Jack of all trades

Or Why the Future Belongs to the Generalists

The saying “Jack of all trades, master of none” has long been used to undermine individuals with a broad range of skills. Well, did you know that the full original quote actually reads: “Jack of all trades, master of none, but oftentimes better than master of one”? 

In today’s complex world, specialization is often presented as the only path to success and contribution. Yet, some of history’s most impactful figures have been polymaths and generalists. Leonardo da Vinci not only created the iconic Mona Lisa but also invented flying machines and dissected over thirty human bodies. Benjamin Franklin known as a statesman and founding father of the United States, was also a prolific writer, experimented on electricity, and invented the lightning rod, bifocal glasses, and the Franklin stove. Archimedes, who famously exclaimed “Eureka!” in his bath — and coined the quote on leverage in my previous post —, studied science and mathematics, and developed new machines to improve the lives of his fellow citizens. 

Why is it that today, while we admire such figures, common sense suggests nothing worthwhile can be achieved by generalists? Were they simply outliers, still known exactly because they were such genius polymaths? Contrary to common sense, studies have shown that while specialization can be important in some pursuits, generalists enjoy a substantial advantage in others. So, let’s dispel the notion that specialization is the only way forward and explain why we would benefit from having more generalists.

Science

Specialization is often deemed necessary in scientific research. Have you ever read the titles of academic studies? Although occasionally, a discovery applies broadly and changes a discipline, academic papers often focus on very narrow subjects. After all, with knowledge deepening in every discipline, it is now impossible to be at the edge of science without specializing in a niche, or so it is thought.

To figure out if that is really the case, researcher Angela Graf undertook the task of examining the profiles of 48 German Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, economy, and medicine from 1945 to 2013. How many do you think had cross-disciplinary training? 10, maybe 20? Not even close. She found that 42 of them, or an astonishing 87.5%, had multidisciplinary studies or work experiences. This early generalization, while initially slowing their development compared to national-level prize laureates, ultimately increased their sustainability and long-term excellence.

Why? Subsequent studies have found that researchers with diverse backgrounds are more likely to engage with distant knowledge, leverage broader networks, and have more meaningful impacts in their chosen field. These findings suggest that history’s greatest scientific discoveries were not achieved despite generalists, but because of them.

Sports

Professional sports often prioritize early specialization. The story of Tiger Woods, who picked his first golf club when he was 18 months old and dedicated his entire life to the same sport, does a lot to reinforce this idea.

However, in his book Range, sports journalist David Epstein tells us that we need only look at one of tennis’ greatest players of all time, Roger Federer, to challenge this assumption. Federer played multiple sports for most of his childhood, until the age of 12, which is relatively late for specialization, especially when compared to the golfer. Again, maybe Federer is an outlier who became one of the best despite his late specialization. However, if you have been following, your gut is probably telling you that this is not the true story.

Indeed, a 2021 meta-analysis reveals that world-class athletes, when compared to national-class athletes, practiced a wider variety of sports during their childhood and adolescence. They also started playing their main sport later in life, mirroring the trajectory of the German Nobel laureates. Athletes like Tiger Woods, who focus early on a singular sport, are the exception, not the rule.

While specialization is undoubtedly important in sports, a more generalist approach earlier in life seems to be the best way to develop elite-level skills.

Business innovation

If all this is true about science and sports, what about business innovation? By now, you might know the answer. Generalist CEOs with diverse backgrounds have been found to foster innovation within their companies. Their ability to connect seemingly unrelated questions, problems, or ideas from different fields, termed "Associating", enables them to discover new ideas and strategies at the crossroads of multiple domains.

An example that comes to mind is Elon Musk. Love him or hate him, no one can dispute that he has pushed multiple boundaries through his business ventures. He participated in the revolution of internet payments through PayPal, popularized electric vehicles with Tesla, and created reusable rockets that are reigniting space exploration with SpaceX. Not only does he possess extensive knowledge across complex domains but he also uses a variety of skills ranging from engineering to marketing and management to achieve his ambitious goals.

In other words, entrepreneurs and executives that have experience across multiple areas enjoy once again an advantage over those who focus solely on one. Who would’ve thought?

The Future Belongs to Generalists

What’s next? With today’s pressures to overspecialize, are we doomed to a decrease in scientific discoveries, athletes’ prowess, and business innovation? Are generalists an endangered species whose only place is in history books? Not so fast.

A study examining which jobs were most likely to be automated found that generalist occupations requiring knowledge of human heuristics, and specialist occupations that involve new ideas, were the least in danger.

In short, while AI and robots can more easily replace and surpass humans in repetitive and narrow (read specialized) tasks, it is much harder for them to deal with complex and novel situations, especially if people and emotions are involved. For instance, while AI can easily beat chess grandmasters who have dedicated their lives to the game, it is not even close to being able to do the job of a CEO or an elementary school teacher. Therefore, the current cultural pressure to overspecialize could not only be suboptimal but also steer young people towards careers that are most at risk of being automated.

However, the automation of specialized disciplines also has the potential to push our species towards a new era of generalists. While specialists will be replaced little by little, existing generalist roles will gain in importance, and new ones might come into existence. We may witness the emergence of a new generation of polymaths, knowledgeable in multiple domains, who, armed with artificial intelligence and robots, will be able to harness specialized concepts and techniques to accomplish extraordinary feats.

The jacks of all trades, often ridiculed in recent years, may not only have been right all along; they might also be the main actors in a new era for humanity – an era of generalists.