On being a jack of all trades
or, master of none?
School was a great time to explore the world of design. But as I put together my portfolio and applied for jobs, I began to feel pressure – real or imagined, perhaps it doesn't matter - to define exactly what kind of design I wanted to do. What was my thing? Looking around, I watched some of my classmates focus on specific industries (like shoes). Other classmates focused on specific types of design (like UI/UX). These things were readily apparent and easy to define, and have worked out well for them and many others.
Then there was me, the girl who not only hadn't identified a niche in the industrial design world but also kept her schedule full with graphic design classes in addition to the required industrial design courses, and spent any free time outside of that working on illustration.
My solution was to find work in a small design consultancy. Nearly 7 years later, I’ve found that approach has worked well. Because I’m part of a small team, I’ve been able to contribute everything from traditional industrial design to strategy to UI/UX to graphic design, presentation design, and information design. I’ve also had the opportunity to work in our research department, managing recruits, writing protocols, speaking to users and conducting analysis and synthesis. And the nature of our work means projects are varied and I’m always learning about new things. Outside of work, I even have the time to provide freelance graphic design and illustration services.
But I still wonder from time to time about the tradeoffs of being a generalist. After all, who wants to be perceived as a jack of all trades but master of none? A mile wide but an inch deep?
Simple things are memorable. I think this is just common sense: simple things are easy to remember. It stands to reason, then, that complicated things will be less memorable. So it seems challenging to build a personal “brand” around something as complex as being a generalist.
At the same time, the future of design appears to be shifting (as I suppose it always is). Through this lens, embracing a multidisciplinary approach while continuing to develop design thinking at a higher level starts to seem prudent. As Christopher Butler wrote for HOW Magazine back in 2012, “...it makes sense for us to maintain a broader view of things, to not bury our heads deep into the sand of our small pocket of the world—profitable as that may be today—but to take in a variety of ideas, experiences and skills so we may better sense the changes just around the corner.”
Indeed, to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In contrast, one of the things I love most about design is the endless possibility of it all. My goal is always to find the best solution for a problem - be it digital, physical, environmental, service, or even something else entirely. Chloe Scheffe seems to echo this approach when she writes, “To be a persistent generalist is actually to be deeply, relentlessly ambitious. It is the natural byproduct of curiosity, of engagement, of unwavering standards, of the insatiable desire for excellence.” For the generalist, the challenge is to articulate this approach in a simple, memorable way.
After all, as the full quote reads, “A jack of all trades is a master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one.”
What do you think?
P. S. The more you know: “Johannes Factotum” - the Elizabethan English version of the phrase - was used to describe William Shakespeare of all people! Robert Greene writes this in 1592 about the actor-turned-playwright: "There is an upstart crow, beautified with our feathers, that with his tiger's heart wrapped in a player's hide supposes he is as well able to bombast out a blank verse as the best of you: and being an absolute Johannes Factotum, is in his own conceit the only Shake-scene in a country."
Note: these views are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Nemera or the Insight Innovation Center.