Good answer. If someone doesn't want to handle the project offered, make the offer to someone else. If your shop isn't large enough to be able to offer such flexibility, then you have a tougher choice to make (you might have to replace this individual and find new talent). Rewards come after a successful project, not before.

Further to @JoeStrazzere's comment: When you are doing salary reviews it is a good idea to reward having learned and applied a new skill. If you don't, the employee may go job hunting with an enhanced resume. But that is after the skill has been learned, not before.

@JoeStrazzere your last sentence is essentially what my answer would have been if I had seen this question before it got so many answers.

Agree that this developer has probably hit their ceiling. His statement is definitely not one of someone looking to advance themselves. That's fine if he has reached the height of where he wants to be, but he wouldn't be on my short list come promotion time.

@PatriciaShanahan I will disagree with you on it about learning skill and then going for raise. What if the company fire him after the project? Isn't it would be injustice to him?

@HumanLove He would still have the skill, and a history of having applied it, to put on his resume.

Thanks for your input. I didn't think that was a case of unleashed honesty. I'll probably give his place on this project to one of the younger developers. That said, you raised an important point regarding keeping an eye on him regarding further dissidences.

I think you're going way too far with the cancer analogy. It is just as likely that the guy is genuinely enjoying his current job and doesn't want to give it up it for something that he doesn't feel comfortable with. Or that he merely knows another person at researching position he thinks is similar who makes much more than him, so he naturally sees it as opportunity for a raise.

@Agent_L As others have noted, raises come after you have attained a skill and demonstrated you can apply it in a way that makes you more valuable, not before. If his justification is that other people with the same skill get paid more, he needs to prove that he is as good as those people before trying to negotiate a raise. Moreover, a software developer needs to be learning new skills all the time. It's part of the game and should not require extra monetary incentive. Those who don't go obsolete. If he isn't comfortable learning this skill, he should have said that, not asked for a raise.

@SethR Yeah, I overstretched a bit. But so did you. Going from handling things into predicting things is not a mere improvement, it's a brand new job. You can't ask a banking programmer to handle AI for Half-Life 3 and call it "personal development". IMHO it was just a passive-aggressive way of saying "no, thanks".

Sounds like you want to punish someone for being good at their job. Odd. If someone wants to only write code and be a good developer, why force him to do other tasks that he probably won't like or excel at?

Having a backbone, a notion of what to do, priorities and being honest is punishable now? wow

When I first started reading this answer, I was concerned that you were advocating a team lead being a doormat, in that employees should never get to dictate who does what tasks (that's not their responsibility; it's their boss's!). However, you're right about the bigger picture, so I agree overall.

@TechMedicNYC: Because they work for you, not the other way around. They're free to pursue their favourite hobbies outside of working hours.

@Lightness I certainly wouldn't want to work for someone who thinks they can unilaterally change the job description ("Sure we hired you for developing, but now we need more QA people so off you go!"). The developer could've articulated this better, but still the sentiment is understandable. I can't see how anyone who worked in either of those two fields would think they are the same. And if the new job requires higher education or responsibility it's certainly fair to renegotiate the contract.

cont. after all nobody here would expect an intern that is taken over as a normal developer to still work with the same contract and benefits.

@Voo: I guess we disagree that the job description has been changed. Hard to tell without reading it, I suppose.

@Lightness I'd say that's the point on which the whole argument hinges. To me if the OP says things like "bit outside their normal task scope" and "academic-level research", that does not sound like part of a normal programmers job description.

@TechMedicNYC: It's not "a new, expanded role". It's the same role. The developer in question seems to think he is only ever expected to perform the same day-to-day functions that he's ever done, in the execution of that role. I'm assuming things about the written job description here (already admitted that) but, on the assumption that we can take OP at their word, the developer in question doesn't have a leg to stand on, rather than as part of their role expanding their horizons and continuing to produce whatever software is asked of them, within the scope of the original job description.

I'm a little appalled by "If he is actually enjoying his job, this is one of those statements he will come to regret." If he had not made this statement, he would no longer enjoy his job! There is nothing wrong with being honest and assertive about what you prefer to work on. This guy probably does great work, he deserves to have some say in which projects he is assigned to. And it does not mean he has hit his ceiling, it just means he doesn't want to go in this particular direction. But if he has hit his ceiling, that is perfectly fine.

@LightnessRacesInOrbit coming from a shop that does such things, I can only tell you that sucessfully develloping predictive algorithms is more maths than it is coding. I can imagine a hot-blooded coder implementing one of the common patterns with the help of some existing frameworks (facematching and the like) but building a custom model involves math, not code. For someone who is trained in development, thats not expanding the horizon anymore, its a 180-degree turnaround in their career, and OP should reflect that.

cntd. In our shop we have a guy who actually graduated in math handling those things. He can do it. Us coders? In a few years, maybe.

@antipattern: I can understand saying "I don't want to do this". I can't understand saying "I will do it if you pay me more money".

@TSar: I agree with this answer and upvoted it, but would also like to add that personally, in my own management style, I do not get excited for a project until my employees are excited. It's mostly to save myself disappointment, but it's also because their excitement fuels my excitement. If I am to expect us to complete this as a team, I will need us to work together and work together passionately, so before I invest and reveal my passion, I will usually allow others to reveal theirs first so that we can get excited about it together. (Cont'd.)

@LightnessRacesinOrbit I'm just saying that the argument about changing the job description is a valid one. Also, in all likelihood, acquiring the needed skills for this new task requires involvement beyond office hours as well as additional responsibilites (solving a math problem, not a code problem) and therefore, a raise would be appropiate.

(Cont'd.) @Tsar: I guess what I want to say is that I think you might be coming at the problem from the wrong angle. The problem hadn't been that your employee had asked you for more money, but rather, that you had expected something from your employee that had not been within previously-defined expectations. So look at how you are reacting now compared to how he had reacted. At least he had been immediately honest and upfront about his expectations. How about you? Will you do the same for him?

Software development and math are two very different fields. For predictive analyses you need an academic background in math, not something you can get by doing a few courses. Actually, math is so hard that yes, people with such a background are on a higher pay-scale.

@littleO - Its one thing to be honest and say, "This project is not one that really interests me and I am not in a position to sacrifice the personal time that will be needed to learn these skills" its quite another to say "You dont pay me enough for this crap"

@PieterB - What does that have to do with my answer? Maybe that comment would be better under the question itself. Not only that but I suspect/hope that the comments here will soon be moved to chat.

To all of you saying "raises come after success, not before." I call bs on all of that. I hate calling increasing your labor rate to be a "raise." (I hate the connotation that pay is somehow bestowed upon a vassal by his Lord) If I have a skill that you need, or if you have no better options than to come to me, then you are going to pay me more "tomorrow" than you are "today" regardless of whether or not we have a successful project. I'm not going to go speculating on your behalf