Back in the corporate world, I was asked this question during an interview:
When building my own team, would I prefer a "jack of all trades" or a "master of one"?
I preferred to have a group of people who are "masters of one", rather than many "jacks of all trades". I still do. Each "master of one" in my team can focus on performing tasks under his/her expertise and continue to develop the skill. I don't need each team member to be able to do and be good at everything. They have their teammates to count on. Each expertise complement the other, allowing better project implementation, problem solving and decision making. And as each one expands his/her expertise, thus the entire team grows.
What are your thoughts?
When building my own team, would I prefer a "jack of all trades" or a "master of one"?
I preferred to have a group of people who are "masters of one", rather than many "jacks of all trades". I still do. Each "master of one" in my team can focus on performing tasks under his/her expertise and continue to develop the skill. I don't need each team member to be able to do and be good at everything. They have their teammates to count on. Each expertise complement the other, allowing better project implementation, problem solving and decision making. And as each one expands his/her expertise, thus the entire team grows.
What are your thoughts?
Comment