Some of the other comments here seem to exemplify the just-world fallacy. If all software teams were so functional, sites like coding horror wouldn't exist.
The dirty secret of software development is that the vast majority of it is done very suboptimally. Both in terms of time taken, and the approach taken to solve the problem. A technically skilled engineer is able to spot these shortcomings and improve on them. A politically skilled engineer is able to get buy-in from the rest of the team, in order to make things better. A well functioning organisation is one where the talents of the technically-but-not-politically skilled engineers, are harnessed to their fullest extent. Not as a favor done to that engineer, but because it helps the organisation itself.
From reading the story, it's clear that this team is even less technically competent than others. It's also clear that the author is very technically skilled, but not politically skilled. Unfortunately for him, the organisation isn't highly functional either, likely stemming from its very political team lead.
In such situations, you essentially have one of two choices. Quit and look for a better team. Or stay, accept that you're working with a bunch of dunces, and do the best you can while getting along and collecting your paycheck.
I can relate because I found myself in a similar situation at a previous job, with almost the exact same quarrels and frustrations. Luckily for me, my team lead was much less political and more open to outside suggestions. Because of this, I was able to ram-through what I thought was the right solution, even though I was constantly butting heads with others. Looking back, I realise how lucky I was to have an open-minded non-political team lead, and how rare that actually is.
God same for me. I read this post and thought I had written it myself. I'm a very pleasant person to work with, I will never belittle others or be harsh about anyone as a person. I will absolutely say when code/architecture/system is poorly designed, and I will say why. This should be a good thing in our industry, but unfortunately it's not.
If a civil engineer came to a team building a bridge and noticed everyone was building something dangerous, he MUST say something or people will die. Imagine a world where the rest of the team poo poo's him for "not getting along."
The dirty secret of software development is that the vast majority of it is done very suboptimally. Both in terms of time taken, and the approach taken to solve the problem. A technically skilled engineer is able to spot these shortcomings and improve on them. A politically skilled engineer is able to get buy-in from the rest of the team, in order to make things better. A well functioning organisation is one where the talents of the technically-but-not-politically skilled engineers, are harnessed to their fullest extent. Not as a favor done to that engineer, but because it helps the organisation itself.
From reading the story, it's clear that this team is even less technically competent than others. It's also clear that the author is very technically skilled, but not politically skilled. Unfortunately for him, the organisation isn't highly functional either, likely stemming from its very political team lead.
In such situations, you essentially have one of two choices. Quit and look for a better team. Or stay, accept that you're working with a bunch of dunces, and do the best you can while getting along and collecting your paycheck.
I can relate because I found myself in a similar situation at a previous job, with almost the exact same quarrels and frustrations. Luckily for me, my team lead was much less political and more open to outside suggestions. Because of this, I was able to ram-through what I thought was the right solution, even though I was constantly butting heads with others. Looking back, I realise how lucky I was to have an open-minded non-political team lead, and how rare that actually is.