|
I am just wondering, do you really say that? If so, how does it go over? I ask because what I have realized is that over the last two thousand year while technology has changed, our ability or lack thereof to communicate remains the same: very hard for some of us (myself included) to learn.
Thus it seems this is a timeless question. What I find interesting is: in my case, what has changed with regards to the question is not the question itself, but how I answer it. I have a far more loving answer today at 48 than twenty years ago.
-- modified 6-Sep-19 10:00am.
|
|
|
|
|
It's how you say it that counts. Stay affable, show humour, display interest in the work (if you're genuinely interested), and any doubts or fears (if you have them) -- bullsh1t might get you a job, but you'll be bloody miserable and probably be let go soon.
I always have a good laugh, during interviews, unless it turns out to be a contract that I really don't want.
If the people I will have to work with take themselves too seriously, and don't want to laugh, I don't want to work with them.
Never go into an interview allowing yourself to be nervous or scared. Thinking "OK, this should be fun!" allows you to open up more, and lets you give good answers immediately (rather than thinking "I wish I'd said that!" later)
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Applying for this job.....
|
|
|
|
|
pass the exam get the job !!!
How to Hire a Programmer
Programmer Competency Matrix
...
Even in the best of circumstances, hiring human beings is hard. A job opportunity may not work out for reasons far beyond anyone's control. People are, as they say, complicated.
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to argue that it does play a big part.
Every project I have seen fail has generally been because someone with great technical skills and a high IQ believes that those skills also mean that they have good judgement.
That then translates into a lack of communication and even in the world of programming there are complexities which require input from outside of the machine and the single individual.
Technical skills are definitely no.1 on the list but I think communication and attitude are no. 2.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Hear! Hear!
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Technical skills are definitely no.1 on the list but I think communication and attitude are no. 2.
I'd go as far as to switch those two.
An a**hole genius will wear your whole team down while a mediocre team player can be taught some additional skills and will eventually be an asset to the team.
I've been in a team with one such a**hole (although he was far from a genius, actually one of the worst programmers I've ever seen), but the whole project suffered from his personality and two people, me included, quit the company because of him (that was a 1/3th of the team!).
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've been in a team with one such a**hole (although he was far from a genius, actually one of the worst programmers I've ever seen), but the whole project suffered from his personality and two people, me included, quit the company because of him (that was a 1/3th of the team!).
That, is a blatant lie. I have never, ever, worked with you.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
I daresay personality matters a lot. A software team becomes efficient with team players. Much less so with sod-you-all-linus-thorwalds-genius-types.
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
My experience is that it is much easier to teach a reasonably intelligent, but not super genius software developer, some of the technicalities of software development than it is to try to convince a technically genius jerk that their lack of decent communication could do with some looking at.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Skill can be learned, personality cannot. Give me an averagely skilled team player anytime over two skilled self absorbed developers.
Companies hire people, not skills.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: Skill can be learned, personality cannot
I disagree, personality, I believe can also be learnt. The thing is very few people ever try, it is frustrating for sure but it can be done. Having said that while personality can be learned, nature does not change. So even if somebody manages to learn "personality" they would constantly be in conflict with their nature. Resulting in constant frustration.
|
|
|
|
|
Abbas A. Ali wrote: Having said that while personality can be learned, nature does not change. So even if somebody manages to learn "personality" they would constantly be in conflict with their nature. Resulting in constant frustration.
You explained it way better than me 
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Abbas A. Ali wrote: while personality can be learned, nature does not change
An interesting "innate determinism" view that does not take into consideration the roles people play in different contexts, and their ability to learn new behaviors.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
As I said earlier, I agree, new behaviors can be learnt. But they are contradicting to your nature, just the mere effort to act on them causes you to be at odds with your nature, the only way: you would have to suppress your nature for a long time (very difficult) or you run the risk of exploding.
I hope you don't think the people who feel better when they've learned and acted on this new behavior are the same with who don't. Just this feeling suggests this new-found behavior to be your nature which you never got in touch with before.
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking as a former licensed psychotherapist, and Board Certified Member of the American Society of Group Psychotherapy and Psychodrama, I completely disagree with your view on "human nature," and the implication that cognitive dissonance and psychological discomfort are inevitable outcomes of learning new roles, and behaviors.
In my opinion short-term Cognitive Behavioral therapy (CBT) is often effective for helping people who have such "rigidly defended" points-of-view, and are often suffering depression, and frustration, at being stuck in old habits, and stereotyped patterns of behavior.
The great Kabir wrote: "Rahi gulzar to phool khilenge" ("where there is a garden, the flowers will come"); timelessly good advice ... but, sometimes we need some help to get started clearing the weeds.
cheers, Bill
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
modified 6-Sep-19 8:00am.
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: In my opinion short-term Cognitive Behavioral therapy (CBT) is often effective for helping people who have such "rigidly defended" points-of-view, and are often suffering depression, and frustration, at being stuck in old habits, and stereotyped patterns of behavior.
Could that be a smirk I'm detecting? 
BillWoodruff wrote: Speaking as a former licensed psychotherapist, and Board Certified Member of the American Society of Group Psychotherapy and Psychodrama
You must know the field well. I know better than to cross paths with psychotherapist!
|
|
|
|
|
Salaam, Abbas, no smirk intended; i'm just an old whale blowing his spout as he is about to beach himself. i am certain you are a healthy, happy, and productive, young man !
the one thing i try and never underestimate is the ability of individuals to grow and change; at the same time, healthy people can maintain a set of core values that are consistent, and that they/we struggle to defend as we encounter the inevitable speed-bumps on the path of life: loss, disease, hardship, bad luck, family difficulties, etc.etc.
Gandhi-ji said: "I want the winds of all cultures to blow around my house, but, I don't want to be knocked over by any of them.
Remember what Kabir, and Gandhi said, and forget what bill said
cheers, bill
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Abbas, no smirk intended
I'm sure, I was just joking around. Perhaps I should've been clearer...
BillWoodruff wrote: the ability of individuals to grow and change
Sure, people do change (in their actions), their nature remains the same their instincts will always deceive their better judgement. Not that I'm taking away any credit from them, it takes great effort and care to do so. But my point was the very nature does not change, it is that voice in your head that keeps telling you to avoid doing the right thing. It is that compulsion in our heads that tentatively draws us towards our own undoing. And just like any other bad habbit, when you give in to it even once, you've gone back to your old ways.
BillWoodruff wrote: forget what bill said
No, give yourself a little credit.
|
|
|
|
|
People learn my imitation of others, rather than their taught learning.
In the article (covers more than cooking!) How do people learn to cook a poisonous plant safely? - BBC News[^] we see we are creatures of social habit. We often don't really learn, unless shown, so that we can 'copy'.
The hiring methods only need to work adequately, rather than well.
|
|
|
|
|
PhilipOakley wrote: People learn my imitation of others, rather than their taught learning.
If that is true for you, how do you account for the murder of the English language in this sentence  PhilipOakley wrote: The hiring methods only need to work adequately, rather than well.
I hope you are joking !
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: murder of the English language
As a Yorkshire man living in Scotland, I've yet to find a real English language... 
BillWoodruff wrote: hiring methods... joking !
Semi-seriously, as a Systems Engineer, the idea of the `hiring process` is to have 100% of folks be out of the top 5%, which isn't sustainable across the industry.
You get ~50% of folks out of the top ~40% (with the difference being those who don't get the employment . Performance is generally determined by the system that the component is in. It's only when the system has few components that it can be the other way around.
|
|
|
|
|
As a Yorkshire man living in Scotland, I've yet to find a real English language...
So, everyone from Yorkshire is retarded in terms of spelling, and grammar ... or, is it bagpipes' related brain damage from living in Scotland ?.Semi-seriously, as a Systems Engineer, the idea of the `hiring process` is to have 100% of folks be out of the top 5%, which isn't sustainable across the industry. You get ~50% of folks out of the top ~40% (with the difference being those who don't get the employment . Performance is generally determined by the system that the component is in. It's only when the system has few components that it can be the other way around.
You must be part Irish to spout blarney like this.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
That is beautifully said. The problem is not ones nature, but self esteem. Early in my career as a software developer, a coworker enlighten me to the fact the software genius that architected the whole system related his code to his genital size.
It was only a few years ago when I was working with someone else of that nature and that person was going off on a rant about something I realized I suffered from the same problem a bit. I vowed to change where I get I sense of self and today I am a much better team player than I was 20 years ago.
I didn’t ‘change my nature’, rather I cleared out the weeds so the flower can grow. It is hard, hard work, but anyone can do it if they want and have good folks to support and guide them.
|
|
|
|
|
The personality of one ex-coworker made two people (1/3rd of that team), including me, quit the company.
Having a toxic coworker can severely damage your product, the team and your company.
No amount of technical skills (or whatever profession you're in) can change that.
I've had another such coworker at another company who didn't make anyone leave, but probably only because he was one of the bosses and he could work alone for the most part.
His personality made that he called the customer and asked "I'm reading in your document about an EPAL-pallet, but what's that?"
The definition of an EPAL-pallet is easily Googlable, he could've asked a coworker, it wasn't necessary to complete the job to begin with, but he called the customer making the whole company look like a fool who clearly didn't have domain knowledge (while that was kind of our sales pitch).
I think the customer even asked for a discount because of that phone call, because they expected real professionals who knew what an EPAL-pallet was.
Another time, a coworker and me where waiting at the client, it was like 8:55 and we had a meeting at 09:00, so this EPAL-pallet guy comes in and says, in front of the CFO who occassionally gave us a hard time, "well then, I see [name of our company] is standing with it's hands in their pockets." He then grabbed his laptop and started to work (he wasn't invited for the meeting).
He honestly did not see the damage he had just done while my coworker and I were holding our breath (luckily, we never heard from that incident again).
That's what the personality of one person can do.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
