I was in the middle of an IM conversation with my sister, when I received a text from my make-up artist. She had come to pick up a color swatch she needed to match for an upcoming photo shoot.
When I returned, I explained the concept behind an upcoming ad I was working on, and what my make-up artist needed.
Her response was simply, “Your job is random.”
My job is random; I specialize in bringing chaos into order.
When I need a specialist, nothing else will substitute. I get the best make-up artist I can find, find the best photographer, and hire the best designer. As long as the budget allows for it, there’s no substitute for a quality specialist.
But, who can pull that together? Who’s job is it to know enough about project management, make-up, photography, and design to order the parts into a whole?
A generalist, that’s who. A generalist will be able to see the finished project, not just a slice of it. They’ll know enough about x, y, and z to pull them all together—and do it well.
So, let the “which is better” debate rage on. The real answer to specialist vs. generalist is: it depends.
Are you the person who excels at one task or brings many parts together?
I’m a Generalist (Big picture strategy/bring cohesion to disparate parts) but I also am a Specialist in Social Communications, Online community building, Engagement marketing.
Seems to me that some people ARE both. Anyone who works within a particular field can have a specialty within that practice but can also have a brain that can order the chaos.
Others, however, may be forced to be both because of their jobs – especially these days because of cutbacks to staff due to the economy – but can’t do either well because the fit isn’t right.
It must be possible to be both a Generalist and then to have a specialty, right?
This is a perennial topic for me, and I’m not sure I’ll ever resolve the debate. As a small town business person, I’m used to piecing together multiple lines of business to survive. But I’m challenged by the idea of focusing, or selecting one thing to be the very best at. Jonathan Fields has been challenging my thinking lately with his posts on building a legacy, vs. being in a cornucopia of chaos.
So true! In fact, I think it is something that everyone suffers from, but really because of a limited paradigm that has been forced upon us.
Who is really a specialist? Truly? Because as people, we are multifaceted by nature. It’s foolish to think that people should really good at only one thing. Unfortunately, with the world of work being so compartmentalized, we are forced to choose a specialty and then commit to it to the exclusion of many other skill areas that we would have just as good of a chance of excelling in.
Sorry, just found that soapbox! But worth thinking about. I think the trick is to know how and when being a specialist and being a generalist is going to be the most beneficial for you and then to leverage that.
Excellent topic… I agree with @AlizaSherman… because o the economy… many of us have had to expand our “job descriptions” and learn to wear yet even more hats than we already were. I think this is not for everyone though. It’s like many artists can sing, many can play music, but few can do both sing and play music at the same time. Also like juggling… some can handle more balls than others.
Ah, what a great post to get us going…
People seem have the perception, especially here lately, that I am a specialist. When introducing me they say Zena “specializes” in social web strategy.
My background is in direct marketing, interactive brand advertising, web project management, a little bit of front-end coding and enterprise-wide strategic planning. Bottom line, I’m a doer who can blue sky with the best of them but I thrive on what can be done with the resources available.
So maybe I’m a generalist that’s being perceived as a specialist…or maybe I’m going through an identity crisis????
I find the topic of specialize vs generalize a very interesting one. I remember when one of my professors told me that I had to choose and I said that I refused to.
There is a balance that I’ve learned over time that exists but I am never sure that I’ve reached it. The broader the topic (ie. social media) the more challenging it is to be a specialist. I truly believe it depends and you have to be prepared for a healthy balance of both.
My comments specific to social media can be found here and the link above. http://bit.ly/afxHAa
What you bring up, Aliza, has always been a source of joy and frustration for me.
Coming up the ladder, those hiring wanted someone who was a specialist in a particular type of writing or producing – not recognizing that the process was mostly the same even though the output or product or production was different by length, genre or attitude. That was the frustration, however, it did make me a better “specialist” in certain areas and that kept me employed in advertising & promotion writing for many many years.
In time, as my resume grew, I was able to expand my reach (with forward thinking employers) to other areas of production and was able to get other jobs not just in the ad/promo field and became more of a generalist, someone who could oversee a project from soup to nuts, and as someone who has done many of the specialist jobs as well. That grew my organizational skills and ability to work as a team and that too was a joy.
As far as what I prefer, both have their place. I am the type of worker who enjoys both the solititude of creating one aspect of a production as well as the comraderie of being part of a group coming together for a communal effort.
If I had my preference, today, I would call my self a generalist with sub-specialties in certain areas.
I admire people who have a specialty and can really focus on knowing more and more about less and less. It isn’t me. I am a boundary spanner. I want to know more and more about more and more…and then feel into how it all relates and overlaps. Don’t call me an expert. Call me a translator, a weaver, a synthesizer, but don’t call me an expert. The dance as a weaver comes down to finding a fit, because the world keeps asking for squares to fit into square holes. Nodes and not connections. Yet the world functions through intersections, relationships, and overlaps. Good for you Andrew. Dance in the weaving of other people who are specialists. Brilliance emanates there.
@aliza I very much believe that you need a speciality within your general expertise. Going from broad to narrow my foci would be: creative direction»design»design for speakers/authors
If we didn’t at least have some focus, we’d be unbrandable—an enormous problem in the new SM world.
@Jean – agreed—the idea of pinning myself down into one speciality is suffocating. I’m glad there are people who can. I’m just not one of them.
Zena, I think that the perception of “specialization” gives other people comfort so if that is something they need, then maybe it is okay as long as we aren’t misrepresenting our skills.
You’ve got a cornucopia (I love finding ways to use that word) of skills as do many of us. If others need to “peg” us or pin us down into something more narrow I think it is okay – as long as it doesn’t diminish what we bring to the table.
@Aliza,
I guess I resonate with the topic of being a specialist in some areas — and a generalist in others.
When it comes to several arenas within which I’ve played (CRM, Integrated Marketing, Operations, Business Strategy, Content Management) I might be considered a generalist. That is, I’ve had exposure to enough things to understand all the moving parts well and know when to extend outside of myself to get narrower (read: almost always more junior OR someone highly technical) focus to make the project a success.
However, within the digital media arena – I am truly a specialist. That casts a wider net than it used to…. as technology advancement, adoption and channel proliferation, this arena is growingly complex. I find that it’s impossible to keep up at a granular level with all the areas of expansion… so in certain areas of digital media, I may choose to use more GRANULAR SME’s (e.g. expert in video – and I have a degree in TV/film production) to ensure the best use of my time.
But I have to ask this: Isn’t that a normal part of being very senior in one’s field?
While for the most part, I can execute, and often do …. I find my time is often better spent managiung at a higher level and hiring people to handle detailed execution (depending on the project). I often face the hard fact taht I have to bring in someone CHEAPER to execute the work… because the project financials can’t afford that much of my time.
However, as an excellence junkie, I can’t – and won’t – take myself out of the execution camp… I find it keeps me SHARP… on my toes, and constantly learning. That is keeping in step with the fact that I love my work – I love this arena, and mostly — I love to create experiences for customers (and clients) that are outstanding… so I take a high level of ownership.
So – am I at risk of seeming unfocused? Perhaps to people who don’t understand why it’s necessary in this field to be pretty darned good at a LOT of different things…
However, I’m never sorry for it — because I’m not lying about my capabilities and my clients are usually more than happy to find a consultant that is agile, versatile and active in her field.