Top Reasons Why Being A Multi-Specialist Pays.
In this world of specialists is the Renaissance Man dead? Is Da Vinci – painter, sculptor, architect, musician, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist and writer still relevant in the modern world? Generalists have often claimed him for their own especially in battles with specialists but I do not think Da Vinci was a generalist or even a specialist. He was multi-talented and definitely a multi-specialist.
Specialists have been defined as people who have in-depth knowledge and expertise in one area or discipline. Whereas generalists are those who have basic knowledge in a wide number of disciplines without the depth and expertise of the specialist. Promoters of specialization still insist that since specialists concentrate on only one discipline they are more knowledgeable and experienced and the generalists claim that they are the masters of integration and will always be the ones leading the pack.
So who wins this battle between generalists and specialists? In my opinion, neither suffices to be successful in today’s scenario. While specialization is… Read More
creatingmultitalentedmanagers 
Dear Shweta ,
Must admit … Its a very well written article … Keep it going … Engage with all the Multi Taskers & the Specialists …
As I see Multi taskers are multi talented and hence will be always be a minority .
But for any organisation to be successful the 80 / 20 Principle will apply ..20 % Multi Taskers and 80 % Specialists ..
The multi taskers guide the Company and Specialists execute the plan .. Exactly how a Team Sport Unit wins on the playing field
And I agree that the Specialts should be rightly skilled to Multi Task and thus become able Managers
Look forward to more from your desk …
Best ,
Nitin
Dear Nitin,
Thank you for your interest and kind comments. Just thought I’d point out that when I speak of multispecialists, I differ from multitaskers completely. Multi-specialists bring together the advantages of specialists and the generalists or multi-taskers, as you call them.
They will fulfill the role of specialists and will also be re-deploable and flexible since they will be multi-specialists with depth in more than one field instead of specialists (who have knowledge of only one area) and generalists or multitaskers, as you call them, (who don’t have the depth of the specialist) . We need to build people who can execute as well as guide 🙂
Yes, I totally agree with you that this is a minority today but I feel that is also in part because we, as a society, have been focussing too much on specialization where we have depth in only one field or believing that being a generalist is the only other option. We are not using the human being’s complete potential which allows him/her to achieve expertise in multiple fields if he works on it.
Like the allrounder in cricket, an excellent batsman, excellent bowler and even fielder is possible if the sportsman works hard in that direction instead of just being happy with the brand of only batsman or bowler.
I am hoping I can inspire more people to be multi-specialists than just settle for one field.
Shweta
Dear Shweta (given that Dearing people seems to be the flavor of comments here, I thought I might as well make a lame attempt to keep this formal)
I like your first post. and hope many more come up too.
Even though, I’m just starting out, but post reading your post, I have just one question (more from a learning rather than questioning questioning perspective), does life give us enough of that perpetually scarce resource: Time?
Does an average worker have enough time to build a specific competency in-depth and then also seek out even more wisdom for herself by looking for more width? Also, is there enough time available to first nurture her own skill set and then, as a leader, go about developing other people’s capabilities as possible multi-specialists?
Sincerely (Okay, I am rarely sincere, even though most of my teachers believe otherwise. Quite natural, given that I have both studied Cinema, as well as been a part of a 10 day Theater workshop at college. But why I am I taking my own case?)
Pratyush
Thanks for your interest, Pratyush.
Yes, I do think that life gives us enough time to specialise in more than one area in-depth and spend time on other things too. I will definitely include a blog on Time Management for you in my upcoming blogs.
How much you get done is a function of time, energy, inclination and motivation so time is not the only variable at play.
P.S. I’m a certified Film-maker myself but am mostly pretty sincere 🙂
Hi
Shweta, before I begin, a well written piece.
Now coming back to the topic, I really dont think there is a all or none kind of an answer to this. I am sure Da Vinci would stand out, if we had tons of similar multi-talented (introducing a new “multi”) individuals. We call an individual a Specialist, since he or she specializes in one (or maybe couple) of areas. That individual fulfills a need and caters to a demand.While a Generalist, has skills in multiple areas. Since we all live in shades of grey, we cannot compartmentalise individuals to either state, as people have varying depth of skills. Better in areas of specialisation, and not so good in others. We have good and poor standards in both streams.
Coming down to the corporate arena, I would agree with Nitin’s thoughts on specialists execute to plan, while generalists take on more managerial or adminstrative tasks. Some specialists evolve to generalists while other continue to specialise, while some generalists continue to remain the way they are. Different organisations have varying requirements of both.
Hi Anshu,
Thank you for your time and interest
I totally agree with you, I don’t think there is ever a simple black or white answer to anything in life!! Everybody has a space where they fit in best. I am glad I could provoke some thoughts in your mind. Viewpoints are always welcome 🙂