems can be solved by talking to the groups involved. How do you talk to people about actual issues in a way that'll get them to be honest/realistic with you? Create safety. Make sure it's clear that nothing they do/say will hurt them or you, or come back to do so later. What I don't see here, what I don't see anywhere, is how to deal with a legitimate bad actor. I wish more of these kinds of things would talk about how destructive a person with intent to do damage can be, and how to effectively handle someone like that when you can't simply get rid of them.

mbrodersen 6y ago
Agree. Most of the time you can simply have a quiet polite conversation with difficult people and they will realise that they need to change and sometimes even thank you for letting them know. But I have experienced cases where co-workers don’t give a f** about anybody but themselves, will hate the fact that you approached them, and will go out of their way to sabotage you and everybody else in the future.

TameAntelope 6y ago

The author is clearly a developer, as there are some positive stereotypes in that category, but no positive stereotypes in any other category. I'm guessing their perspective on the related roles is either only through the lens of a developer, or through no lens at all, just squinting from afar.

outworlder 6y ago
~There are no positive stereotypes in that category.~ Scratch that, you are correct. The entire website does have some, outside of that "difficult people section". But there are way more stereotypes there, so I agree that they are probably a developer.
mywittyname 6y ago
The site is titled "how to deal with difficult people..." Not nice, competent, or all people, just a specific negative subtype. I totally agree with the comments about not stereotyping coworkers. The way this site is setup is naturally contrarian to that idea.
- haswell 6y ago
  While that is the title of the site, the site also has an entire section dedicated to "Dev Types" which all sound like a one-sided glorification of highly questionable developer behaviors. Everything about this site feels gross.

ArtDev 6y ago

Its funny but you may find you might take some of these negative labels over your career. I have been a number of these but it depends where I am in my life, career and the project. Currently I am a "Rockstar" developer.. and looking at the door. Luckily this project has a specific end date I can plan on.

williesleg 6y ago

Just do the needful and move on, you'll get your big payday and they'll all go out of business eventually.

thrower123 6y ago

This gets posted every few months. I'm surprised to see that it's getting such a negative reaction this time.

pawelmi 6y ago

While most of those advices (or rather tricks like go around or hire replacement and ask to train them) would work sometimes, they lack empathy and reproduceability. In fact might even be counter effective. From my experience it works best to build good relation, give honest feedback and ask for reasons of bad behaviour. It might be because of some factor that we do not know or control (eg someone has problems at home, has different understanding of their role, are not aware of the scale of effect of their actions). Only after, if it won't improve, clear boundaries should be shown, which when overstepped would result in well defined consequences. If behaviour is noxious to the team, it is much better to let offender go early on clear notice, not as results of playing some psychological ticks on them.

darth_avocado 6y ago

I think its a great Illustration of the different problematic behaviors you encounter when you work pretty much anywhere. However, the solutions although quite straightforward and make sense, in real the situation is not so simplistic. For e.g. you have the dictator PMs that refuse to do anything that didn't come from them. The solution is to have the upper management talk to them. In my work, we have a PM who is literally sitting at the top of the chain (reports to CEO) and displays those characteristics. Pretty everything anyone has tried to solve this problem in the last 10 years, hasn't worked and people have destroyed their own careers over trying to fix the behavior. In cases like this, the only thing that works is either do what they say or find another job.

908B64B197 6y ago
If the dev team reports to a non-technical PM, your organization has bigger issues than just a rogue PM.
- darth_avocado 6y ago
  The entire org reports to a non technical person. That's how almost every company operates.
  - 908B64B197 6y ago
    Most companies won't ever go close to a trillion in valuation either.

ChicagoDave 6y ago

I'm fine being labeled an idealist. Depending on the client or employer, this role has served me well. On occasion, there is no space for an idealist and if alignment can't be carved out, I'm happy to move on. Now. Where can a 57yo idealist find a job in today's world?

archduck 6y ago
Ha! In your dreams.

failboat 6y ago

Where is the category for devs that will weasel out of any work by claiming a ticket is out of scope, or that the responsibilities for handling a certain piece of work lies with some other team, or that you should go through the project manager so that the work can be done 5 sprints later?

vp8989 6y ago
Hah, that is definitely a category. The person who always creates a "follow up ticket" but never, ever does any of them.
leetcrew 6y ago
the first thing I ask myself in this sort of situation is whether the person is actually correct. part of being effective in a specific role is refusing to take on random work people throw at you. estimates can't be valid if key players are spending lots of time on stuff that wasn't on the schedule. if the person is really just being obstructive, explain to their manager (or have your manager explain to that manager) why you think that team should fix the issue. keep going up the chain until someone with authority knows who ought to fix the issue. it's possible you get all the way to the CEO without finding someone responsible for fixing the issue, but in this case the problem is with the organization, not the IC.
- nullserver 6y ago
  Worked in an environment were anything vague in ticket/story would cause team to reject considering it. At first I was horrified at this. “You can’t tell the boss no!” Six months later I had to admit it was by far the most productive team I had or have ever been on.
  - Redsquare 6y ago
    huh, they should be writing up their own after building a shared understanding of the problem in hand, what you experienced was a top down ticket factory

morelisp 6y ago

I'm sensing a pattern in these answers: > There is no “solution” to The Rockstar Developer > It is impossible to solve The Aspiring Manager > The Extreme Overestimator... is fixable, but there is no will to fix it. > if The Incompetent Developer had the capacity to learn software development, they would have already > All in all, [The Soldier is] nearly an impossible problem to fix. > There is no fixing The Legacy Maintainer At least having disabused ourselves of the ability to actually try to address issues, we can now get rid of management since they clearly have no work to do!

throwaway194729 6y ago
I read the soldier one differently. While the soldier is not fixable as an individual, their personality can work by fixing leadership. I say this as a soldier myself.

goatcode 6y ago

It's interesting that you can categorize a number of the top comments according to this list.

scudd 6y ago

If this is made for a quick, tongue-in-cheek laugh I think it's pretty harmless and kind of funny. If this is posited as actual guidance for interpersonal communication, run.

jibbit 6y ago

The Disenfranchised Designer is spookily good

mkl95 6y ago

Software engineers have the privilege of being at or near the top of the food chain when it comes to job mobility. I follow a very simple rule - if I hate something about my job and it can't be fixed in the mid term, I look a new job. Overthinking this easily leads to burnout and frustration.

marcogarces 6y ago
"If you can't change your job, change your job"

lrvick 6y ago

I for one want to see a Security section. I am the PITA security guy that never has good news.

invalidOrTaken 6y ago

I kind of like it. All the comments saying not to categorize your co-workers are right, but---to an extent, we are what we do. I think it's a useful list of behaviors people can fall into, without making comment on their eternal soul.

gitowiec 6y ago

Which personalities displayed in this article sum up for a developer which is also lead developer, CTO, very oriented on functionalities delivery, strict about new ways (always wants to write an article about something, always wants to do research, to the point where I as a 10 years of experience dev feel like he does not trust me)? And yes he is someone who does not trust if I do not back my ideas, opinions or methodologies with googled articles. He also has no sense of humour, or does not show up with it in the team. I sometimes think about him he is a robot...

whywhywhywhy 6y ago

How do I deal with working with the sort of person who would make this website?

mbrodersen 6y ago
I would love to work with the author of the website. He/she/it clearly has great observational skills and try to see the world as it is.

hitekker 6y ago

Curiously, the author doesn't bother to categories difficult executives. He exhibits a willingness to criticize everyone except for the ones far above him. The rest of his advice reads pretty poorly. He claims that non-technical managers don't hurt projects and that the remediation is just for developers to not rely on them to arbite technical disputes. At this point in my management career, I've witnessed several non-technical managers unknowingly misrepresent their teams capability, causing projects to fail without developer meddling. I wouldn't take this website seriously.

alexk 6y ago

If the author is reading this. I think this website would have been much better if you presented these flaws as biases as opposed to labels. You can also make it clear that bias is something that you can change about yourself by being conscious about it and changes over time.

sjg007 6y ago

I'd be interested in discussions on the Silos, the CYA , the NIMBY and the NIH archetypes. Silos is generally indicate a bigger org problem. CYA blames everyone else, the NIMBY refuses change, and NIH reinvent everything. Nothing more frustrating when working with soldiers who say they were just following orders and miss the forest surrounding the tree. In the end multiple levels of missed opportunity to provide feedback which points to a process problem. Also don't let your QA team get too powerful...

jareklupinski 6y ago

thank you for confirming that my "Rockstar" status is ironically the only problem that I can't solve :)

CodeGlitch 6y ago

Whilst technically leading a software project, I worked with a contractor who was so arrogant it defied belief. He told me he was smarter than everyone else in the organisation, and repeatedly told me that he used to work "at board level" whenever he wanted to override my decisions. You know what - I'm fine for anyone in a team to express different opinions and happy to take them on board, but there's a way of going about this without being so hostile. You don't accuse colleagues of being "stupid" (which he repeatedly told us) and then go on to make massive errors in the codebase, over-engineer everything and refuse to read documentation because "I know better". He seemed to really have it in for me, which is odd considering I've worked with plenty of software contractors some of which still message me years after they left just to say "hello". I was ready to walk out the org but then COVID hit and thankfully I no longer manage him. I was ill SO much during the time I worked with the guy - my body was definitely trying to tell me something. I guess he would fall under "The Diva"?

nmfisher 6y ago
If you were his manager, why couldn’t you can him?

e2e4 6y ago

Author's podcast: https://neilonsoftware.com/category/podcasts/ https://neilonsoftware.com/category/podcasts/ p.s. interesting views, so am looking forward to learning more

steve76 6y ago

Learn from the best: Force difficult people to borrow money from adversaries, the marxists, the jihadis, the drug cartel. Take the difficult people's money. When the loan comes due, dump them in the ocean. Good luck collecting. There will be a standoff with your adversaries. To hell with nuclear weapons. How about using recent developments in fusion and matter waves to turn the sun into a giant microwave? Or, better yet, pair production and coherent control to turn the black hole the sun orbits into a giant microwave, and then melt a couple billion people off the earth as easy as adjusting the volume on my speakers. The article mention heart surgeons. Not like any heart surgeon ever defrauded the public, cashed out in crypto, and flew to Mumbai from Canada with USB stick in their shoe. And not small town surgeons either. Heads of big pharma and research universities.

AtlasBarfed 6y ago

I don't see a single reference to backstabber, empire builder, or middle management machiavelli. Maybe ladder climber, but who in "management" isn't in the ladder climbing business?

ttz 6y ago

Reading some of the comments here (and the vitriol), am I wrong in thinking that this site was meant as a joke? Because I totally read it as such...

test1235 6y ago
I read it as a bit of fun ... I feel everyone's maybe taking this a bit too seriously.