Just a literal shower thought. Share your thoughts about my thought.
Do you really think they’ll replace someone who knows how to do five things with five specialists?
My point is (almost) exactly the opposite: I’d argue that any of those non-specialists can be replaced at any time with other non-specialists (best case scenario), or with bootlickers, nutjobs and yay-sayers (worst case scenario). In other words, you shouldn’t aspire to be the one your boss delegates every shitty piece of ‘work’ he can think of, rather, to be THE one everyone else in the company has to wait for if they want X or Y done.
It’s also a perfect way to replace anyone at work.
it (need) inversely scales with the size of the company.
you need jack-of-all-trades when youre starting out, proof of concept type stuff or your business is just niche and tiny. you sometimes cant just immediately pay for every role.
as the company grows you replace each hat worn by that one individual with a laser focused employee who can do it better.
eventually, the jack is out of hats.
My thought would be the opposite.
If you need to scale down, you do not look at the one employee who knows the most about your company.
If you scale up, you need the guy/girl who knows the most about the departments, because you need structure. Otherwise all the specialists only have eyes for their own field.
I’ve seen more “general employees” being promoted than “specialised employees”.
Depends on your line of work, I guess. I’m a self-employed handyman - a jack of all trades, master of none, so to speak. I can really only be replaced by someone even more of a generalist than I am. I often get hired for jobs that would otherwise take two to four specialists, but with me, you don’t need to call anyone else.
Good point, thanks for the insights
…though I’d like to add that, in the original post, ‘at work’ == ‘at someone else’s company’
I hear handymen have a terrible time keeping a job down.
Not exactly true for the IT field. It’s almost a requirement there
That’s … THE one argument that (mostly) vindicates my theory. It is a friggin’ ‘requirement’ because it makes you replaceable/disposable. If you think otherwise, I’m legit interested on why you think companies have your, not their, best interests in mind.
I’m not really sure I’m picking up the train of thought you’re laying out here. If a company’s IT department mostly relies on one guy doing everything, how does that make them replaceable or disposable?
It is tough, specialist are useful/have value until the thing they are the specialist of goes away.
On the other hand being a jack of all trades is how to market yourself internally and externally to show your value.
