I doubt I will ever put the word “expert” in my title. I don’t think I’ll have earned it.
Like most people in my generation, I have a broad background. I played tons of sports, studied all kinds of subjects, and participated in a large variety of clubs and extracurriculars. When I went to college, I went to a liberal arts school so I could get a taste of everything. I really didn’t want to specialize, and sometimes felt like Van Wilder saying, “I majored in that once.” We trust the broadness.
I have transitioned through four positions in my company in just as many years, practically making my own rotational program. Even this fall, I’m heading off to get my MBA. The most exciting part? Getting to learn a little of everything.
Have we noticed a pattern?
After all that broadness, I’m pretty good at a number of things: I danced for about 15 years, painted for 14, sung for 8, learned French for 5, rowed for 4, and have been blogging for almost 2. Those are the biggie commitments. I’ve done a large number of other things, but they’ve rarely made it past a year. Do I really need to be an expert in just one thing?
Penelope Trunk has told me I need to commit to something. I open myself up to too many possibilities.
But I’m I just hardwired that way?
If anyone has applied to college, you know that the guidance counselors kept hammering home the message, “They want well-rounded students.” Your entire academic career leading up to college was intentionally broad. Since then, I haven’t shaken the need to experience everything. I don’t want to specialize because I’m afraid I’d be missing something.
In my experience at my job, every lesson I learned or project I managed from each role before has made me better at the next position. It’s all compounded experience. I proactively collect other experiences from people to make sure I’m getting the broadest foundation for my work. Do I use all of that? I don’t know. Is it time consuming? Sure.
It’s how I am.
Don’t worry, though. I’ve had my coming to God moment of realizing I can’t possibly learn (then hope to retain) everything. I understand knowing a little about a lot means I might have to make up for lack of specialty somewhere else. I think I have an idea where though…
I want to be an amazing leader, and you can do that as a generalist.
What are your thoughts on generalists vs. specialists? Is it nature or nurture? Do we need to get more expertise?
Photo credit.
Since you once believed it was great to be well-rounded and now see employers’ desire for people experienced in one field, do you feel as if you’ve been prepping yourself for life the wrong way? When I look around and see how the business world really is — and where it seems to be headed — that’s often how I feel. My resume is so mix-matched that if I were unemployed tomorrow, I’d have no idea where to begin searching (and I’ve already been in that situation once; it sucks).
As far as the leader thing, I’m torn on that. I do believe that leadership is a universal skill — anyone can learn it, and it shouldn’t matter what your profession is. But at the same time, I put more trust in people who are experts at my task.
.-= Jake LaCaze´s last blog ..Don’t Overlook the Details =-.
Jake, it’s funny because the change from generalists to specialists back to generalists happened over the four years I’ve been at my own company. We might be going back to specialists again. I think you’re going to find you always need a mix of both, but it’s how you can work with each other that’s important. For example: I worked with some government departments that found their specialists had zero people skills and made awful managers. They we successful, however, in finding leaders who many not have been the specialist, but they could build the bridge for understanding. That went a long way. So I guess I’m addressing both your points. Thanks for the comment!
Hi Emily,
Great post! I completely share your feelings regarding specializing. It’s something that I have struggled with since entering the “real world” and I’m no closer to finding peace. There are definitely pluses to having an expertise, but that concept always raises new questions in my mind:
– Do I actively seek out an expertise?
– Does it simply happen based on where my jobs fall in to place?
– Does this limit me from other experiences that may be beneficial to my career?
As you can tell, I have no clue what the answer is regarding this topic. However, I’m happy to learn that I’m not the only one who is questioning the idea.
Hi Kristin, those questions go through my mind all the time. Clearly the “missing out” part is huge in my thought process. It’s not just missing out, but feeling like I’m going to be out of touch if I think too narrowly. My experience at my company is that at the leadership level, the more you can see all the perspectives, the more success you’ll have internally. Externally, maybe clients want more specialists. I think everything will continue to change, so I guess I just want to be able to flex.
I think you should be a generalist in your professional life and a specialist in your personal hobbies/interests.
I’m in communications and have tried out every element through various jobs – media relations, graphic design, public outreach, editing, writing, events, web, you name it. Because of this, I think it makes me a very good manager, or at least team leader (which might be a whole other issue – I always want to lead!). I have knowledge of each specialty, so I can communicate with the IT person, the designer, the writer, etc. on the team. But I also can do all of it, if needed. I think it keeps doors open and my interest engaged.
But personally, I tried out all different kinds of sports and arts when I was a kid and decided that ballet was my passion. I concentrated on it and got to soloist level with a company. I am horrible at modern, hip hop, jazz and tap, but I excelled at ballet and kept with it.
Just my two cents 🙂 Great questions and great post!
.-= Niki Pocock´s last blog ..When Relationships Are Beyond Repair – Do You Just Forget? =-.
Niki, you demonstrated why professionally, I think a leader with a generalist perspective can be successful. That’s why I love to learn things from teams. I may not be able to recall how each button push turns out product A, but knowing the steps and time required makes it so much easier to plan. And then the person who does the button pushing ends up wanting to work with me because I’ve taken the time to understand the job.
I like the idea of specializing in your hobbies. Maybe that’s going to be painting for me. Thanks for the inspiration!
I think that maybe the generalist/specialist debate doesn’t matter so much anymore. We know and agree that the world is becoming more interconnected, and divisions are disappearing/blending in work life, scholarship, and personal hobbies. Mixed Martial Arts masquerading as WWF for instance. 😉
In my own personal experience, I have followed my interests wherever they lead. Right now that means academic advising, librarian school, emerging technologies and weight lifting. Diverse, yes, but still all capturing my attention. Perhaps the best suggestion to the debate is excel at what is in front of you, and keep yourself invested in what you care about, which will most likely change and adapt as you grow.
Ever heard the “jack of all trades…” quote that seems to be thrown around when this discussion comes up? Well, FYI, the whole thing goes –
Jack of all trades, master of none.
Though ofttimes better than master of one.
Boo ya!
Micah, I love this: “Perhaps the best suggestion to the debate is excel at what is in front of you, and keep yourself invested in what you care about, which will most likely change and adapt as you grow.”
It makes me think of when someone thinks a particular job is “below” their level: you can choose to bitch and do the job poorly, or you can rock it and show them you’re made of greater stuff. That is a bit of a digression, but I’m sure you know what I mean. Thanks!
I think it’s both: we each attached to different things from different points in our lives. So it’s natural to attach or not attach to certain things. However I do think that depending on how you were raised you maybe more likely to attached to certain things: think of the baseball fan that was taken to the park as a child by their Dad or the car nut who would mess around with them as a child. I think what you were exposed to plays a big part in what you identify with when you get older.
.-= Dmbosstone´s last blog ..How Blockbuster Became The Dinosaur Of The Movie Rental Business =-.
Howdy Patrick, the link of exposure to later interest is very neat. It’s probably where you might get aversion, too. We all know our experiences play a lot into our choices.
I think you’re probably a lot like me in that your expertise isn’t a specific topic like “dancing” or “business” but more soft skills like people skills and networking and things that can transfer through jobs. Personally, I wouldn’t have it any other way. Always enjoy the debate about it though…
.-= Rebecca´s last blog ..Re-Thinking Workaholism =-.
Rebecca, you nailed it! You’re right, perhaps my skill in dancing isn’t the actual steps, but understanding how choreography is all about orchestrating multiple parts in order to pull together an entire piece…something that project managers do. Totally on target…
I. Feel. Exactly. The. Same. Way
The world is too big to specialize in one or two things: this has always been my perspective.
But think it’s hard if one doesn’t specialize to a certain degree. One needs to get to the point of competence before one can really do a job well enough for anyone else to care.
This post will be part of my “Wish I Wrote That” blog series, BTW. You read my mind.
Thanks for adding this to your “Wish” series Cameron! I do agree, you should become proficient at certain things (no one will take you seriously if you can’t accomplish basics of a job or know background of a field). Perhaps there’s a line: proficiency before expertise.
You know, I’ve recently become very interested in polymaths, who are quite celebrated in our culture. And I realized that growing up, that’s always what I wanted to be: a linguist, an actress, a writer, a scientist. I think the real trick is knowing how deep to go in each area. It probably isn’t the same in each, depending on the path you want to take. Even in science, I realized I didn’t want to specialize too much, so I followed the science management track, which has been perfect for me, because it exposes me to a wide range of scientific fields.
So I don’t think the question is whether or not you need to specialize. I’d argure you don’t. You just need to know how deep to go into each area you enjoy to accomplish your goals.
Great post!
Jen
Jen: Knowing how deep to go is a great way to put it. It’s like in hobbies when you dabble a bit. If you approach learning that way, I’m sure you’ll actually be more successful at retaining information, as well. Thanks!
Great conversation here! Been thinking about this a lot lately, as my role is evolving within the org. I’m in marketing/communications, but am really a specialist in several areas – technology, design, website management, social media and print procurement. I find myself increasingly spending more and more time in meetings brainstorming and planning longer-range strategies – which is awesome for my career, but difficult to then get back to being an “operator” churning out the work. I do think that I’ll be moving up into a more strategic management role soon, which will push me more into the generalist camp as others manage the actual work. I know that my experience as a specialist will make me a more effective leader when I do get there.
.-= Jenn Sutherland´s last blog ..Upper West Side Vegan Gluten Free Brownies =-.
Howdy Jenn! I like the use of “operator” for getting things done. It makes a huge difference if you can straddle the line between operations and strategy. What I think the big risk with being a generalist if you move up in an organization is forgetting about the operational side. If you don’t actually remember or learn the operational piece, you can’t plan accurately. If more leaders remembered their paper-pushing days when planning, things might go more smoothly. Thanks!
I think specializing and generalizing are actually two different interfaces, designed to accomplish different things for different people, as opposed to being different degrees on the same spectrum. Ergo, I don’t think one can really debate if it’s “more productive to be a generalist or a specialist” anymore than one can argue if it’s more productive to be an auto-mechanic or a carpenter. Apples and oranges.
Specializing is perfect for people who feel honed in to something very specific for quite a while. If someone has been fascinated by web-design starting in childhood and up through college, specializing in web-design makes sense. The programming industry also values specialization highly.
But then there are others, like yourself, (or myself, when it comes to that) who feel that wherever our personalities end up being in life, a broader knowledge base will be crucial. (I for example would never end up in programing or research, but I have been in the arts, and hope to expand my career even further into same.)
Any job can use both, and I think it’s sad but true that the American business model embraces specialty over breadth of knowledge these days. But fortunately, what I call Business with a capital “B” is not the only area that employs people. There’s the public sector, non-profits, the arts, certain types of human relations. And of course self-employment. And the list goes on.
In the specializing and generalizing, (though I really wish there were different term…that makes us less intelligent) are not opposing ends of the same spectrum. They are on different plains entirely. And though the world seems ready made for specialists, just as it does for extroverts, there is a valuable place for the generalists if we look hard enough, just as it is for the introverts.
.-= Ty Unglebower´s last blog .."Excellent" in Spite of Myself. =-.
Hey Ty, your description of different planes makes me want you to break out a white board and draw it out for me. I do think I get what you’re talking about. I know it’s hard even with word choice: expert vs. specialist, expertise vs. proficiency. Maybe what it all boils down to is that I need to check out my SAT words again…
I was told that I had to specialize at various points in my life. One of those times was grad school in library science. Sorry, folks, I’m a born generalist. I’m a jack of all trades, born of a long line of jacks of all trades. At the age of 55, I am incapable of specializing and I can tell you that all those folks who said I had to specialize were wrong.
Jude, thanks so much for sharing your own experience with specializing. It’s wonderful to hear how being sure of who you are allows for you to make decisions about moving forward in life. We all learn lessons as we go, and I appreciate you sharing your own knowledge with us. Thanks!
Hi Emily,
I’m a little late in my response to this post, I just found it today. I think you’re correct about generalism being driven in schools and universities. One thing I’ve learned is that to be an expert in a particular field, you must have an exceptionally broad knowledge of many other fields. Most of the time it’s unrealistic to think that an expert has knowledge and experience only within the one area.
Thanks for the post, I found it interesting & have subscribed to your blog.
Daniel
Daniel, thanks for finding this and leaving a comment. I always love seeing what people find. I’m really glad you got me thinking about my own experience in graduate school. I do get to specialize a bit, but my first year has a lot of broad knowledge. As someone who came from Marketing (and will concentrate in it here at school), I am a hub for communications between all departments, stakeholders, and customers. I have to know a little of everything.
Thanks for subscribing!
[…] years of wearing all the hats, it turned out I could specialize in something. But only because I appreciate the greater context of digital […]