[wolvoleo]

Yeah I'm getting a lot of pressure to be a "team player" lately. I've told them over and over I'm not capable of that and that has never been a problem before. But we have a hipster new VP who is really pushy and wants to generalise everything.

[stackghost]

If you worked for me and you said you're not capable of being part of a team I'd immediately start looking to replace you.

You might be a 100x rockstar developer. You might even be the best software engineer in the world.

But the vast majority of good software is built by teams of people. It doesn't matter how good you are if you can't play nice with others.

I'd rather have a team of "merely" good engineers than one "rockstar" creating a toxic work culture. Fuck that noise.

[bayindirh]

"Not being a team player" doesn't mean the person is a nuisance, but they can be an introvert who has a limited interaction budget and can work silently and efficiently otherwise.

This generally means the person might not leave their cubicle much or give feedback frequent enough, but this doesn't mean they are not motivated to help others or share knowledge. One can approach and ask a question and get tons of help immediately.

How I know? That's me. I look like a cave dweller from a distance, but I'm not. The only difference I have is human interaction sometimes drains me a lot, so I just concentrate and work, yet everybody get their help immediately if they need them.

Also, no, I don't bite or belittle people. On the contrary.

Assuming the worst in others is bad. If I worked with you, I'd be looking for somewhere else the moment I found out how you think about me.

Remember. People don't leave bad jobs, but bad managers.

[stackghost]

I have worked with lots of introverts and my empirical observation is that the introversion/extraversion axis is completely orthogonal to whether or not someone can be a team player.

[array_key_first]

You require both team players and "rockstar" individuals. It's not one or the other or a competition, because they do different things.

Yes if you put a someone who can't work on a team on a team and expect team work then that will not work. But that's obvious, so then don't do that. Expecting a homogeneous workforce isn't realistic or optimal.

[stackghost]

>You require both team players and "rockstar" individuals.

Hard disagree.

Some of the best, most successful, and most impactful projects I've ever been on had no "rockstars" at all.

People who refer to themselves as rockstars is a huge red flag.

[wolvoleo]

I'm not a software engineer at all. And I tend to take on projects nobody else wants because they are too complicated or esoteric.

And I didn't say I'm not capable of being part of a team. Just that I need to have my own responsibilities within a team. I can't deal with micromanagement or excessive coordination like 'standups' every day.

[account42]

In other words, you want replaceable cogs rather than human beings.

[gremlinunderway]

Yeah you've completely misread this. The phrase "not being a team player" is a euphemism for someone not willing to do dubiously unethical or illegal (or things that go against internal company policy) things in support of a low level supervisor or manager's wishes. Or more favourably, someone who's unwilling to do things outside of what he's actually paid for or to do things unpaid (or outside working hours etc.). Also known as wage theft.

The guy saying that he has been accused of "not being a team player" isn't literally quoting his management here. He's summarizing that his immediate supervisors don't like him because he's unwilling to enter in some patronage like relationship with them.

The fact that you gave the benefit of the doubt to some faceless employer here instead of an actual person recounting his experiences is really sad and maybe ought to be reason for you to rethink your biases to jump to the conclusion that this guy is a toxic loner. Sounds like you're projecting hard here from some other experience.

[wolvoleo]

That is also a thing yeah. It's not really unethical or illegal but our VP has a huge preference for snazzy glitzy projects and never wants to tackle the problems that cause real pain in the organisation because they are not spectacular and don't make him look good. And yes I bring that up whenever it comes into play. I'm definitely not an order-follower.

[coderjames]

> I've told them over and over I'm not capable of that

I can relate and empathize. And also provide this suggestion based on my own similar experience: if you can't provide evidence (e.g. doctor's diagnosis) that you are "special" or "not capable of that", then they don't have to care and will take steps to force you out. I wish you all the best.

[wolvoleo]

Here in Europe it's different, we have more rights. Unfortunately I don't have an official diagnosis but I'm definitely neurodivergent. I've been meaning to get one but it is difficult.

[abawany]

I was once (12 years ago) told: "they debate, they decide, we deliver" along with other "teamwork" pablum. This evil has been with us for a very long time, unfortunately.