Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

abhijitbhaduri.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 159 posts

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#21

Post by miemo23 »

bhattisatish wrote: post #4

I am not sure I buy the authors argument. I am not even sure if I am clear about how the author defines a generalist and specialist!! The way the world knowledge is evolving, there is a blurring of what we call specialist and generalist. For e.g. If you are a medical researcher, then knowledge of biology, biochemistry, software development (simulation anyone) and maths is required. Now is this specialisation or being…

If there are many generalists in a given space, doesn't that make them specialists? And you'd just be more-specialised? Can you think of an example of when this might have occurred?

Seems by that line of thinking today's specialists are tomorrow's generalists, even if they do nothing differently.

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#23

Post by cjblomqvist »

irjustin wrote: post #9
planet-and-halo wrote: post #2

The best thing I ever read on this topic came from biology. In "The Diversity of Life," E.O. Wilson describes how specialist species thrive in stable environments. The stability allows them to evolve "deeply" into a niche and outcompete any species less specialized for that same niche. So if I'm really great at plucking fruit from tall trees, and you suck at it, I win. In unstable environments, however—say all of tho…

I've had a going theory on this - that it's a yoyo between generalization and specialization. A particular topic starts with generalists but as time progresses and stability (i.e. a path worth pursuing) becomes apparent, specialization is needed to eek out more performance gains. Then after a while, that particular area gets disrupted because there's a fundamental shift in landscape and the cycle repeats because the…

In economic theory this is well known, and related to S-curves. First innovation (requires integration, which requires generalists/people spanning disciplines), then specialization and price war / commoditization

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#24

Post by wrnr »

jiriknesl wrote: post #15

I doubt, there's such a thing as a real generalist, that knows SW development, negotiation, history of Italy, international politics, engine design, ... to the same level of depth. When we speak about successful generalists, they are still quite specialized. They might know some data analysis (maybe limited by Excel and VB macros), some teamwork skills, some marketing/sales/product ownership knowledge, some competiti…

Maybe it's more about adapting quickly to a new situation

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#25

Post by enriquto »

threatofrain wrote: post #5
planet-and-halo wrote: post #2

The best thing I ever read on this topic came from biology. In "The Diversity of Life," E.O. Wilson describes how specialist species thrive in stable environments. The stability allows them to evolve "deeply" into a niche and outcompete any species less specialized for that same niche. So if I'm really great at plucking fruit from tall trees, and you suck at it, I win. In unstable environments, however—say all of tho…

Just a restatement of K vs r theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory

it doesn't seem so... can't either selection strategies be used independently by specialists and generalists?

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#26

Post by AYBABTME »

eyelidlessness wrote: post #11
irjustin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a going theory on this - that it's a yoyo between generalization and specialization. A particular topic starts with generalists but as time progresses and stability (i.e. a path worth pursuing) becomes apparent, specialization is needed to eek out more performance gains. Then after a while, that particular area gets disrupted because there's a fundamental shift in landscape and the cycle repeats because the…

Pardon me for a bad (and generalist) habit. I’m not correcting your spelling for any reason other than to give you a free Scrabble tip: it’s eke. And yep, you’re spot on.

I had no idea, good to know!

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#27

Post by kmonsen »

Swizec wrote: post #8
Snoozle wrote: post #3

I always feel like these types of posts are too kind to generalists. Maybe that's just because I am one and I am falling for the greener grass. It's true I've done well in my career, but I've never felt particularly competent. I can do a half assed job as a manager, developer, product owner, and salesman, but I am not any better at those tasks than someone who specializes in doing those things. I could argue that I h…

The grass is greener where you water it.

Never heard this before, and I love it!

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#28

Post by noodle »

bhattisatish wrote: post #4

I am not sure I buy the authors argument. I am not even sure if I am clear about how the author defines a generalist and specialist!! The way the world knowledge is evolving, there is a blurring of what we call specialist and generalist. For e.g. If you are a medical researcher, then knowledge of biology, biochemistry, software development (simulation anyone) and maths is required. Now is this specialisation or being…

> And which is better? It all depends on context!

I long considered myself a generalist because I typically work with early stage startups to get them going and growing, and that requires being competent at many things, wearing many hats. I now position myself as a specialist at growing early stage startups, because that wide of a skillset is exactly what you need to be successful in that context.

In many cases, its about how you frame it.

Re: Generalists vs specialists – Who has a greater chance of success? (2019)

#30

Post by anthropodie »

irjustin wrote: post #9
planet-and-halo wrote: post #2

The best thing I ever read on this topic came from biology. In "The Diversity of Life," E.O. Wilson describes how specialist species thrive in stable environments. The stability allows them to evolve "deeply" into a niche and outcompete any species less specialized for that same niche. So if I'm really great at plucking fruit from tall trees, and you suck at it, I win. In unstable environments, however—say all of tho…

I've had a going theory on this - that it's a yoyo between generalization and specialization. A particular topic starts with generalists but as time progresses and stability (i.e. a path worth pursuing) becomes apparent, specialization is needed to eek out more performance gains. Then after a while, that particular area gets disrupted because there's a fundamental shift in landscape and the cycle repeats because the…

True. I think every team needs both generalists and specialists to complement each others qualities. For example, my manager is kinda specialists and he is great at solving problems in his domains. But then I put my generalist ideas and solution is sometimes way simpler than what a specialists was trying. The reverse is also true. So a balance in team is needed.
Post reply on HN