Everyone’s heard the phrase “Jack of all trades and master of none.” Almost always it’s in a derogatory sense. As in…. “Everyone needs to stop being good at lots of things because that’s bad and everyone needs to start being a master of one thing because that’s good.” I understand where people are coming from and I agree with some of what they are saying, but for the most part, I have one big problem with this philosophy….
It’s stupid.
I did a little checking on the real meaning of the phrase. Look what I found on Wikipedia:
The earliest recorded versions of the phrase do not contain the second part. Indeed they are broadly positive in tone. Such a Jack of all trades may be a master of integration, as such an individual knows enough from many learned trades and skills to be able to bring their disciplines together in a practical manner. This person is a generalist rather than a specialist. A person who is exceptional in many disciplines is known as a polymath or a “Renaissance man”; a typical example is Leonardo da Vinci. The phrase became increasingly negative in connotation during the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_of_all_trades,_master_of_none
The fact is, we need Jacks and Masters. We need people who specialize and do one thing very well. BUT, we also need Jacks. What I’m trying to say is we need people whose mastery is integration. In addition to specialists, we also need general practitioners. WHY?
Every good team needs specialists. Every team needs people who are the best at what they do. The problem comes when we try to make a person who is best in his field the leader of a team. The best teams aren’t led by masters, they’re led by Jacks. The Jacks are the ones who understand a little bit about every aspect of the team and thus can communicate with or integrate all the specialists.
The best basketball players are often lousy coaches. The best guitarists are often lousy worship leaders. The best salesmen are often lousy sales managers. People who lead the best teams are often not the superstars. Make no mistake: I’m not saying the best team leaders are lousy at the various aspects of the team. Indeed, they do have to be at least good in the various areas. From the Wikipedia definition, we learn this team leader has to be someone who knows enough about each of the individual disciplines to bring them together in a practical manner.
So what’s my point? Sometimes our goal as a team leader (be it a team of youth leaders, a team of pastors, a team of parents or a team of students) is to be a superstar in some area. We’ve been taught that’s the only acceptable philosophy. My point is that the best team leaders are the ones who are not afraid of or threatened by specialists on their team who are bigger and better at some aspect of the team than they are. At the same time, they talk enough of the language of each of the specialists on their team that they can be a central connection point for the team so that all the various specialties are integrated in a practical manner.
I’d love to hear your thoughts. Has the phrase “Jack of all trades and master of none” been a mantra you’ve used or had used on you to discourage you from attempting to be good at many things instead of great at one thing?
