Ask HN: Is it OK to not have a “thing”?

There was a post or comment I read recently that mentioned different levels of developers and how/why they're hired. It came down to sometimes devs are hired for what they know or alternatively for what they can learn and that those two generally break down into intermediate and senior devs.

The point isn't that you have a current 'thing'. The point is that you went deep into some of these past things as deep as necessary and should be able to tell the story of how that went. This is one of the parts I always cover when interviewing for senior devs: tell me in your own words of a time you went deep into a problem and came out with a solution. If they can tell a coherent technically detailed story then they had first-hand knowledge of the issues and how the solution was found and applied.

Edit: A different perspective is that no company of considerable size needs a generalist dabbler, they have specialists in relevant areas. A person like that could be versatile as they could be part of any team or project but isn't indispensable. Probably better to work at smaller companies where wearing many hats is a definite plus.

You should read the book Range by David Epstein. He talks about how generalists can make an impact due to bringing solutions from multiple fields together, often in ways that specialists can't see due to being in the field too long (they lack the "beginner's mind") or just don't have such a breadth of experiences. Here's a HN discussion about the book: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20094242

The bigger thing is the convince employers of this fact, however, which most people won't understand to be true. Instead, therefore, of making just one big resume with all of your experiences, make resumes for disparate fields: full stack resume will only contain full stack experience; same for data science, devops, and so on. This will make you seem like a specialist. Don't lie but don't downplay your experience as well.

It’s not about what you can do or what your skills actually are... but how you market those skills.

A made up example: I used to do Windows programming, progressed to websites and the back ends to support them, learned SQL and DB optimization, sprinkle some 3D programming in there.

Generalist? Nope. UI expert with 20 years of developing UIs across multiple platforms. Additionally, I spent time learning some of the back end like services and SQL so I can better understand the interface between the UI and the back end developers.

What do you want to do now? Answer that and you will get your next title.

I think as a counterpoint I’d offer that you don’t need to find a common thread. Breadth is a value in its own right. Demonstrating that you have such a wide base of experience shows that you can adapt to new challenges, and reduces the applicability of any lack of direct prior experience. Finding a common thread may help you refine your own ambitions, and that’s great. But you don’t need to sell a specialist narrative to explain your generalist background. Embrace it! A lot of roles value it over specialization!

All of that said, regardless of what larger orgs may say about preferring candidates who can be effective across the org, I think you’ll find that generalists are more valued in smaller teams/startups/etc. And if that’s your cup of tea, go for it! There’s a ton of business [co]founders looking for someone with a broad skillset.