When the manager is the only one involved, he’s the one with the most ownership, but with limited ability to help the new person fit in day-to-day. The manager also has the most emotional investment in seeing his new hire succeed, so he may be inclined to overlook or brush off problems. Because to admit the person isn’t working out is to admit his mistake.

Of course, the same dynamic can work be at work for the team when they are involved. But it’s less likely all the members of the team will protect, and they have the manager as someone who (in theory at least) can help navigate the situation.

On a darker note, not involving the team in hiring is another way that managers exert power. Though I doubt most of them think of it that way.

I strongly support your advice to “Involve the Team in the Hiring Process”.

Many hiring managers in organizations of all sizes and shapes don’t conceive of people working in teams, so it simply doesn’t occur to them to ask for input from the team when hiring.

As someone working day-to-day on software teams, I appreciate inclusion in team hiring rituals. A team lunch with a potential hire often smokes out valuable intra-personal impressions.

Sadly, I’ve also worked on teams where the morale is so low that team members have a “whatever” attitude vis-à-vis adding new members to the team. Still, I suspect most would rather be solicited for input than ignored.

In pursuit of the ideal technology team, I value behavior over technology. A teammate’s sense of humor, composure under pressure, and professional modesty is more an indicator of collaborative success than outstanding programming chops.