Jack or master?

`
Jack of all trades, master of none.Someone pretty smart probably said that a long time ago, and they’re right. If I was running a business, I would want more masters than jacks because masters would churn out higher quality stuff all at the same time. If you had a lot of jacks that might equal a handful of masters.At work we have three master developers - and I mean masters compared to jacks, not masters masters. Anyway, each of us is pretty specialized in what we know as far as platforms and languages. None of us really know how to do what the other one does.

This situation puts the company in a tight spot because there are no backups for any of the developers. If I got hit by a truck full of whoopi cushions tomorrow they would be shit out of luck. Same goes for the other guys. However, each of us make very good quality products and get them done relatively quickly. We are each working on different products, so three products at the same time and each is turning out really well.

But a new CIO has a different idea. His big picture puts everyone picking in a single gold mine until it is empty. This gets the mine empty quickly, but what happens to the pile of stone and the pile of wood? Nothing. It sits there untouched until the gold is done.

This plan does not boost quality nor does it get things done quicker. First, everyone has to be cross-trained, which takes them out of their zone and makes quality suffer. This makes everyone unhappy because they are forced to stop working at their specialized craft. Also, projects that would have otherwise gotten done by either developer get pushed to the bottom of the priority list because everyone has to work on the same thing. No more multi-tasking.

I understand the big picture and sometimes that makes sense, like when everyone has multiple skills already. But when you have a group of people that are very specialized, putting them together as a team puts a lot on the line.