10 ms·

Cases like this, when the talented person in question is a geek who "doesn't interview well," always frustrate me. Most of my professional success is a result

by mercer 13y ago

Cases like this, when the talented person in question is a geek who "doesn't interview well," always frustrate me. Most of my professional success is a result of social skills and a lot of experience with wildly different social environments and cultures. While I do work hard at being actually good at what I do (because that's just more fun!), I could get pretty far as a cruddy developer. And that just feels unfair, and frustrating. I do understand that social skills matter when you work for a company, in a team, but it often feels like they're way too important (evidence: incompetent people at top positions in companies who primarily excel at manipulation or are extremely socially skilled). Of course, there's a difference between a geek who just lacks social skills, and a geek who is just not a nice person and also lacks social skills to hide this (or lacks social skills because of this). I've met my share of those. But even then, it's hard to (fully) blame the person in question. I've met my fair share of arrogant, abrasive, unsympathetic, or misogynistic geeks who seem to have mostly become that as a reaction to having been bullied or ostracized. Often, it's self-defense or just inability, and quite frankly the main reason I didn't turn out that way was because I was in the right place at the right time, and I had wonderful peers who dragged me out of my isolation. It just sucks. And I wish I could fix that. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to know that you are competent, or even well above average, and still not get the jobs that downright incompetent people seem to have no trouble getting. (I don't mean to justify 'bad' behavior, by the way, but to a degree understanding where it comes from allows me to still sympathize with, say, a racist.)

overgard 13y ago
I get what you're saying, but I also tend to think: if they're so smart, why not learn some social skills? It's not like being socially awkward has to be an innate thing; they're called social skills for a reason, you can learn them. Many people were once socially awkward, and then fixed it. It's not particularly fair, but social awkwardness does tend to send a signal about what people value. And what a socially awkward person clearly does not particularly value is time spent with other people. I'm not saying everyone needs to be a gregarious extrovert (I'm certainly not), but if I were looking to hire someone, I'd be a bit concerned if it was obvious that they had no real interest in anything that isn't directly within their bubble. It's not just "are they skilled" it's, are they actually going to fit in the company?
- mercer 13y ago
  > It's not like being socially awkward has to be an innate thing; they're called social skills for a reason, you can learn them. It doesn't have to be, true. But in the same way that a tone-deaf or rhythmically-challenged individual can probably never be even a decent musician, there are plenty of people who can probably never become 'socially skilled'. Consider autism, for example (in all it's degrees), and also the fact that it's probably quite a bit more prevalent in our profession. > I get what you're saying, but I also tend to think: if they're so smart, why not learn some social skills? Why are so many very intelligent people alcoholics? Why are so many doctors smokers? Why do so many psychologists have psychological issues? There's a massive gap between knowledge and practice, and I've become increasingly convinced that not being aware of that gap is one of the primary reasons people have trouble turning 'saying/thinking' into 'doing'. We underestimate the difficulty. For example. As a student, me and a friend of mine were living rather unhealthy lifestyles. Then a few years ago she suddenly 'got serious'. She started working out, implemented a healthy diet, and applied herself more to her studies. A month ago I remarked that I really admired her strength, as I still struggle with these things (to a degree). Her answer? She'd been raised with a strong emphasis on health, her family was always into sports and they're all over-achievers. From her perspective, she merely 'dropped' a habit that was deeply instilled in her, and had little trouble picking it up. I've found that most of the 'changes' and personal development that I see are not a result of mind of matter, but more a result of upbringing, social environment, and being in the right place at the right time. It's not just that, and I think it should't ever be used as an excuse, but it's much more that case than we often suspect. A socially awkward person who doesn't 'value' time spent with others more often than not 1) just hasn't proper experienced the value of this, 2) has been actively shunned or bullied socially, or 3) just hasn't found the particular people that they can enjoy time with. tl;dr: the value we place on things is often a result, not a cause. Or at least it goes in both directions.
  - overgard 13y ago
    So your post kind of resonates with me, but if I were to boil it down I think your point is "Smart people frequently do dumb things, but that doesn't mean they're not smart". Agreed! I just think a lot of what we call social skills really comes down to, frankly, giving a shit about the person in front of you. For exceptionally smart people sometimes this is hard. Interacting with average people can be mind numbing. I mean the average person is.. well, average. But I think 90% of social skills is finding a way to be interested in the people around you. Finding what's interesting about them. As annoying as the phrase is, I think "if you're bored than you're boring" is pretty much true. Charismatic people don't have some fundamental gift, for the most part, charismatic people are charismatic because they seem to find a way to be interested in all the people around them. Or at least they can fake it. Sometimes I think about 18 year old me versus 28 year old me. 18 year old me was undeniably smart, but shy and awkward. 28 year old me is (reasonably) socially skilled. The only particular difference between the two is 18 year old me only really wanted to talk about myself, or things I liked. 18 year old me was a total fucking narcissist. 28 year old me tries to figure out what other people are about, and engage them on their terms. It sounds small, but actually caring about other people is a thing some people have to learn, and it makes most social situations about 200% more interesting.
seren 13y ago
Do not underestimate social skills. A SW project is rarely (never?) a one man's job, you have to deal with other team members, business, client expectation, testers, QA, etc. I have worked in company where people had generally good social skills, were helpful, able to listen carefully and receive feedback and criticism without going mad. On the other hand, have worked in environment where most people were passive-aggressive, unable to compromise or negotiate, unwilling to empathize with other teams. It should come as no surprise that in the latter situation, projects were always running very late behind schedule. (Causation could also have been the other way round, since everyone was stressed out, the basic defense mechanism was to stop worrying about other people, which in turn was slowing down the project further...) I would add that the different behavior were not really due to individuals but rather to the overall "culture", and modeled after the top manager behavior. Maybe I am wrong, but early in my career, I used to believe that SW project were technical challenges, but for bigger project, it is much more an organizational challenge, and the way people interact with each other is a big part of that. And being able to listen is as important as being able to communicate clearly.
- mercer 13y ago
  > Do not underestimate social skills. Absolutely! I didn't mean to imply that social skills are unimportant. If I were to hire a programmer to work for me in a team context, the better choice from a business perspective, often, would be to hire the less-competent but socially-skilled. But that sucks. Because the best way a socially awkward or socially underdeveloped individual will learn the very essential skill of being more social is through acceptance, a safe environment, and constructive feedback. Furthermore, it's often not the real problem. A big problem in almost all companies I've worked for is that the managers (who usually are very socially capable non-geeks) were just not skilled at dealing with their developers. And in my opinion that's a core element of their job, to learn how to handle introverts or those less skilled in the social things. Some of the developers I've worked with were very socially awkward, but if you figured out how to talk to them, they had no trouble communicating what needed to be communicated. To a degree, I think the ones who are socially skilled should use their strength to help those who are not. And if you're a manager, I'd say you're partly paid to do exactly that.
ixmatus 13y ago
Here's the deal though, because I've wrestled with this myself and after being a founder of three startups this is my conclusion: being a good hacker is not enough - who ultimately is the recipient of a hacker's output? Always the human. There are so many facets to this argument I won't attempt to cover them in this comment but people with solid social skills are not only easier and more pleasant to hire but are also better hires in many ways due to organizational social cohesion and the fact that the "hacker" may have a better understanding of the customer or recipient. That's what I don't buy about his Xah Lee's argument that he's terrible at it - if he's written tutorial material that people find useful, he's more socially capable than he thinks. My suspicion is that his drop-out and autodidactic arc are social inhibitors for him; I think he lacks self-esteem due to it (no matter how well self-educated you are). I know that all too well because I wrestle with it myself as a highschool dropout and self-studied person.
justinpaulson 13y ago
Yeah, I lost all sympathy when I read this: 'why i didn't seek job all these years? well, i can only say i procrastinate and is ok living on a dime.' Maybe it's not that he doesn't interview well, its that he would be horrible employee.
- htns 13y ago
  >ok living on a dime Isn't that the perfect employee?
  - sigstoat 13y ago
    in my experience as an employer: no. the folks who don't need the money (either because they're willing to live like a grad student their either life, or because they're wealthy and working for entertainment) are generally flaky. they won't work their promised hours, give two weeks notice and then just stop showing up, etc.
danielweber 13y ago
When I was much younger, I used to think that I was so awesome that people would have to bend to my social needs if they wanted my awesomeness. They would come looking for me for employment, for relationships, for anything. Needless to say, that was foolish of me. Other people are humans just like me, with their own strengths and weaknesses just like me. Maybe this was on my mind because of the "RMS FAQ" also on the front page. Enough people want to deal with RMS that he is able to give checklists of what he does and doesn't need. And even he still has trouble making ends meet with speaking engagements, since the $10 check-clearing fee needs to be covered.
jcroll 13y ago
Teamwork arguably trumps all skills. Many of the greatest things are accomplished by great teams (look no further than YCombinator demanding multiple founders). Social skills are a critical part of good teamwork skills and good teamwork skills will advance your career in just about any profession.
nadam 13y ago
The problem is that sadly the fact that someone does not interview well, or has no social skills does not automatically imply that he/she is particularly talented. The most interesting stories are about awkward geniuses, but in real life there are plenty of averagely talented people (at least averagely talented compared to other programmers) with lack of social skills. And those are the people for whom finding a job is really hard, because they cannot compensate their awkwardness with exceptional other skills.
abandonliberty 13y ago
Do not pity us. Would you feel sorry for someone who doesn't work hard to stop being a cruddy developer? We are not alone. I'm someone who doesn't naturally get social cues. I don't recognize faces. I was bullied, ostracized, and grew up in an abusive household until I convinced my mother to divorce. While children were being children I was protecting my mother, becoming her key social support by 13. I had to be a man before I hit puberty, never having the luxury to act out, cry, or lament the injustice of my situation. There were starving child soldiers in Africa; I had it pretty good. I was a serious A student and got along with adults. As a result, I was quietly arrogant and unsympathetic. I shunned social interaction with the children around me whom I perceived to be stupid, emotionally weak, rebellious, attention-craving, and suicidal for no valid reason, instead deciding to wait until they grew up. They never did. To my surprise, I did. I finally realized that one of the single most important skills for success in society is the ability to handle people and social situations. A person is not competent or above average without it. At some point, you are going to hit the limit of what one person can do and will have to leverage the competencies of others. They will have some you won't, plus one the most valuable commodity of all: time. It is still possible to be a single person success, like Markus Frind from POF, but it often requires social skills and I don't like the odds. Had I realized this sooner, I would be much further ahead. Turns out I wasn't so smart. Luckily, I only need a decent foundation; this ability can be bought like any other. I have invested a ton of effort into addressing this with the help of a couple close friends. Progress can be frustrating. Things can be obvious to others yet when you ask them it turns out they either cannot explain, or don't really understand themselves. Everything Is Obvious examines the difficulty in creating a socially capable AI/robot: "social skills" are in fact a collection of often disparate, complex, illogical, and incongruous data points. We all have challenges in life. This is one of my greatest. If you share it with me, I understand. It is every person's responsibility to choose to improve themselves and to help those around them who've done the same. We can guide people to this choice, but we cannot make it for them. If you meet us, give us your patience and compassion as you would to any person who doesn't intuitively grasp something incredibly obvious and fundamental to you. I will do my best to do the same for you, though it might not always come off that way.
- mercer 13y ago

by mercer 13y ago

overgard 13y ago

I get what you're saying, but I also tend to think: if they're so smart, why not learn some social skills? It's not like being socially awkward has to be an innate thing; they're called social skills for a reason, you can learn them. Many people were once socially awkward, and then fixed it. It's not particularly fair, but social awkwardness does tend to send a signal about what people value. And what a socially awkward person clearly does not particularly value is time spent with other people. I'm not saying everyone needs to be a gregarious extrovert (I'm certainly not), but if I were looking to hire someone, I'd be a bit concerned if it was obvious that they had no real interest in anything that isn't directly within their bubble. It's not just "are they skilled" it's, are they actually going to fit in the company?

mercer 13y ago
> It's not like being socially awkward has to be an innate thing; they're called social skills for a reason, you can learn them. It doesn't have to be, true. But in the same way that a tone-deaf or rhythmically-challenged individual can probably never be even a decent musician, there are plenty of people who can probably never become 'socially skilled'. Consider autism, for example (in all it's degrees), and also the fact that it's probably quite a bit more prevalent in our profession. > I get what you're saying, but I also tend to think: if they're so smart, why not learn some social skills? Why are so many very intelligent people alcoholics? Why are so many doctors smokers? Why do so many psychologists have psychological issues? There's a massive gap between knowledge and practice, and I've become increasingly convinced that not being aware of that gap is one of the primary reasons people have trouble turning 'saying/thinking' into 'doing'. We underestimate the difficulty. For example. As a student, me and a friend of mine were living rather unhealthy lifestyles. Then a few years ago she suddenly 'got serious'. She started working out, implemented a healthy diet, and applied herself more to her studies. A month ago I remarked that I really admired her strength, as I still struggle with these things (to a degree). Her answer? She'd been raised with a strong emphasis on health, her family was always into sports and they're all over-achievers. From her perspective, she merely 'dropped' a habit that was deeply instilled in her, and had little trouble picking it up. I've found that most of the 'changes' and personal development that I see are not a result of mind of matter, but more a result of upbringing, social environment, and being in the right place at the right time. It's not just that, and I think it should't ever be used as an excuse, but it's much more that case than we often suspect. A socially awkward person who doesn't 'value' time spent with others more often than not 1) just hasn't proper experienced the value of this, 2) has been actively shunned or bullied socially, or 3) just hasn't found the particular people that they can enjoy time with. tl;dr: the value we place on things is often a result, not a cause. Or at least it goes in both directions.
- overgard 13y ago
  So your post kind of resonates with me, but if I were to boil it down I think your point is "Smart people frequently do dumb things, but that doesn't mean they're not smart". Agreed! I just think a lot of what we call social skills really comes down to, frankly, giving a shit about the person in front of you. For exceptionally smart people sometimes this is hard. Interacting with average people can be mind numbing. I mean the average person is.. well, average. But I think 90% of social skills is finding a way to be interested in the people around you. Finding what's interesting about them. As annoying as the phrase is, I think "if you're bored than you're boring" is pretty much true. Charismatic people don't have some fundamental gift, for the most part, charismatic people are charismatic because they seem to find a way to be interested in all the people around them. Or at least they can fake it. Sometimes I think about 18 year old me versus 28 year old me. 18 year old me was undeniably smart, but shy and awkward. 28 year old me is (reasonably) socially skilled. The only particular difference between the two is 18 year old me only really wanted to talk about myself, or things I liked. 18 year old me was a total fucking narcissist. 28 year old me tries to figure out what other people are about, and engage them on their terms. It sounds small, but actually caring about other people is a thing some people have to learn, and it makes most social situations about 200% more interesting.

seren 13y ago

Do not underestimate social skills. A SW project is rarely (never?) a one man's job, you have to deal with other team members, business, client expectation, testers, QA, etc. I have worked in company where people had generally good social skills, were helpful, able to listen carefully and receive feedback and criticism without going mad. On the other hand, have worked in environment where most people were passive-aggressive, unable to compromise or negotiate, unwilling to empathize with other teams. It should come as no surprise that in the latter situation, projects were always running very late behind schedule. (Causation could also have been the other way round, since everyone was stressed out, the basic defense mechanism was to stop worrying about other people, which in turn was slowing down the project further...) I would add that the different behavior were not really due to individuals but rather to the overall "culture", and modeled after the top manager behavior. Maybe I am wrong, but early in my career, I used to believe that SW project were technical challenges, but for bigger project, it is much more an organizational challenge, and the way people interact with each other is a big part of that. And being able to listen is as important as being able to communicate clearly.

mercer 13y ago
> Do not underestimate social skills. Absolutely! I didn't mean to imply that social skills are unimportant. If I were to hire a programmer to work for me in a team context, the better choice from a business perspective, often, would be to hire the less-competent but socially-skilled. But that sucks. Because the best way a socially awkward or socially underdeveloped individual will learn the very essential skill of being more social is through acceptance, a safe environment, and constructive feedback. Furthermore, it's often not the real problem. A big problem in almost all companies I've worked for is that the managers (who usually are very socially capable non-geeks) were just not skilled at dealing with their developers. And in my opinion that's a core element of their job, to learn how to handle introverts or those less skilled in the social things. Some of the developers I've worked with were very socially awkward, but if you figured out how to talk to them, they had no trouble communicating what needed to be communicated. To a degree, I think the ones who are socially skilled should use their strength to help those who are not. And if you're a manager, I'd say you're partly paid to do exactly that.

ixmatus 13y ago

Here's the deal though, because I've wrestled with this myself and after being a founder of three startups this is my conclusion: being a good hacker is not enough - who ultimately is the recipient of a hacker's output? Always the human. There are so many facets to this argument I won't attempt to cover them in this comment but people with solid social skills are not only easier and more pleasant to hire but are also better hires in many ways due to organizational social cohesion and the fact that the "hacker" may have a better understanding of the customer or recipient. That's what I don't buy about his Xah Lee's argument that he's terrible at it - if he's written tutorial material that people find useful, he's more socially capable than he thinks. My suspicion is that his drop-out and autodidactic arc are social inhibitors for him; I think he lacks self-esteem due to it (no matter how well self-educated you are). I know that all too well because I wrestle with it myself as a highschool dropout and self-studied person.

justinpaulson 13y ago

Yeah, I lost all sympathy when I read this: 'why i didn't seek job all these years? well, i can only say i procrastinate and is ok living on a dime.' Maybe it's not that he doesn't interview well, its that he would be horrible employee.

htns 13y ago
>ok living on a dime Isn't that the perfect employee?
- sigstoat 13y ago
  in my experience as an employer: no. the folks who don't need the money (either because they're willing to live like a grad student their either life, or because they're wealthy and working for entertainment) are generally flaky. they won't work their promised hours, give two weeks notice and then just stop showing up, etc.

danielweber 13y ago

When I was much younger, I used to think that I was so awesome that people would have to bend to my social needs if they wanted my awesomeness. They would come looking for me for employment, for relationships, for anything. Needless to say, that was foolish of me. Other people are humans just like me, with their own strengths and weaknesses just like me. Maybe this was on my mind because of the "RMS FAQ" also on the front page. Enough people want to deal with RMS that he is able to give checklists of what he does and doesn't need. And even he still has trouble making ends meet with speaking engagements, since the $10 check-clearing fee needs to be covered.

jcroll 13y ago

Teamwork arguably trumps all skills. Many of the greatest things are accomplished by great teams (look no further than YCombinator demanding multiple founders). Social skills are a critical part of good teamwork skills and good teamwork skills will advance your career in just about any profession.

nadam 13y ago

The problem is that sadly the fact that someone does not interview well, or has no social skills does not automatically imply that he/she is particularly talented. The most interesting stories are about awkward geniuses, but in real life there are plenty of averagely talented people (at least averagely talented compared to other programmers) with lack of social skills. And those are the people for whom finding a job is really hard, because they cannot compensate their awkwardness with exceptional other skills.

abandonliberty 13y ago

Do not pity us. Would you feel sorry for someone who doesn't work hard to stop being a cruddy developer? We are not alone. I'm someone who doesn't naturally get social cues. I don't recognize faces. I was bullied, ostracized, and grew up in an abusive household until I convinced my mother to divorce. While children were being children I was protecting my mother, becoming her key social support by 13. I had to be a man before I hit puberty, never having the luxury to act out, cry, or lament the injustice of my situation. There were starving child soldiers in Africa; I had it pretty good. I was a serious A student and got along with adults. As a result, I was quietly arrogant and unsympathetic. I shunned social interaction with the children around me whom I perceived to be stupid, emotionally weak, rebellious, attention-craving, and suicidal for no valid reason, instead deciding to wait until they grew up. They never did. To my surprise, I did. I finally realized that one of the single most important skills for success in society is the ability to handle people and social situations. A person is not competent or above average without it. At some point, you are going to hit the limit of what one person can do and will have to leverage the competencies of others. They will have some you won't, plus one the most valuable commodity of all: time. It is still possible to be a single person success, like Markus Frind from POF, but it often requires social skills and I don't like the odds. Had I realized this sooner, I would be much further ahead. Turns out I wasn't so smart. Luckily, I only need a decent foundation; this ability can be bought like any other. I have invested a ton of effort into addressing this with the help of a couple close friends. Progress can be frustrating. Things can be obvious to others yet when you ask them it turns out they either cannot explain, or don't really understand themselves. Everything Is Obvious examines the difficulty in creating a socially capable AI/robot: "social skills" are in fact a collection of often disparate, complex, illogical, and incongruous data points. We all have challenges in life. This is one of my greatest. If you share it with me, I understand. It is every person's responsibility to choose to improve themselves and to help those around them who've done the same. We can guide people to this choice, but we cannot make it for them. If you meet us, give us your patience and compassion as you would to any person who doesn't intuitively grasp something incredibly obvious and fundamental to you. I will do my best to do the same for you, though it might not always come off that way.

mercer 13y ago