I think some level of this is ok, just as long as one is clear about the difference between a generalization and a stereotype. IE, "Geeks tend to want X" isn't necessarily bad, but "Geeks always want X" is probably bad.
I mean, it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession. The problem begins when you start treating these ideas as rigid rules: "Geeks know nothing about the business side of things. They need us managers to tell them how to build a good product."
"it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession"
Absolutely. There are certainly some commonalities among groups of people -- especially among groups of people who self-select into the same profession or skill set. And, as a geek, I'll be the first to admit that a lot of the stereotypes about people like me are at least grounded in some observable shade of reality.
But underneath my geek layer, I've also got a personality layer. And a motivations layer. And a background layer. Etc. I may share the same external, readily observable, surface-level traits as many of my peers. But that doesn't mean my peers and I are the same people.
Are there general principles that apply to managing geeks? Yes. Are there things that geeks, as a set, will pick up on or respond to more readily than other sets of people? Yes. But a good manager shouldn't stop there.
I mean, it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession. The problem begins when you start treating these ideas as rigid rules: "Geeks know nothing about the business side of things. They need us managers to tell them how to build a good product."