Birds and Frogs: Generalists vs. Specialists

The bull case for being a Generalist in a world “ruled” mostly by Specialists.

“Some mathematicians are birds, others are frogs. Birds fly high in the air and survey broad vistas of mathematics out to the far horizon. They delight in concepts that unify our thinking and bring together diverse problems from different parts of the landscape. Frogs live in the mud below and see only the flowers that grow nearby. They delight in the details of particular objects, and they solve problems one at a time…. The world of mathematics is both broad and deep, and we need birds and frogs working together to explore it.”

—Freeman Dyson (from AMS Einstein lecture, published February 2009)

The Rise of Specialization

The modern world of work values specialization more than ever. In this piece, I want to make a case for the generalist skill set.

In my (extended) family of origin, most people have pursued careers (successfully) as specialists – whether in business (working in the same organization / industry for a long-time) or as academics (college professors with sub-specialties) and specialist doctors.

For clarity, when I refer to people as “specialists”, I mean depth of knowledge and experience in a specific domain — academic, medical, legal, technical, business (organization or industry or function), art or craft.

I understand that most qualities / personality traits lie along a continuum.  It is rare for any of us to be always and fully any one thing. For the purposes of relating to the content of this article, decide whether you identify mostly as a generalist or mostly as a specialist.

What about those at the top of an organization – CEO, Director, President, Admiral, or another Leader? Are they generalists with strength in attracting, motivating, and retaining top talent? I believe even these folks have an innate personal style and comfort zone which is often as a specialist. Such as the CEO whose expertise lies in Product, or the Director who adds extra value on the Audit Committee due to her accounting background.

Specialization is Valuable

When we have a job to be done or a problem to solve beyond our abilities, we seek out experts or specialists. Specialists with deep domain knowledge are highly valuable and thus are often compensated handsomely. Google search trend data over 2020 for “specialist” (blue line) compared with “generalist” (red line) showcase our relatively high interest in finding “specialists”.

Classical economic theory on production and trade has taught us the advantage of focusing effort on goods / services where each of us (whether country, company, or individual) have a comparative advantage. The modern economy showcases the power of specialization. Today, businesses can, more easily and inexpensively than ever before, purchase and integrate bespoke, specialized pieces of software and hardware with each other.  If there is a need for people expertise, marketplaces for professional services such as a Upwork, Fiverr and Catalant connect businesses with a range of vetted and skilled experts from across the globe.

Specialization as a Key to Peak Performance and Success

With the publication of Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers in 2008, the idea that greatness in any field requires 10,000 hours of deliberate, focused practice (research done by K. Anders Ericsson) entered the mainstream.

There are many examples of individuals reaching the pinnacle in their respective fields through specialization at an early age accompanied by deliberate, focused practice. Reaching a pinnacle is many fields is accompanied by two things most people value – fame (status) and fortune (wealth).

We have read about the Polgar sisters focusing on chess from early childhood (two of whom became chess grandmasters), saw videos of Tiger Woods playing golf at age 2, heard about the extent of the practice by the Beatles, and about Steve Martin honing his craft through repetitive performance from a young age and continuously trying out new jokes and routines at small venues.

As the pace of innovation has quickened and the breadth of knowledge continues to expand, the case for being a specialist becomes ever more compelling.

The Appeal of Specialization

The last few decades have seen an increasing focus on specialization in our educational system, starting from an early age, particularly in the STEM fields. Some reasons for this trend.

1.       Make More Money – The conventional wisdom is that specialists make more money. We accept as fair specialist doctors charging more than primary care physicians. Two specialties in the business world – securities trading in finance and specialty computer programming – are presented as proof of this hypothesis of specialization leading to increased wealth. Both these fields require relatively more specialist knowledge and training. They have created a huge amount of wealth for the top performers in these areas.

2.       Stand-Out – In a highly competitive job market, with increasing numbers of well-paying jobs doable from anywhere, specialization allows individuals to stand-out more easily against their competition.

3.       Easier to Remain an Expert – The ongoing learning curve, though steep in any field, is less taxing when a person chooses to specialize in a particularly narrow field.

4.       Virtuous Cycle – Specialists in any field find it easier to get noticed and build networks. These connections are self-perpetuating in a virtuous cycle.

5.       More Likely to Get Funded as a Founder by VCs – Venture investors, especially those investing at the earliest stages, are actively seeking out founders who have deep domain knowledge dealing with a specific problem (and have a new or better approach to solving it).

6.       Sensible to Specialize Early in Life if You Know Your Passion – Very few of us find a passion early in life that will remain our calling for our whole life. Some academics (including my mother) fit the mold of someone pulled into a field where the work is a passion or a mission. For such folks, specialization from an early age makes a lot of sense.

Are Generalists doomed to be “Jack of all trades and Master of None”?

By contrast to most of my family, I would describe myself as a generalist. My college education included courses in political science, foreign languages, and literature. I got through business school (thank you Stanford GSB for your flexibility) without taking any accounting or finance classes. Instead, I focused instead on topics that interested me more including operations, entrepreneurship, strategy, and organizational behavior.

As a generalist, I sometimes describe myself self-deprecatingly as a “Jack of [many] trades, Master of none.” I recently learned that the saying was first used in 1785 during the age of guilds when a Jack was an apprentice, and a Master the expert craftsman. The saying was later modified to the more favorable: “Jack of all trades, master of none. Oftentimes better than a master of one.”

The Case for Generalists

Words that one might substitute for generalist with more positive connotations include “Renaissance man” (Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin being prime examples) and “polymath”, which can be loosely defined as a “person of varied learning”.

1.       More Valuable in Small Organizations – My experience suggests that start-ups which scale efficiently rely upon strong generalist talent in their business functions (go-to-market, operations, finance, people etc.). There is so much varied work to be done in start-ups and not enough capital to justify having specialists for each type of work. So strong generalists add a huge amount of value in these situations, particularly in the early stage of getting from “0 to 1.”

2.       Greater Richness to the Work – Many people find variety in their work enhances their job satisfaction. Generalists naturally encounter more variety. For generalists that variety is the spice of life.

3.       Better at Defining Complex, “System-Level” Problems – A great visualization shows how generalists think horizontally and specialists vertically. I find a slightly different metaphor more useful. Generalists tend to ask lots of questions about: “what” is the problem that needs to be solved, and “why” are we trying to solve this problem (goal to achieve). Specialists are much better at the implementation and execution of the “how” to solve the problem once it is clearly defined.

4.       Greater Openness to New Information – Specialization by its very nature is self-reinforcing thinking around a narrow set of topics. Generalists are more likely to be open to new, contradictory information, as they have less to lose (in professional social capital) from modifying a perspective. Specialists, by contrast, build their reputation around points of view that become a core of their “professional identity.”

5.       Better Suited to Less Predictable, More Diverse Environments – David Epstein talks about “wicked environments” as those where the rules of the game are unclear, feedback is slow, patterns are not predictable, and the future is not the same as the past. Much of the world of knowledge work sounds closer to a “wicked environment” than its opposite (a kind environment). Generalists tend to perform better in wicked environments.

6.       Pattern Matching – The recognition that “I’ve seen something similar elsewhere” is pattern matching.  Generalists are naturally more open to applying lessons from one field to another. An HBR article on polymaths discusses the field of biomimicry, which relies upon looking at nature for solutions to modern problems. As I have gone further in my business career, I have gained a greater appreciation on the tremendous business value of pattern matching in problem solving and decision-making.

A Recommended Path for Generalists

1.       Build your Communication Skills – Both written and verbal matter. Both get better with practice.  Take those opportunities (albeit scary) when presented. Writing (though more time consuming than public speaking) does not require an audience. All of us sound rather good in our own heads. Writing something down forces clarity of thought. Explaining concepts simply using short sentences is an undervalued skill.

2.       Place yourself at the “Unique” Intersection of Multiple Skills – Scott Adams, creator of the Dilbert cartoon, described his strategy to career success as “become very good (top 25%) at two or more things.” He continues, “Capitalism rewards things that are both rare and valuable. You make yourself rare by combining two or more “pretty goods” until no one else has your mix.”

3.       Understand the Fundamentals first; then dive into the Details – From Elon Musk: “One bit of advice: it is important to view knowledge as sort of a semantic tree – make sure you understand the fundamental principles, i.e., the trunk and the big branches, before you get into the leaves/details or there is nothing for them to hang on to.” For Finance Leaders, I would translate that into understanding what investors assign value to before figuring out how to build an interactive, three-statement model or learning how to best use an ERP system. For People Operations professionals, I would recommend having a theory on how best to motivate, develop and retain people before investing in specific benefit or other programs or choosing software to gauge employee engagement.

4.       Know when to Hire Specialists – Implementing certain solutions well (such as legal documentation, tax filings, customized software implementation etc.) requires specialists. Learn how best to select and manage specialists.

Through nature and nurture, each of us has our own predilection and personality. I suspect it is hard to change someone from a generalist to a specialist in preference or temperament. The world clearly needs both.

As a generalist I want to end with a quote that speaks to me and my approach to learning.

“Be curious. Read widely. Try new things. What people call intelligence just boils down to curiosity.” —Aaron Swartz