Yes, quoting a Slashdot article again:
According to recent research by the U.S. military and CERT, workers who sabotage corporate systems are almost always IT workers who are disgruntled, paranoid, generally show up late, argue with colleagues, and generally perform poorly.
There’s the obvious joke in this post’s title. But there’s a more serious complaint here as well:
I would be much more interested to see the correlation the other way. Being able to predict lateness and grumpiness after previous events of sabotage is not very useful. It would be useful to know if most disgruntled, paranoid, generally late, argumentative, and off-key IT workers later perform sabotage. It might be useful to know if a substantial minority of such persons become saboteurs if mistreated, and whether this can be avoided by proper treatment.
But what good is it to know that saboteurs were once surly? There are too many surly IT workers to dismiss them all, or even to apply selective treatment around dismissal time.