Alright, let’s talk about this idea: “who has the most masters wins”. I heard that kicking around, maybe in a meeting, maybe read it somewhere. Sounds good on paper, right? Get the best person for every single little thing, and you conquer the world.
My Brush With “Collecting Masters”
I remember this one project, a real beast. The higher-ups were all hyped about it. Their big plan? Assemble a ‘dream team’. We needed someone who was a god at databases. Found one. Needed a front-end wizard who could make pixels sing. Got one. Needed a security guru who breathed paranoia. Check. We basically went shopping for specialists, the absolute ‘masters’ in their tiny little boxes.
So, we got them all in a room, virtual mostly. What happened?
- Everyone spoke a different language. Not literally, but technically. The database guy couldn’t care less about the front-end struggles. The security person saw threats everywhere, blocking things left and right, making life hell for others.
- Nobody owned the whole thing. Each ‘master’ perfectly polished their own little corner. But getting those corners to fit together? Nightmare. It was like, “My part works perfectly, it’s their problem.” Heard that a lot.
- Things got slow. Really slow. Waiting for one ‘master’ to finish their piece so another could start. Endless debates about the ‘right’ way to do tiny things. Progress just crawled.
It felt like we didn’t have a team. We had a collection of very smart, very expensive individuals who weren’t really playing the same game. Each one was optimizing for their own domain, not the overall project goal. Lots of finger-pointing, lots of “that’s not my job.”
What Actually Happened
We were burning time and money. It got so tangled. In the end, we had to simplify. We actually let go of a couple of the super-specialists. Sounds crazy, right? We kept a smaller core team, folks who were maybe 80% expert in several areas instead of 110% in just one. People willing to step outside their box, learn a bit of the next person’s job, and actually talk to each other.
Suddenly, things started moving. Decisions got made faster. Integration wasn’t a dirty word anymore. We delivered something, maybe not the perfect diamond the bosses dreamed of initially, but something solid that worked.
So, Does The Most Masters Win?
Based on what I saw? Not always. Maybe sometimes, for very specific, well-defined problems. But for complex stuff where things change and you need people to adapt and work together? Give me a team that communicates and collaborates over a room full of isolated geniuses any day.
Having a few really skilled people is great, essential even. But just collecting ‘masters’ like trading cards? That doesn’t guarantee a win. Sometimes, it just guarantees a mess. What seemed to matter more was having people who could bridge the gaps, who cared about the finish line, not just their little part of the race track. Maybe the real ‘masters’ are the ones who can play well with others.
