

Ask HN: Would you hire someone whose very smart but annoying? - whenisayUH

We've found a great candidate who is eager, smart, technically solid and scrappy.  But he is definitely a bit annoying - loud, talks too much, etc.  Not sure if feedback to him would change those things (they're hardwired/part of his personality) so we're going to assume that's part of the package?<p>The question is should the technical competencies and smarts outweigh the annoyingness?
======
JacobAldridge
No. The suggestion I give all my clients is to first pass every potential
recruit through a 'Family Photo Fit' - ie, will they fit in with the rest of
your team. If not, then their skills, relationships, intelligence etc won't
have a chance to be leveraged.

I think Branson has written about 'hiring for attitude, training for skills'
which is along the same vein.

Annoying team members are bad. If you have a bad performer who is disruptive,
it's bad for your business; if you have a good performer who is disruptive, it
is many multiples worse as their behavious starts to become accepted by others
who want to also perform at their level.

But definitely be open about the 'non-match' on your organisation's culture -
there are possibly other businesses there where he would fit better, and at
least it gives him a chance at become more aware of those hardwired elements.

------
kstenerud
The most important question is: How will he affect office morale?

A hotshot employee is great and all, but if his personality problems
negatively affect the rest of your crew, it's a net loss. Bad attitudes are
infectious.

------
enqk
Often managers are not brave enough to cope with a person with significant
differences with respect to the team's culture.

If you hire this person, you must be ready to deal with other managers and
other team member's reaction. If they trust you and you trust your ability to
work with the person, then it can be an enriching experience (for instance, an
outspoken person will make manifest a lot of the problems your team may have,
and that others would ignore)

In the end, it's not just about that particular person, and rather about the
whole group dynamics. A particular person's qualities & defects may well be
mitigated by other persons's qualities & defects.

(In particular I dislike the default behaviour that team have which is not to
deal with cultural or behaviourable differences at all, and only look for
homogeneity. It's pure lazyness)

------
throwawayme174
From the point of view of someone who is much like the candidate you
interviewed(could be him too!) here are some factors you need to consider
before making a decision.

a) What is the size of the team that he is going to be collaborating with when
writing code...If its just him or a team of two people..He could be an asset
since annoying people are mostly very confident and motivated and when working
alone they can be very very productive (Case in point:Linus Torvalds).But then
that works the other way too.

b) Is someone smart going to be mentoring him...I feel like he needs a mentor
or someone who he can learn from...the annoying attitude is mostly just a
defence mechanism...once you can prove that he has something to learn from you
or his boss his annoying behaviour will most likely go away.(Case in
Point:Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting).

c) The culture of your company...Are you a company where you focus more on
stability or you focus more on creating ....As the Steve Jobs says in the
movie ,Pirates of the Silicon Valley,"Creation is messy".....and needless to
say people who dont give a fuck about the status quo or what you think about
them are an essential part of that mess.

d) "Not sure if feedback to him would change those things (they're
hardwired/part of his personality)"...I dont know if this is an assumption you
are making or this is part of the question.....Feedback to him could certainly
change things...especially if you point out to him what parts of his behaviour
are annoying in particular and why exactly is that counter-productive to the
company and himself too.Smart people are also reasonable and if you have good
enough reasons to support your suggestions he will acquiesce and will respect
you for your candor.

EDIT1: Grammar EDIT2:I just got a rejection email from the company I
interviewed at.So I deleted the personal note.The other points still hold.Good
luck!

------
drfloob
Being consistently loud and annoying are indications that this person doesn't
adapt well to his surroundings, especially if everyone around him seems
displeased. It may be a sign of poor overall judgement.

It may also be that this person was nervous when you interviewed him, and
didn't have the forethought to say "I get loud and annoying when I'm really
nervous, it will pass."

My advice: test him out. If he is truly great, and you really need a truly
great developer, and the annoying bits don't go away: isolate him from your
team, manage him closely, and keep him happy.

------
philiphodgen
Personal experience: no. It damages the entire team. I've seen how team morale
improves when such a person departs.

Talked to a friend today who is way, way good at polo (the horse type). The
head guy at his stable picks players (in South America) as follows: (1) he
asks around for "nice" people. (2) he goes and watches them play. (3) he
extends offers. Screening for potential members of the team happens in that
order.

------
TMK
Only problem I see is. Does he talk more than work?

------
bo_Olean
Not at all.

He is not just smart. Smart people with annoying behavior are over-smart. Why
you are killing your time on someone who would make fun of your company vision
too?

When you hire, hire someone so that you would want to pay them more every
month for their work/involvement in your organization.

------
aspir
Hire him on a 90 day trial period. Pay him for those 90 days, of course, but
after that time, that's when you should know if his technical skills
outbalance the "annoying factor." He may be a great guy once you get to know
him, and he also may the be best engineer you've ever hired, but you never
know.

------
koopajah
I've done my last internship in a small startup in Paris where the 3
developers did not get along at all. Everyone was eating separately, they were
not speaking to each other during the day except to talk about the project
specifically and it was really hard to integrate. The software was working and
was pretty good but who knows where they would have been if they all had the
same goals and shared a lot except just work. In most of the interviews of
startup founders I've seen (especially in the book startups open sourced) it
really seems that culture, getting along, etc. is really vital for most of the
startups to succeed.

On the other hand, in bigger company, hiring someone really smart can be done
even if he is annoying because he will be one in a hundred or more.

------
ericwsbrooke
No I would not hire them, if I was convinced it was hardwired. A bad fit in
the case of your team, would mean your happiness and thus your productivity
for the whole team would go down. Also in terms of culture, values and brand
you could be sending a bad message to your team and anyone outside that has to
work or interact with them.

I should declare an interest my startup (Professional You) is building a
system to help you find your perfect boss, as our data shows that if you like
your boss you are happier and more productive and if you trust them you are
will take the occasional risk and thus be more innovative..

------
Mijay
Is this hire critical in terms of timing? If yes, then I would go with the
other's suggestions of doing a trial period. Provide feedback and positive
reinforcement.

If no, then I would absolutely hit the pool again and find someone who's both
a technical and culture fit. This post might be helpful for you:
<http://actionablebooks.com/culture-fit-whatever-that-means/>

Also, how big is your team? If it's small enough that this person would throw
off the flow and stick out like a sore thumb, then I would say no again.

Good luck!

------
buntar
This is how would try to solve the dilemma:

\- Can he really make a (qualitative) difference, or ships he just faster and
a little more elegant?

\- If yes, hire him and let him work wherever he wants but in your office (at
home, an external office, ...). Communicate via email.

\- if no I would'nt hire him simply because it takes energy to digest annoying
behavior. So it will have a slight negative effect on my personal performance.
It will be a zero sum game.

------
michaeldhopkins
It depends whether your culture is passive or one with some teeth that will
challenge this guy. If your culture is too weak to confront him, then don't
let him in.

------
abbasmehdi
Quirky vs. a-holish are two things. If your team cannot get over minor quirks,
they are the ones with something stuck up them. If the guy is an a-hole, show
him the door. If he is just loud and talks too much and it becomes a problem:
make quiet zones and hours in the office.

Also, I am getting that you are judging based on an interview, so you pretty
much know that you have no idea what kind of an employee he will be yet.

------
brianl
Do not hire as employee. The collective cost of dealing with the annoyance
will far outweigh the geek's contribution.

However, consider hiring him as an on-call "consultant" for "special projects"
in case the team falls behind schedule. It might motivate them to get ahead.
:)

------
brudgers
Depends on how important social skills are to the position. An annoying person
probably shouldn't be making initial contact with potential clients. On the
other hand, if they are part of a team of smart annoying people whose job is
to sit in the dark and write code, why not?

------
tobylane
If you are sure he can be kept on task by whoever is in charge of him, and he
won't affect others then I'd say something like you're on probation, please
act gently and kindly.

------
beagle3
I once, as a manager, had the most brilliant employee, who did not shower
regularly. Others didn't want to work with him. When all development could go
through version control, it worked fine; When there was need for interactive
team work, it didn't work at all.

Depends on how work flows in your organization, I guess.

------
webbruce
No. Everyone is replaceable, find another.

------
peterwwillis
Regardless of your decision, I would ask that you find a polite way to inform
this candidate what you think of his personality. Even if you don't accept him
it will help him learn to control his abrasiveness so he will have less
difficulty trying to find work.

That said, if you're already having doubts it's probably not meant to be. If
he were just working from home or something it wouldn't be much of an issue,
but people who work together daily need to not hate each other =)

