It is hard to punish people for working hard and fixing something, when they are fixing something they created that was crappy from the start! And then the team that is highly-tuned and made a perfect design from the start shows very little improvement because it is already perfect. The indicators flip the script and make it hard to decide who actually deserves accolades. The correct answer is that they both do: one team for figuring out their mess, the other team for executing flawlessly. But the flawless people, in my experience, tend to have big egos and are offended by the seemingly equitable treatment.
The part about ego trip is the "always looking out for yourself." On the one hand, you have to promote yourself, on the other hand, you're part of a team. And manipulating the system to make to make sure you get preferred assignments backfires spectacularly. Which is why those folks tend to switch companies a lot.
I'm ambivalent about this. It can be taken as some tips as how to be be assertive by not getting shafted by evildoers like the author (remember that debate from last week on HN?), which are healthy. But there's also a lot of "me first" that'll get you shivved in the long run.