High-Performing Developers Have One Secret: They Ask for Help

Asking for help should be easy. Yet, in software development—an industry built on problem-solving—many developers hesitate to do it. While this struggle is often associated with junior developers, who may fear looking incompetent, the truth is that everyone, from entry-level engineers to senior consultants, faces this challenge.

A junior developer might spend hours debugging an issue that a colleague could solve in minutes. A senior engineer might refuse to ask a peer for advice, believing they should already know the answer. A software consultant might avoid clarifying requirements with a client, thinking it would make them look less like an expert—all while burning the client’s budget on an unnecessary rabbit hole.

The consequences of not seeking help are costly: wasted time, delayed projects, inefficient solutions, and increased frustration. The rise of AI has added another layer to this issue. Developers now have the option to ask an AI for help, but AI, while useful, is not a replacement for human collaboration. Over-reliance on AI can lead to misleading answers and wasted effort, reinforcing the same inefficiencies.

So why do smart, capable engineers avoid asking for help? The answer lies in psychology, biases, and company culture. Developers want to prove their competence. They fear judgment. They fall into cognitive traps like the sunk cost fallacy, convincing themselves they’re “almost there.” And in many cases, company environments subtly discourage help-seeking, rewarding independence at the cost of efficiency.

In this article, we’ll explore:

• The psychological reasons developers hesitate to ask for help.
• The cognitive biases and fallacies that reinforce this behavior.
• How junior and senior developers alike can recognize when to ask for help.
• How AI changes the help-seeking equation—when it helps and when it misleads.
• What managers and teams can do to build a culture that encourages smart collaboration.

By the end, you’ll have a new perspective on why asking for help isn’t a weakness—it’s a skill. And like any skill, it can be practiced, refined, and used strategically to improve both individual performance and team efficiency.

---

The Psychology of Not Asking for Help (For All Levels)

Fear of Looking Incompetent (Juniors and Seniors Alike)

No one likes to feel incompetent, especially in a field where intelligence, problem-solving, and technical expertise are highly valued. For many developers, the fear of looking unqualified is one of the biggest reasons they avoid asking for help—even when they need it.

For junior developers, this fear often stems from imposter syndrome. They may worry that asking too many questions will confirm their worst fear: that they don’t belong in the role. Even if their team encourages learning, they may hesitate to speak up, assuming their colleagues will silently judge them. Thoughts like:

• “I should already know this—what if they regret hiring me?”
• “If I ask too many questions, will they think I’m not smart enough?”
• “Maybe I just need to struggle through this on my own.”

The reality is that no one expects junior developers to know everything. In fact, not asking for help is a much bigger red flag than asking the right questions. Yet, this fear can keep them stuck in a cycle of struggling alone rather than seeking guidance that could accelerate their learning.

For senior developers and consultants, the fear is different—but just as powerful. Instead of worrying about being perceived as “not smart enough,” they worry about being perceived as not expert enough.

A senior developer is supposed to be the one others turn to for help. A consultant is expected to bring knowledge and expertise to a client. When they hit a problem they don’t immediately know how to solve, the internal dialogue sounds more like:

• “I’m supposed to be the expert. If I ask for help, won’t they question my credibility?”
• “If I go back to the client for clarification, will they think I don’t know what I’m doing?”
• “I’ll figure it out—I don’t want to lose their trust.”

Ironically, this fear can lead to worse outcomes for everyone. A consultant who avoids clarifying a vague requirement may spend days working on the wrong solution. A senior developer who refuses to ask a peer for advice may waste time struggling through a problem that someone else could solve in minutes. The need to maintain an image of expertise can actually reduce effectiveness.

This phenomenon isn’t unique to software development. Research on imposter syndrome has shown that even highly competent individuals doubt themselves and overcompensate by avoiding situations where they might appear unknowledgeable. Studies suggest that high-achieving individuals—especially those in technical and leadership roles—are even more susceptible to this type of thinking.

But in reality, the best engineers, consultants, and leaders aren’t the ones who know everything—they’re the ones who know where to get the right answers, as efficiently as possible.

The Desire to Prove Oneself

Closely tied to the fear of incompetence is the internal drive to prove oneself. Developers—especially in fast-paced, competitive environments—often feel a personal responsibility to demonstrate their skills and intelligence through self-sufficiency.

For junior developers, proving oneself often means showing that they can solve problems independently. There’s a belief that “real” engineers don’t need help, that being good at coding means being able to figure things out alone. This leads to thoughts like:

• “I need to show them I can handle this on my own.”
• “If I solve this myself, they’ll see I’m capable.”
• “The best engineers don’t need to ask for help—so I shouldn’t either.”

The problem is, this mindset is a myth. The best engineers do ask for help—but they do it strategically. They don’t waste hours spinning their wheels on something someone else could solve in minutes. They recognize when struggling alone leads to diminishing returns and know when to collaborate.

For senior developers and consultants, the desire to prove oneself is more about maintaining credibility. They may already have a strong reputation, and they don’t want to do anything to jeopardize it. This leads to thoughts like:

• “I’ve been doing this for years—I should already know how to do this.”
• “If I ask, will people start questioning whether I deserve my senior title?”
• “The client hired me as the expert—I shouldn’t have to ask them for help.”

This can lead to stubbornness at the expense of efficiency. A consultant who avoids asking the client for clarification may deliver a subpar solution. A senior developer who refuses to seek input from a junior may overlook a fresh perspective.

Paradoxically, the strongest engineers and consultants are the ones who know when to ask for help. They understand that asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness—it’s a sign of experience. It shows that they know how to work efficiently, leverage the strengths of others, and get to the right solution faster.

In many ways, knowing when to ask for help is a skill in itself. And like any skill, it can be improved with the right mindset and practice.

---

Biases and Fallacies

Developers, like all humans, are subject to cognitive biases—mental shortcuts that can lead to flawed decision-making. These biases often reinforce the reluctance to seek help, causing developers to waste time, make poor assumptions, and reinforce inefficient behaviors.

Psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky pioneered much of the research on cognitive biases, particularly in their work Thinking, Fast and Slow. They demonstrated that people often make irrational decisions because of biases they aren’t even aware of. In software development, these biases can make developers resistant to asking for help, even when doing so would be the most logical course of action.

While I’ve already written about how our inherent optimism influences our decisions as software engineers, let’s dig deeper into the psychology…

Tip: Find other great books on my Non-Fiction Reading List

Sunk Cost Fallacy: Sticking with a Problem Too Long

One of the most well-known cognitive traps is the sunk cost fallacy—the tendency to persist in an endeavor because of the time, effort, or resources already invested, even when it would be more rational to cut losses and change course.

In Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics, Richard Thaler explains that humans are loss-averse, meaning they would rather keep throwing resources at a failing effort than admit those resources were wasted. This is particularly dangerous in software development. A developer who has spent hours debugging a problem might think, “I’ve already spent so much time on this, I can’t give up now,” when, in reality, asking a colleague for help could resolve the issue in minutes.

This fallacy is particularly problematic for senior developers and consultants. Their confidence and experience can sometimes work against them, convincing them that they should be able to figure something out on their own—leading them to sink even more time into a problem rather than seeking help.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect, named after research by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, describes how people with low expertise in a subject tend to overestimate their competence. This can be a major issue for junior developers who are unaware of the full complexity of a problem.

A junior developer, struggling with a bug, may avoid asking for help because they think they are “almost there,” even if they have fundamentally misunderstood the issue. In reality, their confidence comes from a lack of experience, and they would benefit greatly from an outside perspective.

Senior engineers are not immune to this effect either. Those who specialize in one area of software development may assume that their expertise extends to unfamiliar domains—leading them to avoid seeking help when working outside their comfort zone.

Appeal to Authority

An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy in which someone assumes that being an expert in a field means they do not need input from others. This is a major issue for senior developers and consultants, who may resist asking for help because they believe their role as an authority figure means they should have all the answers.

Ironically, this can cause them to miss out on valuable insights. A senior engineer might hesitate to ask a junior developer for input, even though the junior has been working more closely with the technology in question. Consultants, fearing damage to their expert reputation, may avoid asking a client for clarification, leading to costly misinterpretations.

As Ray Dalio argues in Principles, “No one has all the answers, no matter how smart they are.” The best leaders actively seek input from others—regardless of title or experience level—because they recognize that the goal is to reach the best solution, not to appear infallible.

False Dichotomy (Black-and-White Thinking)

Developers often fall into false dichotomy thinking, believing they must either solve a problem on their own or rely entirely on others—ignoring the idea that an optimal approach lies somewhere in between.

This is particularly common among junior developers who think, “If I ask for help, it means I’m not a good problem solver.” They fail to recognize that the best engineers use a strategic mix of independent effort and timely collaboration.

In reality, problem-solving is not a binary choice. The best approach is often:

1. Attempt to solve the problem independently.
2. If no significant progress is made within a reasonable time frame, seek help.

By reframing help-seeking as a tool rather than an admission of failure, developers can strike a balance between learning on their own and leveraging team expertise.

Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out information that supports one’s existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence. This can be particularly problematic for developers debugging a tricky issue.

A developer struggling with a bug might repeatedly search for solutions that align with their current assumptions rather than considering that their assumption could be wrong in the first place. Rather than asking a teammate who might immediately spot the flaw in their thinking, they waste time reinforcing a mistaken belief.

The same bias can affect senior engineers and consultants, who may be overly confident in their approach and filter out information that contradicts their initial assessment. This can lead to wasted effort and suboptimal solutions.

Survivorship Bias

Survivorship bias occurs when people focus only on successful outcomes while ignoring failures. This bias is particularly evident among senior engineers who believe that struggling alone is the best way to learn—because they succeeded that way.

A senior developer might say, “I had to figure everything out myself, so junior devs should, too.” This ignores the fact that many developers who struggled alone may have quit or taken far longer to develop skills. In reality, the most effective engineers balance independent problem-solving with smart collaboration.

Research in learning psychology suggests that mentorship and guided learning significantly accelerate skill acquisition. Junior developers who seek help at the right times will often develop stronger problem-solving abilities faster than those who insist on struggling alone.

Planning Fallacy

The planning fallacy, first identified by Kahneman and Tversky, describes the tendency for people to underestimate how long a task will take—even when they have past experience that suggests otherwise.

Developers often think, “I’ll figure this out in 10 minutes,” only to find themselves still stuck hours later. The assumption that solving a problem will be quicker than it actually is leads developers to delay asking for help, thinking they are just one step away from a solution.

The best way to counteract the planning fallacy is to establish time limits. A common approach is:

• If you haven’t made progress in 30–60 minutes, seek input from a colleague.
• If you’re working on a critical feature with a deadline, ask for help sooner rather than later.

By recognizing the planning fallacy and setting clear limits, developers can prevent small obstacles from becoming time-consuming roadblocks.

Cognitive biases and logical fallacies affect developers at every level, reinforcing hesitation to seek help. By becoming aware of these mental traps—whether it’s sunk cost fallacy, Dunning-Kruger, appeal to authority, or confirmation bias—developers can take proactive steps to work more efficiently.

As Daniel Kahneman suggests in Thinking, Fast and Slow, “The illusion that one has understood the past feeds the illusion that one can predict and control the future.” The key to overcoming these biases isn’t eliminating them—it’s recognizing them when they occur and making adjustments in the moment.

Understanding these biases helps developers strike the right balance: spending enough time solving problems independently to learn, but knowing when to ask for help to stay efficient. The next step is understanding the business cost of delayed help-seeking and how teams can encourage a culture where asking for help is seen as a strength rather than a weakness.

---

When Asking for Help Saves Time and Money

Many developers hesitate to ask for help because they see it as a personal decision—one that affects only them. But in reality, delayed help-seeking isn’t just an individual issue; it has a real cost to businesses. Every hour spent spinning wheels on a problem that could be solved in minutes is wasted time, wasted money, and wasted opportunity.

The Business Cost of Delayed Help-Seeking

Time spent struggling alone isn’t free. In a business setting, every developer’s time translates into dollars spent.

Let’s break it down with a simple scenario. Suppose a developer spends four hours debugging an issue they could have resolved in 15 minutes by asking a senior colleague. If that developer earns $50/hour, that’s a $200 loss on something that should have cost $12.50. Now, multiply this by an entire engineering team making similar choices across multiple sprints.

Beyond direct financial loss, delayed help-seeking has other consequences:

• Missed Deadlines: Wasted time on individual problems leads to missed sprint goals.
• Technical Debt: Poorly informed decisions (due to lack of input) result in solutions that need refactoring later.
• Decreased Team Velocity: If one developer’s work is blocked, others waiting on their output are delayed as well.
• Burnout & Frustration: Developers who struggle alone for too long become demotivated, increasing turnover risk.

This is why companies invest in knowledge-sharing tools, pair programming, and mentorship. The best engineering teams aren’t the ones where every individual works in isolation; they’re the ones that optimize collaboration to minimize unnecessary struggle and maximize efficiency.

For Junior Devs: When to Push Through vs. When to Ask

For junior developers, there’s a fine balance between learning through struggle and knowing when to ask for help. A certain level of independent problem-solving is necessary for growth. However, there’s a breaking point where struggling alone stops being productive and becomes a waste of time.

The key is recognizing that asking for help doesn’t mean giving up—it means being resourceful.

A Simple Rule: The “30-60 Minute” Threshold

A practical approach many teams adopt is the 30-60 minute rule:

1. Try to solve the problem independently for 30 minutes.
   • Search documentation.
   • Try debugging techniques.
   • Experiment with different approaches.
2. If no significant progress is made, seek help.
   • Formulate a clear, concise question.
   • Provide context on what’s been tried.
   • Ask a teammate, mentor, or use an internal help channel.

This rule ensures that junior developers get the benefit of struggling just enough to learn, but not so much that they waste hours on a dead-end. Teams that set clear expectations around this help normalize asking for assistance, reducing the fear that juniors often feel about reaching out.

For Senior Devs: When “Figuring It Out” Is Hurting the Business

For senior engineers, the hesitation to ask for help often stems from a belief in self-sufficiency. After years of experience, they feel they should be able to solve problems on their own. But here’s the reality:

• Experience doesn’t mean you’ll always have the best answer. Technology evolves, and no one knows everything.
• Asking for help doesn’t mean handing the problem off. It means getting a faster, better-informed solution.
• Time is a finite resource. Every hour spent stuck is an hour not spent on higher-value work.

The Illusion of Productivity

One of the biggest pitfalls for senior engineers is the illusion of productivity—believing that staying “busy” equates to making progress.

• Spending three hours on a problem when someone else has already solved it in the past is not productivity.
• Rewriting a function from scratch because you didn’t want to ask a teammate where the existing solution lives is not productivity.
• Working late to finish a feature on time because you didn’t want to clarify a requirement with the product team is not productivity.

The best engineers aren’t the ones who insist on solving everything alone. They’re the ones who know when to leverage collective knowledge to move faster.

Senior Developers and the Multiplier Effect

A senior engineer’s time is even more valuable than a junior developer’s because they’re not just responsible for their own output—they often influence an entire team’s velocity.

• If a senior engineer is blocked, other team members waiting on their work are also delayed.
• If they make a bad architectural decision because they didn’t seek input, the whole team may need to refactor later.
• If they refuse to ask a junior developer for insights, they miss out on fresh perspectives that could lead to better solutions.

By recognizing that collaboration is a force multiplier, senior engineers can shift their mindset from “I should solve this myself” to “What’s the fastest way to get to the best solution?”—which often means asking for input sooner.

For both junior and senior developers, the decision to ask for help isn’t just about efficiency—it’s about maximizing team effectiveness and reducing wasted effort. When developers recognize the real business cost of struggling in isolation, they can make better decisions about when to push through and when to collaborate.

Asking for help is not a sign of weakness—it’s a sign of smart engineering. The best developers know that efficiency isn’t about doing everything alone; it’s about solving problems as effectively as possible.

---

Senior Developers and Consultants: A Unique Struggle

For senior developers and consultants, the hesitation to ask for help is less about imposter syndrome and more about protecting their credibility. Junior developers may fear looking unqualified, but senior engineers and consultants often fear looking less authoritative. They are expected to have answers, not questions. This expectation—whether self-imposed or reinforced by workplace culture—can lead to delays, misaligned solutions, and wasted effort.

Why Consultants May Hesitate to Ask Clients for Help

Software consultants, in particular, face a unique dilemma. They are hired as subject matter experts (SMEs), expected to bring solutions rather than problems. The hesitation to ask a client for clarification often comes from the belief that:

• They should already know the answer—after all, they were hired for their expertise.
• Asking too many questions might make them seem inexperienced.
• Clients expect solutions, not uncertainties.

However, this mindset can lead to far worse outcomes than simply asking a question early. A consultant who avoids seeking clarification may:

• Spend days or weeks building the wrong solution.
• Make incorrect assumptions about business priorities.
• Burn client dollars on unnecessary effort, damaging trust in the long run.

In The Trusted Advisor by David H. Maister, the authors emphasize that trust is built not by pretending to know everything, but by demonstrating transparency and a commitment to the best outcome. Clients don’t expect perfection—they expect thoughtfulness, efficiency, and results.

The reality is that most clients would rather be asked for clarification than pay for wasted work. No one is keeping a mental tally of how many times a consultant asks a question—what they do notice is when deliverables don’t align with their expectations.

When Consultants Asking for Help = Better Outcomes

A consultant’s job is not just to write code, but to solve business problems. If they don’t fully understand the business problem, how can they possibly deliver the right solution?

By seeking early clarification, consultants can:

• Ensure alignment with the client’s real needs.
• Avoid unnecessary work and costly rework later.
• Build trust by showing a genuine interest in solving the right problem.

One of the best ways to do this is to reframe questions as collaboration, not weakness. Instead of thinking, “If I ask, they’ll think I don’t know what I’m doing,” shift to:

• “Let’s confirm that we’re solving the right problem.”
• “Before I go too far down this path, I want to make sure this approach aligns with your business needs.”
• “Can you clarify X so I can ensure we’re prioritizing the right thing?”

These approaches position the consultant as a strategic thinker, not just a coder—and that increases credibility rather than diminishing it.

How Senior Engineers Can Ask for Help Without Losing Credibility

Senior engineers face a similar challenge: they are often the ones others turn to for help. Asking questions can feel like admitting weakness—but in reality, strategic questioning is a sign of experience, not incompetence.

The key is how the question is framed. Compare these two approaches:

🚫 “I have no idea what I’m doing. Can someone help?”
✅ “I’m evaluating two possible solutions for this issue—does anyone have insights on which approach has worked best in the past?”

🚫 “I can’t figure this out. What do I do?”
✅ “I’ve tried A, B, and C, but I’m still seeing an issue in production. Has anyone encountered something similar?”

By structuring questions to show that effort has already been made, senior engineers:

• Demonstrate competence, even while seeking input.
• Encourage collaboration, making it easier for others to step in.
• Move toward a solution faster, rather than struggling in isolation.

For consultants and senior engineers, the hesitation to ask for help is often about protecting their professional image. However, the best technical leaders and advisors don’t let ego stand in the way of efficiency. By shifting the mindset from “asking for help is admitting weakness” to “asking for help ensures better results”, senior developers and consultants can work more effectively, build stronger client relationships, and ultimately deliver better solutions.

---

The AI Factor: When Developers Should (and Shouldn’t) Ask AI for Help

With the rise of AI-powered tools like ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, and other large language models, developers now have a powerful resource for debugging, research, and code generation. While AI can be an incredible tool when used correctly, it is not a substitute for human expertise.

The key challenge is knowing when to ask AI for help—and when relying on AI could lead to wasted time, incorrect solutions, or even dangerous assumptions.

AI as a Debugging and Research Tool

AI is at its best when used for rubber-duck debugging, syntax guidance, and general research. Much like explaining a problem to a colleague or a rubber duck forces a developer to articulate their thought process, asking an AI to analyze an issue can help bring clarity. AI excels at:

• Explaining concepts that a developer may not be familiar with.
• Providing code snippets for well-documented patterns and common problems.
• Summarizing documentation that might take longer to read manually.
• Suggesting debugging steps that could help narrow down an issue.

For example, if a developer is stuck on an unfamiliar regular expression pattern, asking AI can save time by generating examples or breaking down syntax. Similarly, AI can provide historical context on best practices, such as why certain design patterns are preferred.

When AI Leads Developers Down the Wrong Path

Despite its usefulness, AI is fundamentally not an expert—it is a statistical model trained to generate plausible responses based on past data. This means:

• AI can be confidently wrong, presenting incorrect solutions with the same authority as correct ones.
• AI lacks real-world debugging experience and may suggest fixes that don’t apply to the actual problem.
• AI-generated code often lacks nuance, such as performance considerations, security best practices, or company-specific standards.

Studies on AI-generated misinformation have shown that hallucination rates—where AI generates factually incorrect or misleading information—can be significant. Research from OpenAI, Google, and academic studies on large language models confirm that while AI can generate code, it does not inherently “understand” the code in the way a human does.

The problem arises when developers trust AI-generated solutions without verifying them. A developer who blindly copies and pastes AI-suggested code without testing or understanding it can introduce hard-to-debug errors, security vulnerabilities, or logic flaws.

Why AI is Not a Replacement for a Colleague

Asking an AI for help is fundamentally different from asking a human colleague for several reasons:

1. AI lacks context.
   • AI does not have access to a team’s codebase, architecture, or internal tools.
   • It cannot understand the history behind a decision or the reasoning for a particular implementation.
2. AI does not mentor or teach critical thinking.
   • Senior developers and team leads provide mentorship by guiding developers through problem-solving, not just giving answers.
   • A well-structured conversation with a teammate improves problem-solving skills, whereas AI simply provides responses.
3. AI does not validate assumptions.
   • Human colleagues challenge assumptions, ensuring that a developer isn’t solving the wrong problem.
   • AI, on the other hand, provides answers based on the question as asked, without considering whether the question itself is flawed.
4. AI has no experience.
   • A human colleague has actually solved real-world problems before.
   • AI can generate solutions based on data, but it does not “know” what works in practice.

AI is a valuable tool for developers, but it must be used wisely. It is best suited for syntactic questions, research, and debugging assistance, but it is not a replacement for collaboration with experienced colleagues. The most effective developers learn how to leverage AI where appropriate, but also recognize its limitations. Asking AI can be helpful—but asking a human is often the best way to ensure correct, efficient, and context-aware solutions.

---

How Managers Can Foster a Culture of Help-Seeking

One of the biggest factors influencing whether developers ask for help is company culture. If an engineering team views asking for help as a sign of weakness or incompetence, developers—especially juniors—will hesitate to speak up. This leads to wasted time, poor decisions, and a team that operates below its full potential.

Managers play a critical role in normalizing and encouraging help-seeking behaviors. By setting the right expectations, removing fear of judgment, and modeling the behavior themselves, they can create an environment where developers feel safe asking for assistance when needed.

Modeling the Right Behavior

A team’s culture is often shaped from the top down. If managers and senior engineers never ask for help, it sends an implicit message that self-sufficiency is the expectation. On the other hand, when leaders openly seek input and discuss challenges, it normalizes the behavior for the rest of the team.

Managers can model help-seeking behavior by:

• Asking for feedback on technical decisions. Even experienced engineers benefit from second opinions.
• Openly discussing mistakes and learning moments. When leaders admit they don’t always have the answers, it creates a culture of continuous learning.
• Recognizing and rewarding good questions. When a developer asks for help at the right time, acknowledging it reinforces the behavior.

When senior leaders say, “I don’t know the answer—let’s figure it out together,” it signals to the team that asking for help is not only acceptable but encouraged.

Encouraging Psychological Safety

One of the most significant predictors of a high-performing engineering team is psychological safety—the belief that individuals can take risks, admit mistakes, and ask for help without fear of embarrassment or punishment.

Google’s Project Aristotle, a multi-year study on team effectiveness, found that psychological safety was the number one factor distinguishing successful teams from less effective ones. Teams where members felt safe admitting when they were stuck outperformed those where help-seeking was discouraged.

Unfortunately, many engineering teams—intentionally or not—cultivate a blame culture that discourages developers from speaking up. In environments where asking for help is seen as incompetence, developers will:

• Struggle in silence, afraid of looking weak.
• Make avoidable mistakes, rather than asking for input.
• Avoid taking ownership, because failure is punished rather than seen as a learning opportunity.

Managers can foster psychological safety by:

• Publicly reinforcing that asking for help is a strength, not a weakness.
• Framing mistakes as learning opportunities rather than failures.
• Encouraging knowledge-sharing—if one developer learns something, the whole team benefits.

Implementing a “Help-First” Policy

Many teams operate under an unspoken rule about when it’s appropriate to ask for help, leaving developers—especially juniors—unsure of when to reach out. Instead, managers should set explicit expectations about when and how to seek help.

A help-first policy can include:

1. The “Try First, Then Ask” Rule
   • Developers should attempt to solve the problem on their own first (e.g., for 30-60 minutes).
   • If no meaningful progress is made, they should ask for help rather than continue struggling.
2. Structured Support Channels
   • Slack help threads where developers can post questions asynchronously.
   • Office hours where senior engineers are available for live troubleshooting.
   • Pair programming sessions to encourage collaboration.
3. Encouraging Documentation of Solutions
   • If a developer asks a question, the answer should be documented somewhere (e.g., an internal wiki or Slack knowledge base).
   • This prevents repetitive questions and builds a culture of knowledge-sharing.

Managers set the tone for how help-seeking is perceived within their teams. By modeling the right behavior, fostering psychological safety, and implementing structured guidelines for seeking help, they can create an environment where developers feel empowered to ask for assistance without hesitation. The result is a more collaborative, efficient, and high-performing engineering team.

---

How Developers Can Ask for Help More Effectively

Asking for help is a skill. It’s not just about reaching out—it’s about asking in the right way, through the right channels, and with the right mindset. When done effectively, asking for help doesn’t just solve problems faster; it improves team collaboration and reinforces a culture of shared learning.

The Right Way to Ask Questions

Not all questions are created equal. A vague, unstructured question can frustrate both the person asking and the person being asked, while a clear, well-formed question leads to faster, more useful answers.

One of the worst ways to ask for help is the dreaded:

“It’s not working. Can you help?”

This kind of question forces the other person to ask follow-ups before they can even begin to help. Instead, a developer should provide enough context to make it easier for others to understand the problem and propose a solution.

A good help request should include:

1. A clear description of the issue.
   • “I’m trying to integrate Service X into our backend, but I’m getting an authentication error.”
2. What has already been tried.
   • “I’ve double-checked the API keys and confirmed that my credentials match the ones in the environment variables.”
3. Any error messages or relevant logs.
   • “The error message says ‘401 Unauthorized,’ but I confirmed that the credentials work in Postman.”
4. What specific help is needed.
   • “Could someone help me check if there’s an issue with how I’m passing authentication headers?”

A structured question like this makes it much easier for teammates to jump in with relevant help, reducing unnecessary back-and-forth.

Using the Right Channels

Just as important as how a developer asks for help is where they ask for it. Choosing the right communication channel can impact response time, efficiency, and team workflow.

When to Ask in Slack or a Team Chat

• Best for non-urgent questions that others might benefit from.
• Encourages asynchronous help—someone can answer when they have time.
• Good for documenting solutions so others can refer back to them.

Example:
“I’m debugging an issue with our OAuth flow and keep getting a 401 error. Tried X and Y so far. Anyone encountered this before?”

When to Ask in a 1:1 Message

• Best for quick, specific questions that require a direct response.
• Helps avoid unnecessary noise in team channels.
• Should be used sparingly, especially for non-urgent requests.

Example:
“Hey, I know you worked on this feature last sprint. Can I ask you a quick question about the API integration?”

When to Bring It Up in a Team Meeting

• Best for discussions that impact multiple people, such as architectural decisions.
• Useful when a question requires more in-depth conversation.
• Should be prepared with specific points to discuss rather than vague problems.

Example:
“In today’s standup, I want to bring up an issue I’ve been having with our database schema migration. I’d love input on whether we should take Approach A or B.”

By choosing the right channel, developers reduce disruptions while increasing the chances of getting timely and helpful responses.

Reframing Help-Seeking as Strength, Not Weakness

One of the biggest mindset shifts developers need to make is recognizing that asking for help is not a sign of failure—it’s a sign of efficiency. The best engineers aren’t the ones who know everything; they’re the ones who find answers efficiently.

In high-performing teams, even the most experienced developers ask questions regularly. The difference is, they:

• Ask better questions (clear, structured, and to the point).
• Ask sooner rather than later (avoiding wasted time).
• Learn from the answers (applying knowledge rather than repeatedly asking the same thing).

Senior engineers model this behavior when they admit gaps in their knowledge and seek input from peers. When a senior developer openly says, “I don’t know the best approach here—what do you think?”, it signals to the rest of the team that collaboration is a strength, not a weakness.

Asking for help effectively is a skill that every developer should develop. By structuring questions well, choosing the right communication channels, and embracing help-seeking as a strategic tool rather than a last resort, developers can improve their own efficiency and contribute to a stronger, more collaborative team.

---

Principles: Asking for Help

Principle: If you ask someone a question, they will probably give you an answer, so think through to whom you should address your questions.

---

Conclusion: Asking for Help is a Skill, Not a Weakness

The best developers—junior and senior alike—aren’t the ones who work in isolation, struggling endlessly to prove their competence. They are the ones who know when to ask for help, how to ask effectively, and who to ask. They understand that collaboration accelerates learning, reduces wasted time, reduces costs, and leads to better solutions.

Asking for help is not a sign of weakness; it is a skill. Like debugging or code optimization, it can be practiced, refined, and mastered. Knowing when to push through independently and when to seek assistance is a balance that improves with experience.

AI has added a new layer to the help-seeking equation. While it can be a valuable tool for research, debugging, and syntax guidance, it is not a replacement for human collaboration. AI lacks real-world experience, business context, and the mentorship that a human colleague can provide. Developers must learn to use AI wisely—leveraging its strengths without over-relying on it for critical decision-making.

So here’s a challenge: Try asking for help 10% sooner than you normally would.

• If you typically struggle with a problem for two hours before asking, try seeking input after 90 minutes.
• If you wait 60 minutes, ask after 50.
• If you usually hesitate because of fear, reframe it as an opportunity to improve efficiency and learn faster.

The simple act of asking for help a little earlier could save hours, reduce frustration, and improve team collaboration. In the end, the most effective developers aren’t just great at solving problems—they are great at getting to the right solutions as efficiently as possible.