A Generalist is good at many tasks, a Specialist only good at one. Demand for the output at each task fluctuates so it is good to have someone who can perform many tasks so “supply can match demand”. So, the Generalist is better for the firm than the Specialist.
But the Generalist’s life is hard – she is taking on a lot of risk. What will she be working on next? And she is the same rank as the specialist so she gets the same rewards. Better to coast on the tasks she likes least and work hard on one. More predictability and a better idea of what task to get better and better at performing.
So, generalists should disappear in the long run and the firm will just have specialists. Unless they can think of some way to reward generalists.
Advertisements
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 14, 2012 at 9:55 am
Bob Pendleton
Three thoughts:
Society needs more generalists, as specialists are more likely to be trapped by complex systems.
Specialists insist upon job description that limit employment to specialists.
Specialists are easier for the firm to control.
March 14, 2012 at 11:06 am
HBK
“Unless they can think of some way to reward generalists.”
It’s called a “board of directors” ;-).
March 14, 2012 at 10:12 pm
Daniel
Doesn´t the firm just hire specialists and fire them when demand is low? At least that´s what my employer does (just ask the CDO sales desk c.2008-2009)
Therefore the specialists are taking on more risk