Understanding the Roles of the IT Generalist and Specialist
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
I'm definitely a generalist for now. I wouldn't mind being a specialist but I don't have enough experience yet really to be a specialist at anything much. I like networking, servers and security a lot though.
You have to make a real effort to make specialist happen. Typically the focusing process starts early.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
SQL & Business Intelligence people.Database Administrator / Analysts (not even sure why they call it IT Analysts for DBAs). is something I swore off a long time ago.
-
I doubt I'll ever be a specialist. Especially if my current decision to alter my career path sticks, I'll forever be a generalist, as far as IT is concerned.
-
Over all I believe I fall into the Generalist field,.. but lean towards Specialist in some areas like desktops.
Not only can I build a server, clone a desktop, build a website - I have been a event clean up technician (okay,.. dishwasher) Office space technician (aka grunt) and more.
I've put a hand on a number of things over the years...
-
In a place like ML, wouldn't we expect to see primarily generalists? There are more dedicated resources for the specialist.
This mass breath of knowledge is what drew me to SW in the first place.
-
@Dashrender said:
In a place like ML, wouldn't we expect to see primarily generalists? There are more dedicated resources for the specialist.
This mass breath of knowledge is what drew me to SW in the first place.
Oh yes, places like ML and SW you will find almost exclusively generalists. If you are a specialist you will likely have a "small" community focused on exactly the thing in which you are a specialist. Generally that would mean a vendor hosted community. If you are an Oracle DBA you will likely hang out in Oracle's own forums. If you are a Windows specialist, TechNet. If you are a Red Hat Linux guru, Red Hat has a community for you.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
In a place like ML, wouldn't we expect to see primarily generalists? There are more dedicated resources for the specialist.
This mass breath of knowledge is what drew me to SW in the first place.
Oh yes, places like ML and SW you will find almost exclusively generalists. If you are a specialist you will likely have a "small" community focused on exactly the thing in which you are a specialist. Generally that would mean a vendor hosted community. If you are an Oracle DBA you will likely hang out in Oracle's own forums. If you are a Windows specialist, TechNet. If you are a Red Hat Linux guru, Red Hat has a community for you.
Plantronics, you have the Sounding Boards...lol
-
I'm a specialist of generality. Not really. I was a full-time Access developer for a couple of years, does that make me a specialist. There are also probably only a handful of people in the world that know our current ERP system as well as I do - does that make ma a specialist? I've been working on it for 15 years.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm a specialist of generality. Not really. I was a full-time Access developer for a couple of years, does that make me a specialist. There are also probably only a handful of people in the world that know our current ERP system as well as I do - does that make ma a specialist? I've been working on it for 15 years.
The question is not if you have focused on it, but do you focus on it. Do you do anything besides the ERP system? Then you are probably a generalist. A specialist would be 95% - 100% job role on one very focused thing, full time. Not hopping between things or mixing things. You mention multiple things in which you might be a specialist. If you think of more than one thing to mention, that probably answers your question.
For example, do you support desktops? Servers? Networking Gear? Applications? Each of those would be a specialist, if you combine them, you are a generalist.
-
I'm probably 90% ERP, so I'll go for generalist then.
Interesting what you said about managers having to manage people to be a manager. That's maybe a US thing. It's not the case in the UK - a manager manages but what he manages doesn't have to be people, it could be other things.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Interesting what you said about managers having to manage people to be a manager. That's maybe a US thing. It's not the case in the UK - a manager manages but what he manages doesn't have to be people, it could be other things.
What all are called managers then? Like are janitors "waste managers?"
There are specific, normally mocking, job titles that use manager now in the US but everyone knows what they mean and there is zero pretense. Like "office manager" is now a joke term for "secretary." It's actually a lesser title because it denotes someone putting on pretenses when they really just fetch coffee. Someone with the actual title of secretary is likely more senior.
-
You really do 90% of your time on the single ERP system? That's a lot. That's only 40 minutes a day, or so, available for other tasks.
As an example, if this were an Epicor system, would you refer to yourself normally as an "Epicor Administrator"?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
That's only 40 minutes a day, or so, available for other tasks.
That's why I do desktop support outside of work hours and write down people's passwords - I'm in a rush
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@scottalanmiller said:
That's only 40 minutes a day, or so, available for other tasks.
That's why I do desktop support outside of work hours and write down people's passwords - I'm in a rush
I would say so!
-
I specialise in the generalist field.
I like variety
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What all are called managers then? Like are janitors "waste managers?"
Janitors are called caretakers over here. I think janitor is a cooler word. I suppose manager refers more to levels of general responsibility rather than specifically managing people.
-
We use caretaker too but usual it means janitor plus handyman and usually for someone who lives on a campus like a school. We also use custodian.
-
If I ran my own company, I'd get rid of job titles altogether. Are they necessary? They massage egos, cause resentment, restrict flexibility and decrease the willingness to collaborate with colleagues or work in a more project orientated fashion. My job title is Systems Manager, I don't even know what that means!
Note: I haven't really thought this policy through.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
Interesting what you said about managers having to manage people to be a manager. That's maybe a US thing. It's not the case in the UK - a manager manages but what he manages doesn't have to be people, it could be other things.
What all are called managers then? Like are janitors "waste managers?"
There are specific, normally mocking, job titles that use manager now in the US but everyone knows what they mean and there is zero pretense. Like "office manager" is now a joke term for "secretary." It's actually a lesser title because it denotes someone putting on pretenses when they really just fetch coffee. Someone with the actual title of secretary is likely more senior.
This isn't always the case though. I small and perhaps medium physician offices, an Office Manager is like the CEO, runs the day to day operations of the office.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
If I ran my own company, I'd get rid of job titles altogether. Are they necessary? They massage egos, cause resentment, restrict flexibility and decrease the willingness to collaborate with colleagues or work in a more project orientated fashion. My job title is Systems Manager, I don't even know what that means!
Note: I haven't really thought this policy through.
Well at NTG we don't eliminate them but we do reduce them significantly. Management has titles, a few titles are required by law in the US. Not the specific titles, but similar ones (CEO, President, etc.) But the non-managers all have the same title.
