Team dynamics matter

Most of us in a workplace have also once found ourselves in school, and the similarities are hard to miss. Awkward first days, all manner of social dynamics and most pertinently; group projects. I am sure the vast majority of us have little to no fond memories of these trials of strength and willpower. They almost always ended on the shoulders of the most determined or least assertive team member.

Well in collaborative software development, every project is a group project, and is therefore subject to those same pitfalls that we may have experienced in our more educational years. This is something that may not be at the forefront of our minds, but it is true nonetheless, and a fresh perspective from this viewpoint could be what it takes to ensure you get that A+ (metaphorically speaking).

Thinking back to those group projects you may have memories of the perfect group. A team where everything was achieved in time and without draining any singular person. Only a lucky few may even have been part of such teams. Impossible as it may seem, those teams did exist, and I would wager that those teams were the very embodiment of collegiality.

The power of communication

The difference between several people working on the same project and a team is subtle but impactful, and that difference mostly boils down to communication, both verbal and nonverbal. Good communication is what transforms a group of people into a hive mind, helping interpersonal understanding as well as building a picture of the project and its progress. The act of checking in with each other regularly is one as old as time, why eschew it when at work?

When communicating with coworkers or peers respect is the name of the game. No one wants to work with someone who they feel does not respect them, the choice between working with a disrespectful genius or a cordial peer is a quick one. It gets harder when criticizing or offering suggestions to a coworker, as egos are on the line. While you yourself are hopefully not bringing your ego into the workplace your coworkers most likely have not read the latest advice on constructive criticism and may be wearing their hearts on their sleeves. Many a developer has succumbed to seeing criticism of code as criticism of self, we forget that hearts and souls are meant to remain in the body, and that your teammates merely want the very same thing that you do; a product you can be proud of.

Stepping up at crunch time

It is in the crunch time that we truly see “who’s who” on the team. Back to the group project, this “crunch” is usually the sound of one person bending over backwards to finish in time while others gently coo “Can I help with anything?” and offer sweet nothings. I can only hope that this is not the case in most working teams, but I am certain some may read this and instead of faint remembrances of high school they think of last week Tuesday. If time is running short, and you will know when that is, and you are the only one folded eight times over it is imperative that you make it known. Sometimes it simply isn’t apparent that a person is struggling with a workload, and silence in these periods is like a stroke in a meditation class.

The most common place to locate a group project is next to the singular exhausted shell of the person who inevitably did it because it had to be done. This shouldn’t be the case in school but we humans take time to learn, if this is still the case at work there is an issue, and a little sprinkle of collegiality (most likely in the form of a PowerPoint presentation) can go a long way.

Being tough on standards and kind to people.

I was able to write this from experience. It is an experience shared and dreaded by many across the world, a set of worries I have not yet seen replicated in my very short six months at Full Stack. I am uncertain why, surely with an even distribution of developers we would see this sort of issue irrespective of the company. I believe it is because the distribution is not even. Applying to work here involved a gauntlet of tests and interviews, one I deeply enjoyed but was certain I would not survive. After coming through the other side I was imbued with a faith in myself I had not experienced in a while.

With such a stringent process one can be certain that ones peers are from the upper echelons of interpersonal prowess, such levels of respect that in the beginning it was hard to ascertain any form of hierarchy, merely peers working with peers to put out a product they can be proud of, and I think that they should be very proud.