Comments on: jacks of all trades or masters of one? http://almostdaniel.com/2010/03/12/jacks-of-all-trades-or-masters-of-one/ i am a coder, an array explode(r). but here is where i write. Wed, 23 Mar 2011 02:40:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: daniel http://almostdaniel.com/2010/03/12/jacks-of-all-trades-or-masters-of-one/#comment-68 daniel Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:45:13 +0000 http://almostdaniel.com/?p=420#comment-68 <a href="http://www.danielslaughter.com/2010/03/12/sxsw-2010-jacks-of-all-trades-or-masters-of-one/" rel="nofollow">Daniel Slaughter's notes</a>. Daniel Slaughter’s notes.

]]> By: daniel http://almostdaniel.com/2010/03/12/jacks-of-all-trades-or-masters-of-one/#comment-67 daniel Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:25:12 +0000 http://almostdaniel.com/?p=420#comment-67 Of course, the same can be said of the idea that a generalist will never be as good as a specialist (in final output). That was examined as well. So perhaps this was more balanced than I first thought. Regardless, the intent was solid. The presenters truly wanted to examine the back and forth in a positive way. They did make a point during Q&A to mention that a team needs generalists and specialists, so that's good even as much as I hate that kind of Pollyanna ending. Of course, the same can be said of the idea that a generalist will never be as good as a specialist (in final output). That was examined as well. So perhaps this was more balanced than I first thought.

Regardless, the intent was solid. The presenters truly wanted to examine the back and forth in a positive way. They did make a point during Q&A to mention that a team needs generalists and specialists, so that’s good even as much as I hate that kind of Pollyanna ending.

]]> By: daniel http://almostdaniel.com/2010/03/12/jacks-of-all-trades-or-masters-of-one/#comment-66 daniel Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:14:33 +0000 http://almostdaniel.com/?p=420#comment-66 I had a pretty negative reaction to this session, because it seemed to be slanted against specialists. I did accept the statement that a team of specialists with a waterfall process is less agile than a team of generalists with a highly agile process. It basically framed specialists as only bull-headed perfectionists that don't step up and help out, and generalists as angelic staff who get the job done and are headed for upper management. I wish the session focused more of what a team of "T-shaped" people might be like. I had a pretty negative reaction to this session, because it seemed to be slanted against specialists. I did accept the statement that a team of specialists with a waterfall process is less agile than a team of generalists with a highly agile process. It basically framed specialists as only bull-headed perfectionists that don’t step up and help out, and generalists as angelic staff who get the job done and are headed for upper management. I wish the session focused more of what a team of “T-shaped” people might be like.

]]>