Thoughts on deep diving into one area or spreading out?

I have asked this question in the past, but instead of digging up a post from 2011, I thought I would bring back up the topic.

I realize there is no one set answer for this, but I was curious to gather the opinions from the TE community.

Some variables come into play IMO

Where you are in your career
Attention span
Discipline
Do you truly know what you want to do
Type of role you perform. E.G. If you write SQL code all day for analysis you probably want to stay scoped in on SQL and Databases.
Return on knowledge for that particular skill set / Is it going to be valuable 6 months from now?

I have always felt generally that a master is better off than a JOAT, MOST of the time, not always. However there aren't a lot of "master's" out there so........

So which approach do you take? Do you drive deep into something to completely dominate it and own it or do you dabble with several technologies?

I also wanted to add aptitude and the ability to learn quickly. I think if you have a high level of aptitude for technology you can afford to be a JOAT more so, whereas someone with average intelligence might have to spend more effort on a particular topic. Maybe my average intelligence has me leaning towards deep diving.

Find more posts tagged with

Save $250 on 2025 certification boot camps from Infosec!

Book now with code EOY2025

Button

Comments

xenodamus

I'm feeling more and more like I'll need to specialize eventually to avoid going crazy. There's just too much to learn. My current responsibilities revolve around VDI. But hell, it's hard to keep up with Citrix these days - much less storage, networking, Linux, Microsoft, etc.

I agree that to be a JOAT (and be good at it) you need a natural ability to troubleshoot quickly even when you aren't deeply familiar with a technology. That's not my cup of tea, though. The closest I may come to that is being a virtualization guru. Virtualization, as a focus, involves knowledge of several ancillary areas. I'm hoping that once I reach an adequate level of proficiency in those ancillary technologies I can pour my focus into Citrix/VMware/Hyper-V. I'm not quite there, though. So I'm drinking from the firehose as I learn the basics of Linux, storage networking, and all things Microsoft.....

philz1982

N2IT wrote: »

I have asked this question in the past, but instead of digging up a post from 2011, I thought I would bring back up the topic.

I realize there is no one set answer for this, but I was curious to gather the opinions from the TE community.

Some variables come into play IMO
Where you are in your career

Attention span

Discipline

Do you truly know what you want to do

Type of role you perform. E.G. If you write SQL code all day for analysis you probably want to stay scoped in on SQL and Databases.

Return on knowledge for that particular skill set / Is it going to be valuable 6 months from now?

I have always felt generally that a master is better off than a JOAT, MOST of the time, not always. However there aren't a lot of "master's" out there so........

So which approach do you take? Do you drive deep into something to completely dominate it and own it or do you dabble with several technologies?

I also wanted to add aptitude and the ability to learn quickly. I think if you have a high level of aptitude for technology you can afford to be a JOAT more so, whereas someone with average intelligence might have to spend more effort on a particular topic. Maybe my average intelligence has me leaning towards deep diving.

Deep diving takes intelligence also. The problem I find with people, is they don't want it bad enough. The trick isn't learning everything it's learning how to dissect anything. Give me Google, Amazon.Com, and my LinkedIn Contact list and I can solve any IT problem. Having an ability to query data, and then absorb that data supported by the ability to read quickly, mixed with a wide array of Technical contacts makes it easy to be a JOAT.

Coordination is the key, people pay big money to coordinators.

DevilWAH

Deep diving takes considurable intelligence. It requires good recall skills and attention to detail. I chose to go in to networking. And I would consider those skills as expert. However I keep my eyes open to the rest of the it world. So when the storage guy has his netapp consultant in, I go to lunch with them and catch up on latest technologies in storage. Or the security guys and brush up on firewall.
I learnt all the basics back on the helpdesk, so how to set up a windows server, or configure exchange. I don't try to learn the in depth any more but a few days every 4-6 months keeps me up to speed.

I would like to end up back managing a technical team or IT department. Ideally network team. And I think for that its both important to know your own field, but as you are dealing with people from other areas of IT it benefits to have a general understanding of there requirements and issues.

N2IT

I probably didn't go into enough detail to explain my point.

Deep diving does take intelligence, but I find it very rare that a JOAT can bang out true solutions through multiple platforms at a high level. I currently work with a guy like this. He has developed and adminstered middleware, databases, system adminstration with automation, development, data architecture, and does it at a high level. He is impressive to say the least and gets paid at junior executive salary for it.

I just don't see "super joats" that often. I honestly don't believe I could handle all of those platforms and do it well, in fact most technologist couldn't either. I on the other hand I am focusing on databases mostly now and I am learning a lot. While I am lacking in other areas that integrate in my arena I feel my knowledge level is really growing, mainly through work, but also some self study.

Don't get me wrong I have other skills and do those skill extremely well. Project Management, Statistical Analysis just to name a few. But when I want to push beyond, for me the only way to do this is to focus on one particular item and continue to dive deep for a period of time. Maybe 2 weeks, maybe a month.

@Philz - Couldn't agree more about coordination. I was a service delivery lead (AKA PM) for ~ 2 years for a large infrastructure effort. I would receive bonuses and raises every 6 months for that 2 year span, and they were big. It wasn't the automated reporting I developed that got me there. It was my ability to keep everybody rowing in the same direction.

Either way thanks for your opinions I find them interesting and informative.

DevilWAH

N2IT wrote: »

dive deep for a period of time. Maybe 2 weeks, maybe a month.

2 weeks to a month? I would consider that giving my self an over view of a technology, enough to understand and implement it as a entry level, and to follow conversations of experts in the the field. but I would not consider that deep diving. Deep diving to me is to persue a field to the exclusion of all others.

I am often shocked at the general lack of knowledge around so called experts. A recent guy who came in for a VDI project was I have to admit quite a wiz when it came to Citrix. But where as I can both develop and deploy networks at a fairly high level and have the basic understanding to set up most IT systems to a reasonable level. This guy understood nothing about networking, he even struggled to understand what the DFGWs role was. Due to some security measures our network is not text book in how it is configured, and he could simply not figure out how to make his VDI work with it.

With me I sit on the design board as the network consultant to a 8 year site redevelopment plan. That's where my core in-depth skills are and that's what my job description is. But on the side i administer VMware/Lync/Mitel/ and a few other systems. These are my "pet projects" and give me the opportunity to take a break for the network and project management side of things every once in a while. They also keep me in touch with the rest of the IT department

N2IT

@ Devil Absolutely. 2 weeks to a month deep diving returns huge gains for me.

To add context - For over a year my job role has been to uncover and report on data, refining into information and eventually reports. I am in SSMS ~6 hours a day sometimes longer. Now assuming I am peeling, spinning, cleaning, reporting etc on data using SQL all day long I am naturally going to learn more and more as I go. It's the nature of my work or I wouldn't be employed for very long.

Now with that said if I commit myself to my craft with additional study time, 2 weeks to a month was given. This additional time helps me deep dive into something I am already pretty good at, in fact I begin to add value to the seniors refactoring their code and coming up with new ways to do things. So yes the additional effort for a short burst is absolutely benefical.

In fact for me, deeping diving into a specific niche of a technology provides even more gains in short burst. For instance I was building SP and then scheduling jobs in our sandbox environment. To further my knowledge and understand that specific piece of SSMS.

philz1982

I spend 2-3 hours each night reading and practicing some skill.

Right now I am bouncing between Wrox C#, AIO CEH, Murach's Oracle 11g, Web Application Hackers HandBook, and Comptia Healthcare IT Tech Exam Guide. I don't have a desire, to be an expert, but I like to have intermediary skills in everything.

I think it comes down to personality, I am irrationally afraid of being unemployed and unable to find a job, this has led to a very unhealthy obsession with self-study, networking(people), and schooling. The side benefit is me knowing a lot about a a lot.

It also comes down to your learning style, some people can read a book and know a technology, most people have to experience the technology first.

-Phil

DevilWAH

philz1982 wrote: »

I
It also comes down to your learning style, some people can read a book and know a technology, most people have to experience the technology first.

-Phil

Very few people can know a technology from reading a book. Many like to think they can, but the more often truth is they can remember the words and regurgitate them with out thought. This leads to a lot of engineers who have certifications coming out of there ears, but have not learnt the reason why technologies where invented, our how to have original thoughts in implementing them.

I find good engineers talk about better and worse ways of doing things, depending on indivual situations. Bad engineers only even talk in terms of there way is right. every thing else is wrong.

the_Grinch

I do want to specialize and dive deep as you put it, but currently my job does not afford that luxury. I'm picking up skills on the fly on a weekly basis because things need to get done. That being said I am finally seeing where my path will lie and my plan is to shift towards that goal slowly. There will be a lot of auditing and investigation in my future which will require some JOAT skills.

Darian929

Gentlemen,

It depends on your way of learning. I find myself on the same spot over and over. There are many factors that play into this and what you can become. One of them is the current place you work at. If you work at a small company normally you tend to be a JOAT, at a big enterprise your more known for one specific skill.

What does it serve me studying about SQL if I have no way of getting experience in it at the job. Hear me out, if you want to go into that direction then sure study SQL and become a db admin but if you're not sure and also study something that you won't get a lot of hands on then it's sort of another distraction. If you like your job and can get tons of experience at it then I would suggest going into that and deep diving. I do find that people who are experts at a certain thing will end up making more always and also being able to get into complex designs/problems. On the other hand to be an expert in a JOAT scenario will take a long time and maybe even never.

I think of it like the medical field. When do they make a lot of money? When they are very specialized, the general doctors (JOAT) don't make as much as a neurosurgeon or cardiovascular surgeon. I apply the same principal.

philz1982

DevilWAH wrote: »

Very few people can know a technology from reading a book. Many like to think they can, but the more often truth is they can remember the words and regurgitate them with out thought. This leads to a lot of engineers who have certifications coming out of there ears, but have not learnt the reason why technologies where invented, our how to have original thoughts in implementing them.

I find good engineers talk about better and worse ways of doing things, depending on indivual situations. Bad engineers only even talk in terms of there way is right. every thing else is wrong.

I agree very few can, but the fact remains, there are those who can. Technology, for the right person, just really isn't that hard.

philz1982

Darian929 wrote: »

Gentlemen,

It depends on your way of learning. I find myself on the same spot over and over. There are many factors that play into this and what you can become. One of them is the current place you work at. If you work at a small company normally you tend to be a JOAT, at a big enterprise your more known for one specific skill.

What does it serve me studying about SQL if I have no way of getting experience in it at the job. Hear me out, if you want to go into that direction then sure study SQL and become a db admin but if you're not sure and also study something that you won't get a lot of hands on then it's sort of another distraction. If you like your job and can get tons of experience at it then I would suggest going into that and deep diving. I do find that people who are experts at a certain thing will end up making more always and also being able to get into complex designs/problems. On the other hand to be an expert in a JOAT scenario will take a long time and maybe even never.

I think of it like the medical field. When do they make a lot of money? When they are very specialized, the general doctors (JOAT) don't make as much as a neurosurgeon or cardiovascular surgeon. I apply the same principal.

Well, you can always become a systems integrator, then you get to play with everything. Take an I Beacon, feed it via a RESTful API, into a custom designed application. Store the data in SQL, and build a rules engine to take environmental data and join it with your I-Beacon table. Make sure you design your network right so all the data can flow, stage up the application on a virtual platform. Finally, develop the web application to display all the data across a GIS platform. Oh, and don't forget to test for vulnerabilities, it's pretty awesome that the I-Beacon broadcasts in plain-text.... All in a days work as an SI

krjay

It's a tough call. It may depend on your area. Around here the majority of positions posted are more of a JOAT type role. There are specialized positions available, but not nearly as many as the JOAT positions.