The best teams IMO have about a 10/10/80 split between people who do great work and know it, people who do great work and don't know it, and people who don't do great work (caveat: they should do ACCEPTABLE work) but are aware of their limitations. There's only so much work that you want your talent to be doing and you can try and keep the major touch points to your power players, and then you try to silo off the drudgery to the folks who are happy to have something hard to fail at. The personality type of the good-and-knows-it tends to need to be offset by the humble good-but-unsure types. Heaven forbid you get even one worker who can crank out productivity like no tomorrow and claims to be doing good work because in a vacuum everything is functional but they optimize only to close tasks and leave the system in total disrepair. It takes literal years to clean up some messes, and from experience I tend to prefer working with people who adhere to N > quality(output) > 0 over those at |quality(output)| > N.

Yes, this mirrors directly that old adage from that German general [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_von_Hammerstein-Equord#Cl...