There’s no question that specialization can drive efficiency and quality for design professionals. The deeper you go in one area, the more proficient and accurate you become. But too much specialization can come at a cost—limited flexibility and fewer opportunities for the broader learning that comes from diverse experiences.
So, what’s the right answer? I don’t think there is one “right” answer, but I do know leaders making assignments need to be intentional about finding the right balance.
When I was a young student, I was placed into advanced math early. On paper, it seemed like a great opportunity. In reality, I struggled to keep up with the pace set by the teacher and the variety of solution methods presented. My confidence took a hit. Fortunately, my parents supported my decision to step back into the standard math track. There, I mastered the basics, rebuilt my confidence, and went on to score 98 and 100 on my next two Regents math exams.
In the workplace, especially with entry-level staff, this principle matters. If you’re assigning projects, resist the temptation to take a one-size-fits-all approach. It’s not always about pushing people into the deep end right away. Sometimes the best move is to let a junior team member repeat a project type so they can fully grasp the process, refine their skills, and build confidence.
Think of it like shooting a basketball—you don’t become proficient by trying it once. Repetition builds muscle memory, which builds competence, which fuels confidence.
I’m not suggesting you silo junior staff into one type of work indefinitely. Exposure to new challenges is essential for growth. But pacing matters. Introducing new project types gradually, based on the individual’s readiness, ensures they aren’t just going through the motions but truly learning.
0 Comments