I need a good team and a "smart" team.

A few "smart" People can form an excellent team.

 

Why is "smart" added with double quotation marks? It is because intelligence here does not mean intelligence. On the contrary, intelligence can only be omitted. The smart team I want refers to the ability to maintain a strong experience at work every day and regard my work as part of my career. I have an ideal, enterprising, and good at communication, know how to work with other players, be honest and have a sense of responsibility. Of course, you must be skillful. At least not too bad.

 

Excellent Teams, without double quotation marks, are excellent. If you can make these people into a team, the team will be very competitive.

 

I like a team of about five people. Even in a large project, we will try to organize people into a group of about five people to complete different modules. Just like a big project we are working on, a total of 16 participants are divided into four groups. Each group is responsible for different parts, underlying development, communication groups, calculation model groups, and clients. Each group has a team lead. For routine meetings, you only need a meeting lead. Although we realized the importance of small teams for management and did a good job in team building and organization, we didn't have "smart" players or too few players.

 

For example, if a solution has different opinions, some people stick to their own solutions, but they cannot say what the benefits are. They just say yes. However, when most people agree to use different solutions, he also agrees, but while formally doing so, he is constantly trying his own solutions. This is an example that clearly does not know how to implement team collaboration. Even if his solution is better than the current solution, but since it has been decided, many groups should design and develop around this solution, it is because of this problem, it is also to prove your point of view, resulting in the delay of the entire project. That is, it has been proved for a long time. Do you want to rewrite other groups? This is just a problem. No one is right or wrong, because the new solution may not be able to go any longer. It is wrong, his solution may be the only best solution, but lack proof. However, this situation seems to be rare.

 

I also discussed a solution during the Meeting. Are you sure you know? All of them are clear. However, in the following questions, we found that everyone said different things. Do you say you crashed? Others simply do not listen to the solution discussed by everyone, but follow their own ideas. When the solution is made, I will tell you that this solution is also feasible and can be implemented. In the end, all the other groups should follow the change.

 

Poor communication. Sometimes you don't understand what he wants to express, what he wants to say, and where he has a problem. I want to talk to myself. I cannot understand it by myself. The possible reason is that I have poor comprehension ability. What if we all reflect this problem?

 

I am not sure about the report progress. To what extent does my module do? What can I do? If it takes a long time to complete, the Project Manager or company will have other solutions to replace this check or demonstration. I once asked a team member when he was able to finish the work. He said that all interfaces had been reserved, and there was no implementation left. Soon, it would take two or three days. I will say that this week can be completed in five days. The last two weeks have passed and are not yet resolved. If the project manager promises the customer to demonstrate this function, then the Project Manager cannot obtain the function. What should the project manager say? My team members say they can be completed in two or three days. Who knows they haven't finished a week? It's mad at you...

 

One of the most important points of my ideal members is "Obedient". It is not a matter of no intention to listen. Just accept the command. "Obedient" is more important than technology. Consider the entire project as your own business. The tasks assigned by the Project Manager are illegal.

 

The second is the object-oriented thinking. I have to admit that a large project does not have an object-oriented organization and how can it be completed. (Of course there is a way to do it, but I cannot imagine it) But there are too few people who can understand and apply Object-Oriented Knowledge.

I think people around me are studying some frameworks, tools, models, and developing Java all day long. net is studying WPF, WCF, UI, and rapid development all day long. Many people even don't know how to layer the system, I admit that there are many experts engaged in C ++, but there are more sub-products, indulge in details, and do not know the global thinking. I remember a team member said, c ++ does not contain strings. char * is used. It seems that an asterisk will show the superiority of C ++ over C #. Later I read a book, which clearly says, we recommend that you use the string in the standard library instead of char * to avoid unnecessary complexity. If you talk to me about performance, there is no excuse.

There are many people who only know about WPF and do not know the design pattern, but they also have certain market needs. But what I need is people who can understand and use object-oriented very well. It is far from enough to really use object-oriented data. There are not many experiences of failed projects (this is generally the experience of self-taught talents), and it has not been a few years, certainly not.

 

Enterprising and self-motivated. I ran away from work, saying that today is enough time. I hate such people. Isn't it good to learn more and accumulate more knowledge?

 

Agile development and agile management are indeed difficult to implement. Just like implementing the scrum process, in addition to a good scrummaster, you also need "smart players ". These players can give them good treatment with one, two, or even three players. If the company has many projects, the company will surely find it. Just like Google.

 

Now many companies are looking to recruit people from projects. after the work is done, they will be idle.ProgramThe members are most afraid of being idle. In fact, they have more experience in project development than they have learned by themselves. So everyone started to jump... Vicious Circle ..

This is also our actual situation. Just think about our organization. The boss is making money and doesn't say how long the company is developing. At least it feels like this to me.