4 ms·

Why do they have to be? Just because a person isn't 100% 'team player' material doesn't mean they are not capable of massive step-change contributions to a tea

by mtkd 13y ago

Why do they have to be? Just because a person isn't 100% 'team player' material doesn't mean they are not capable of massive step-change contributions to a team activity. If you hire all 'team players' or all PhDs or all men or all people who have been successful in their lives you are likely to have a team that has less capability than one that has some diversity. Unless you're just building a production line - in which case you probably want the uniformity.

nahname 13y ago
If no one rocks the boat, it comfortably goes over the waterfall. Hiring everyone with the same mindset is a great way to limit innovation and creativity. You also run the risk of being blindsided by upcoming challenges because everyone is so eagerly agreeing to the plan.
gambler 13y ago
Great way to put it. I think this is a part of a larger problem. A lot of IT interviews are based on a gigantic set of "ideal criteria" that no single person can realistically fulfill in its entirety. Because of that every hire is a compromise. Because of that who is hired in the end becomes a subject of subjective and irrational judgements. In my opinion, having a realistic set of minimum requirements (which are actually needed to do the job) and looking for candidates to match every single one of them provides a much better and less biased approach. It can also help to design an interview process in a rational manner.
michaelochurch 13y ago
"Team player" is code for the middling level of ambition (MacLeod Clueless). Not a disengaged doesn't-give-a-shit clock-puncher, but not attuned/savvy enough to focus only on projects conferring personal career benefit. It has little to do with whether one actually works well in a team. It's just a codeword for something that's hard to describe and somewhat socially unacceptable (a middling level of ambition that only exists in fresh college grads who haven't figured out who they are yet) to want.

by mtkd 13y ago

nahname 13y ago

If no one rocks the boat, it comfortably goes over the waterfall. Hiring everyone with the same mindset is a great way to limit innovation and creativity. You also run the risk of being blindsided by upcoming challenges because everyone is so eagerly agreeing to the plan.

gambler 13y ago

Great way to put it. I think this is a part of a larger problem. A lot of IT interviews are based on a gigantic set of "ideal criteria" that no single person can realistically fulfill in its entirety. Because of that every hire is a compromise. Because of that who is hired in the end becomes a subject of subjective and irrational judgements. In my opinion, having a realistic set of minimum requirements (which are actually needed to do the job) and looking for candidates to match every single one of them provides a much better and less biased approach. It can also help to design an interview process in a rational manner.

michaelochurch 13y ago

"Team player" is code for the middling level of ambition (MacLeod Clueless). Not a disengaged doesn't-give-a-shit clock-puncher, but not attuned/savvy enough to focus only on projects conferring personal career benefit. It has little to do with whether one actually works well in a team. It's just a codeword for something that's hard to describe and somewhat socially unacceptable (a middling level of ambition that only exists in fresh college grads who haven't figured out who they are yet) to want.