Invisible
He seems to be, but as if not. Often he will be an “unrecognized leader” in the team - it seems that he writes the code, it seems that he offers useful ideas, maybe even the task closes more than others ... But they make someone else a team lead, they send someone else to the conference, they buy a new monitor for someone else, and this programmer begins to prove to everyone that he is the coolest to be noticed. Moreover, this evidence quickly leaks from work duties into some kind of verbal duels with colleagues and all kinds of competitions. But will they be honest? Maybe. But rather not. He will often come up with the rules of the game himself and cheat, only to win. Although the opportunity to show himself in a difficult situation will also play into his hands. And if he is not noticed, he will come up with all the new ways to become “cooler” around others.
(+): He can be given an impossible task and he will solve it from the principle to show that he can.
(-): Inclined to commit rash acts, needs supervision.
Possessed
He comes up with some kind of tool that will turn the development world, or, at least, all development processes in the company. He will make every effort to achieve his goal and implement it! True, there is a small nuance: ignoring the arguments in favor of other solutions, such a programmer can break a bunch of firewood and quarrel with a bunch of people. But under pressure from those around him, he will only intensify and will rush like a steam locomotive to a brighter future. Well, at least in his understanding, it should be light. But it is not exactly.
(+): Can be a great evangelist and promote really useful ideas.
(-): Unmanaged. Here "you are with him" rather than "he is with you."
Recidivist
commits crimes against humanity - it uses all possible programming antipatterns, its code looks like a crutch. He can even feel sick himself, even if he doesn't tell anyone. Sooner or later, the project becomes difficult to maintain. What can be done in this situation? - That's right, write more crutches to make it work somehow. This will allow him to write even more crutches, even more, bogged down in this abyss.
(+): Implements all necessary solutions.
(-): Alone can increase the technical debt of the project indefinitely.
Genius
This character just needs to think of something. Most likely a former Olympiad. He can solve any problem if it is interesting to him. And whether the result will be applied somewhere or not is the tenth thing, the drive from creation is important. Colleagues most likely do not know how to do everything that he does - our hero does not take expertise. Certain respect or even admiration will always be with him. But being charged with energy from the “public”, such a programmer often performs irrational actions, succumbing to various temptations, gets involved in adventures, or, for example, buys a gyro scooter or some kind of robot that is removed into the closet as soon as a new interesting problem appears on the horizon. Well, during such periods he can be a little arrogant, there is such a thing.
(+): If you need to invent something new, you've come to the right place.
(-): If your tasks are not interesting to him, you will not force him to perform them in any way.
Gladiator
A real showman. Can turn any game into a performance and benefit from it. It is not a fact that he will be an intelligent programmer (although anything can happen), but his strong point is corporate games. To arrange reprisals against someone, to find an extreme, it will be easier for him. But this must necessarily be in public, without an audience he loses the meaning of his actions. The higher he climbs on the career ladder, the larger his antics will be, but, oddly enough, those around him will always support him. Although someone will get it.
(+): Easily makes unpopular decisions, takes on dirty work.
(-): Can wreak havoc on the team if he substitutes a useful employee.
Creator
This character is most likely sitting somewhere in the corner and writing code. And he writes well that way, most likely everything will be neat, understandable, and on time. This may be one of the few team members who is engaged in self-development, trying not only to "close all tasks", but also to become better as a developer in the process. If you look around, then hardly anyone will notice his work in the project unless he leaves - then everyone will wake up, and while he is here - well, he is, no one cares. This cannot but influence our hero, he often doubts himself, underestimates his abilities, and makes a lot of effort for self-development, and without noticing it, he becomes a highly qualified specialist.
(+): A valuable shot that not only solves problems but also does it well.
(-): Often falls victim to corporate games, needs patronage.
Philosopher
Most controversial team member. Most likely, he knows in various fields, not only in what he is directly involved in. But he is constantly reeling from one extreme to another. Either he strives for the light, does the job efficiently, he can even do mentoring, and it will be very good in this matter, but if something gets in his way, he can break loose, plunge into reflections on the meaning of work, the sanity of the authorities, the corruption of life, start spending too much energy on side projects that he considers more important, or on entertainment that beckons him. During these periods, the quality of work of such an employee will sharply decrease. But over time, this passes and he gets back on his previous path and returns to work with new forces and ideas.
(+): Can be a strong and broad-minded person.
(-): Cannot work within the system, especially in long-term projects.
Prisoner
The motto of this character is “to survive despite all”. He may be in an extremely disadvantageous position for a long time, he will overwork, he will put up with a bad salary, he will be attacked by colleagues or bosses, but for the time being. The accumulated dark energy will sooner or later begin to break free and then he will demolish everything in his path to restore justice. Moreover, his goals can be clear and logical, often aimed at improving working conditions and processes in the company, and these goals will be realistically achievable, and not abstract. But the methods are likely to be too aggressive. A person can overdo it. Having broken through to power, it can begin to fire left and right, or loosening some nuts will tighten others. And as a result, he will receive a new portion of negativity from others.
(+): Can work in really difficult conditions, decisive.
(-): Often rude, you need to monitor him and resolve conflicts.
Martyr
This may not be the strongest developer on your team. Perhaps he was often belittled for his mistakes. Perhaps he was more than once made extreme in conflicts. But over time, he made himself a "shell" that protects him from all this dirt. Anything can be going on around him, but he will ignore it and continue to do the job that he was assigned. You will not see him strive upward, both in terms of career and professional skills, but he consistently does what he does, and this is his strength.
(+): Will become the center of calm in a storm, very stable employee.
(-): Do not expect any initiative from him.
Helpless
Such a programmer is very unsure of his abilities. His skills may be quite normal, average, or even above average, but he is not sure about them. If you do not support him, he will work slowly, may cause pity, a desire to help him, but if you support him, he may decide that he cannot do anything without you. This effect often occurs with trainees, although a developer with experience may be in such a situation. Such an employee may well grow into an intelligent and loyal specialist in the future, but it will require a lot of investment in terms of mentoring.
(+): There is potential, can become a useful and loyal employee.
(-): Requires investment in yourself.
Smoothing the guilt
This character will often make excuses. For their bad actions or subordinates, but it will be. The most common situation is to build up crutches, make a terrible project in terms of support, which colleagues are ashamed to show, and defend it with the words that "he solves business problems." Formally, you will not dig into his arguments - after all, he solves problems, and he goes to a meeting in any negotiations, but the side effects of his endless controversial decisions will creep out of all the cracks, although they will always have justifications or counter-arguments in the form of objectively useful cases.
(+): Can be a good buffer between conflicting interests.
(-): Often you have to redo a lot behind him since bad actions are compensated only morally, but not in fact.
Slacker
This is the same guy who came to get the money. For him, development is smoothies, MacBooks, all kinds of technological toys, and, of course, money. Much money. And the entertainment that you can afford on them. His problem is that he does nothing. He does not develop, does not create anything new. You can attract him with candy, but there will be little benefit from this. He wants everything at once, is quickly depleted, often quits. It will be incredibly difficult to grow a highly specialized professional out of him.
(+): Easy to hire, fill a burning vacancy that does not require deep knowledge.
(-): Can quickly run out of breath, will begin to demand more than he does.
Loch
A bit rough name, right? Well, unfortunately, is a great and powerful language, there seems to be no slang word that conveys the context of "bred man." This character easily lends itself to manipulations like "well, you are such a cool programmer ..." or "but if this project works ...", and as a result, he works a lot, recycles, although he does not need it ... As a result, he will be depleted, and on the one hand, he will be an even more “convenient” employee, but on the other hand, he will be depleted more and more and it is not known how it will end. He can easily come to a state where he works from morning to night, but the result is something that is not visible because the head no longer boils.
(+): “Convenient”, flexible employee. It Will work as long as they say.
(-): It will be depleted, you need to watch from the outside so that it does not burn out.
Consumer
Loyalty to the company? You're kidding! This hero thinks in more mundane categories. If he is warm and well, he is satisfied. If it’s not good, he will spit on everyone without hesitation and leave. He may have good skills, but he will work by the hour: how much he paid, he worked so much. He got him - left. Didn't you do something? Was it in the TK? No? Well, that's it, the question is closed. Over time, especially unpaid ones will quickly make him think about leaving you. And in general, he did not like to work. Rather, he will do his job at random, just to get his reward and go spend it.
(+): Very predictable.
(-): You need to constantly monitor the quality of work, without supervision and will not lift a finger.
Conformist
Well, here in the company we have been doing this for 20 years, everything seems to work, so why change that? As you might have guessed, change is not a programmer's favorite thing. He will sit on an outdated stack, not because he is that good, or because there is no money to rewrite Legacy, but rather out of habit. Or even out of fear that something will change. Such developers often have a fear that the young will "sit up" them, and if such a character is at the helm, he will swim in ancient solutions like a fish in water, not allowing anything new, and the young will be in this swamp as if without hands. And I must say that he can sit like this for a very long time. Sometimes this is good, but sometimes it can hinder the development of the company.
(+): Can be a “keeper” of old and long-lived projects that need to be supported.
(-): Incompatible with new technologies.
Victim
In any more or less large company, there are such developers. They are always blamed for something, accused of something. Sometimes deservedly, sometimes not. They try to justify themselves and arouse pity in some of the colleagues who take them under their wing. Such programmers alone will not survive, they need to be protected, so they can hide and calmly do their job. But under protection, they seem weak and aggressive attacks against them do not disappear anywhere, only intensify. Such a vicious circle turns out. They can be in it for a very long time, but if you meet such a person in your ranks, do not rush to fire him, it is better to find out where the aggression comes from and how much it is justified.
(+): Can work stably, does not have any inadequate requirements.
(-): Needs protection and patronage.