Specialized team vs general team
The most common team setup you can find in the workplace is either a team where every member has a broad overview of the stuff or a team where every member is specialist in a matter.
Which one do you think is better and why?
I think that a team where each member is specialist in something is far better, as you have a deeper knowledge of the matter and therefore, you are more productive. However, the drawback is that when someone leaves the knowledge is gone, unless it's properly documented.
Which one do you think is better and why?
I think that a team where each member is specialist in something is far better, as you have a deeper knowledge of the matter and therefore, you are more productive. However, the drawback is that when someone leaves the knowledge is gone, unless it's properly documented.
Comments
-
MSP-IT
Member Posts: 752 ■■■□□□□□□□
I would think the obvious answer to this is balance. You're not going to be able to force any team type really. If you have some overlap in specialization between team members, I think it would be to the advantage to the team as a whole.
A true team isn't about ideologies, it's about <cliché> synergy </cliché> -
the_Grinch
Member Posts: 4,165 ■■■■■■■■■■
It really depends on the make up of the department and what they are required to support. I've worked for small companies where there were three people in the department and thus you did everything. Network administration, server administration, desktop support, phone support, and everything in between. I've worked for an MSP with a dedicated helpdesk, NOC, and networking team. I've worked at a university with dedicated teams for just about everything.WIP:
PHP
Kotlin
Intro to Discrete Math
Programming Languages
Work stuff