Alternatively, build a team with a mix. Sometimes having a person passionate about process can be very helpful when they have a little tension with the pioneer types.
They drove me a little crazy, but one of the best people I ever worked with was a “test enthusiast” and believed that anything not automated was going to eventually cause us trouble.
It was good friction and made one helluva a system that managed to serve a couple hundred thousand remote clients while basically on autopilot for several years now.
The culture within the team can go south sooner than one realizes if the 'process' types feel they're constantly cleaning up the mess of pioneers (who tend to get more attention in general for their shinny projects). And on the other hand the pioneers may perceive process-types folks resist any new changes and are stuck supporting outdated technology. The truth usually lies somewhere in the middle.
Having the right mix, with good leadership, can balance out the worst qualities and enhance the best ones.
Alternately, with poor leadership and allowing personalities to run amok, you can find a team in a toxic situation.
So you'll need a good, experienced, team-building hiring manager who understands the balance of the necessary skills and personalities.
I am currently working on team that one guys rejects every single PR that doesn't also come with a description of change in Changelog.md .
You aren't giving us enough context to know whether that changelog requirement is a good one or not. But if your team has agreed on the process, either convince them to change the process, or try to understand why your (hopefully reasonable and competent) colleagues believe it's necessary.
what if your team is dominated by process people.
> try to understand why your (hopefully reasonable and competent) colleagues believe it's necessary.
only explanation that everyone agreed to was that "it makes it easier to see what changed"
If that's not your jam, consider a new job.
> only explanation that everyone agreed to was that "it makes it easier to see what changed"
Maybe it's safety critical software or there are downstream clients? Maybe it's open source? Maybe it's not actually every PR and we have an unreliable narrator? The post did start with "I hate process people", after all.
For what it's worth, I'm notoriously not a process person. But I've seen and respect stability they can bring to a team and product