Tag: generalists

Functional Specialization Conflicts

tomkapostasyLeave a comment

There are many examples of inherently competing interests which limit the application of functional specialization.

The increased specialization of countries, firms and functions has provided new net benefits, but it has also begun to generate inherent conflicts.

Greater functional specialization has increased the need for generalists who define and manage processes.

It has increased the need for other individuals to span levels, translating strategy into projects and then into operations.

It has increased the level of personal specialization to deliver more advanced technical skills, thereby increasing the costs of communication and coordination, even within similar disciplines..

It has divided those responsible for short-term and long-term success.

It has resulted in the development of competing financial and quality paradigms to coordinate operations activities.

It has generated work groups with vastly different cognitive and emotional intelligence capabilities.

Greater focus on specialized entry-level capabilities has resulted in ever greater task or people management skills, but less initial screening for situational leadership skills to balance these needs.

Greater functional specialization has made functional areas ever more stereotypical.  A given company, functional area or individual is less likely to have complementary skills in long-term/short-term analysis, divergent versus convergent thinking skills, or varied personality profiles. 

Ironically, the advance of functional specialization greatly increases the demand for specialized individuals who are generalists, able to knit together the increasing number of functional specialists.

Functional Specialization Solutions

tomkapostasyLeave a comment

There are many solutions strategies that can be used to maximize the potential net benefits of functional specialization and overcome the inherent limitations.

First, processes can be defined and optimized to effectively leverage functional talents.  The mechanical and modular paradigms can be refined to incorporate specialists.

Firms can adopt a portfolio strategy whereby the average success ratio largely offsets random failures.

Specialists and generalists can trade positions to increase their effective coordination skills and understanding.

Communications meetings, technologies, experiences and priorities can improve alignment.

Process management can be elevated to a meta-analysis level, with individuals responsible for the success of prospect to customer, concept to product and order to cash processes.

Countries, states and firms can develop long-term partnerships with their suppliers and customers and improve their prospecting, bidding and negotiation skills.

Individuals can improve their situational leadership skills, learning to balance task and people needs.

Firms can greatly improve their means-ends skills, improving staff delegation, board governance and supplier management skills.

In highly diverse and risky product development areas, firms can invest in specialized firms or in competing development teams.

Firms can invest in staff members who are highly skilled in translating strategy into projects and then into operations.

Finally, firms and individuals can increase their understanding of situations where there are two inherently conflicting objectives.  They can learn from the experience of statisticians, researchers and actuaries who routinely manage the alpha risk that a predicted relationship exists when it really doesn’t against the beta risk that a relationship is found to not exist when it really does.

Functional specialization is an incredible driver of incremental value.  Countries, states, firms and individuals will be rewarded for their attention to this factor.  Common tactics can be used to maximize the value of this strategy.

Effective Leaders

tomkapostasyLeave a comment
 Everyone has their own theory or theories of leadership.In my experience, effective leaders …Are authentic expressions of their unique talents and experiences. They are  
 independent and non-conformist. 
 
 Are shaped by their personality profiles.  They leverage their strengths and minimize their non-talents.  They flex styles for short periods, with effort.
 
 
 Are true to themselves, applying constructive approaches to work, home and community.   This natural style leverages their assets.
 
 
 Are internally driven and project a clear commitment to making progress, overcoming 
 challenges, reaching goals and making a difference. 
 
 Are human with strengths and non-talents.  They are effected by biases and paradigms.  
 Self-awareness and self-control are partial. 
 
 Recognize the strength of organizational and cultural inertia in preventing change, 
 alignment and pursuit of lofty objectives. 
 
 Accept the political nature of organizations and the role of self-interest as part of the natural arena for leadership practice.
 
 
 Understand the value creating role of key leaders in organizations, but do not minimize the value of managers and staff.
 
 
 Appreciate the social psychology of organizations and teams.  They demonstrate their 
 passion, commitment and belonging in real and symbolic ways. 
 
 Use an interactive decision-making process to engage contributors, frame 
 decisions, generate options, evaluate solutions and build commitment. 
 
 Are patient, unstructured decision-makers.  Organization level issues, plans and policies 
 require time to define, analyze, choose and embrace. They change perspectives, urge 
 creativity, challenge traditional answers and encourage contrasting paths to answers. 
 
 Value the contributions of professional specialists, but employ a generalist perspective and 
 healthy skepticism. They employ various facilitation tools to work through ambiguous 
 situations. 
 
 Employ a broad array of skills and experiences, as decisions are increasingly complex, 
 including political, ethical, global and environmental dimensions. 
 
 Embrace a modern approach to diversity, deeply understanding the value of diverse 
 perspectives in contributing their piece of the truth to decisions.