Take the 2-minute tour ×
Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Dictionary Says that a maveric is someone who is

  • Someone who exhibits great independence in thought and action
  • Unorthodox
  • Rebel (A person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority, especially in the hope of improving conditions)

None of those are bad things but good in fact, I see. But people use the term rebel or maverick with a negative connotation w.r.t programmers. Is it justifiable?

In fact, I personally feel that a programmer should be a maverick bringing in new ideas and improvements over the existing. also being orthodox a sin in the realm of programming.

My environment is that, if your superior looking at sun says that it is night then , it IS night; you dont deserve to be a skeptic! If you turn skeptic that qualifies you to be a Maverick/Rebel and no managers will entertain you in their project. I just am curious to know if this is same across all organizations, To know how much rebel you can be.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by thorsten müller, Mark Trapp Aug 25 '11 at 3:23

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

More often than not, software development is a collaborative effort. Creativity and insightful thinking are always valuable; eschewing the conventions and values of the rest of the team is not. Mavericks, by definition, are not team players, and that's the reason for the negative connotation. –  Caleb Aug 25 '11 at 4:51

1 Answer 1

Command and Conquer managment doesn't work well with programmers

Not all organizations will use the "Command and Control" style of management.

Some organizations will listen to their employees as they will have valuable contributions to make to help the organization and company as a whole.

This is where programmers differ from soldiers in the army, and so management styles need to change as well.

When is Command and Conquer management acceptable? Well, it might work where your company is a Herd of Coconuts -- a bunch of underqualified morons who need herding. Perhaps something like the workfare corps that does the raking in Central Park. But software companies aren't Herds of Coconuts, and Command and Conquer doesn't cut it.

You need to be able to tell your boss when he's wrong!

Joel Spolsky wrote an excellent article on what he terms as being crucial character traits amongst the developers he employs.

Which brings us to #7, The Challenge. This is fun. Throughout the interview, you look for the candidate to say something that is absolutely, positively, unarguably correct. Then you say, "wait a minute, wait a minute," and spend about 2 minutes playing devil's advocate. Argue with them when you are sure they are right.

Weak candidates will give in. No Hire.
Strong candidates will find a way to persuade you. They will have

a whole laundry list of Dale Carnegie techniques to win you over. "Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you," they will say. But they will stand their ground. Hire.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.