[al_borland]

There is a difference between acting dumb and being a know-it-all.

Someone recently left my team who was a rock star in his own mind. He claimed to know it all, and would go on and on about how everyone else should do their job. The reality was that he didn’t understand the complicities of the issues, any time a team was involved he would try to delegate everything away, anytime there was an issue he was the first to finger point, any time something was difficult he would quit while making excuses that it was not his fault, he only knew one language/framework and saw no reason why anything else would ever be needed/wanted… I could go on.

I’m sure he might sound great in an interview, as he loved to talk himself up and talk about how amazing he was and how stupid everyone else is. In the real world, he was a toxin within our team and no one was sad when he left.

I’m not sure how one would separate a true “rock star” from a delusional wannabe in an interview, other than having a well tuned BS meter.

[meneer_oke]

There is a big difference between acting as if you know something and actually knowing it. You're describing one thing, while the comment you are replying to is describing something else.

Let's consider a developer who is interested in programming and has a lot of experience. If the team is going down a path that the developer knows will lead to issues, or if the developer tries to help because the team is not as strict and it's leading to outages, that developer may be perceived negatively.

However, the developer is able to find security issues and potential bugs during code review, objectively providing significant value to the team.

This developer could be labeled as having a "rock star" attitude, while in reality, they are trying their best to ensure there are no security, performance, or outage issues.