<story><title>I Got Fired Last Week. That’s a Good Thing. Here’s Why</title><url>http://alexgivesup.com/2013/12/23/i-got-fired-last-week-thats-a-good-thing-heres-why/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>overgard</author><text>So this is going to sound mean when I don&amp;#x27;t mean for it too, but I sort of doubt the reality of being fired for being a generalist. I just don&amp;#x27;t buy it. I totally believe that&amp;#x27;s what they &amp;#x2F;told&amp;#x2F; him, I just don&amp;#x27;t think it&amp;#x27;s the actual truth.&lt;p&gt;So far I&amp;#x27;ve made a career out of being a generalist. In my experience, companies of any size love having people like that. Specialists are valuable of course, but most of the time managers end up with a broad spectrum of problems and if they can throw problems to you without wondering if you can handle it, and feel confident it&amp;#x27;s going to get done, they probably don&amp;#x27;t care that you&amp;#x27;re only 70% as efficient as the specialist.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>neltnerb</author><text>I think there&amp;#x27;s an intermediate size where being a generalist is bad. I&amp;#x27;m a generalist, and I experienced a similar situation -- I was extremely useful at the beginning because I could do a fair job of the responsibilities of three or four specialists, but after a year and a half, there were three or four specialists who could collectively do a far better job than me. The amount of tasks which made sense for me to take on dwindled, and I wasn&amp;#x27;t really needed anymore. I don&amp;#x27;t regret it or hold a grudge, it was my intent to help build a team that was better than me alone, and I succeeded in that professional goal. I trained most of them to be able to do my job, and am proud of that accomplishment. But I suspect that once the company is at 100 people instead of 20, the budget and flexibility of positions will be such to allow generalists to be more practical again.&lt;p&gt;Does that make sense? I think for a 10 person team, generalists are very useful, and for a 1000 person team, generalists can be tolerated and be very versatile members who can quickly switch between roles. But I think there is an intermediate point where the company goals are still very narrow but the team is big enough that generalists are only useful in a high level management role.</text></comment>
<story><title>I Got Fired Last Week. That’s a Good Thing. Here’s Why</title><url>http://alexgivesup.com/2013/12/23/i-got-fired-last-week-thats-a-good-thing-heres-why/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>overgard</author><text>So this is going to sound mean when I don&amp;#x27;t mean for it too, but I sort of doubt the reality of being fired for being a generalist. I just don&amp;#x27;t buy it. I totally believe that&amp;#x27;s what they &amp;#x2F;told&amp;#x2F; him, I just don&amp;#x27;t think it&amp;#x27;s the actual truth.&lt;p&gt;So far I&amp;#x27;ve made a career out of being a generalist. In my experience, companies of any size love having people like that. Specialists are valuable of course, but most of the time managers end up with a broad spectrum of problems and if they can throw problems to you without wondering if you can handle it, and feel confident it&amp;#x27;s going to get done, they probably don&amp;#x27;t care that you&amp;#x27;re only 70% as efficient as the specialist.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jf22</author><text>I agree with you.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve seen generalists with a culture and personality fit be transitioned into highly valued specialists with accessory skill sets that greatly benefited the organization.&lt;p&gt;Either somebody up top didn&amp;#x27;t think this transition could happen by ignorance or by potential difficulty or there was a culture or personality mismatch.</text></comment>