Teamwork Isn’t for Everyone

I recently came across a post from a tech lead who fired a key engineer—a brilliant expert with tons of experience but a “toxic” reputation. It’s a familiar story: an exceptional specialist, undeniably valuable to the project, who constantly clashes with others, dismisses the team, and undermines processes.

But maybe it’s not so black-and-white. Seasoned engineers often see work differently. They get frustrated by bureaucracy and corporate rituals. They care about results, not fitting in. Their bluntness and detachment can easily be misread as toxicity, especially when the focus shifts from efficiency to how comfortable they make everyone feel. So, their honesty becomes a reason to push them out.

Here’s an uncomfortable truth: many top engineers communicate best with machines. Their world is code and algorithms, not team-building or office politics. Expecting them to be socially polished is like asking a Ferrari to handle off-road terrain. Engineering minds are shaped by precision and outcomes, not unwritten rules of workplace etiquette.

We’re stuck in a mindset where every developer has to be part psychologist, part diplomat, part actor. But what if that’s a dead end? What if we’re losing truly valuable talent by trying to force them into a team-player mold?

Maybe there’s a better way. Small, independent teams of 2–3 people with clear responsibilities and technical interfaces instead of endless approvals. This setup lets people focus on what matters: deeply understanding problems, finding elegant solutions, and owning the results. No need to pretend to be someone they’re not.