Intrenion

Pattern: Generalization pressure

Specialized roles are stretched so far that expertise becomes irrelevant.

Situation

  1. In this condition, individuals hired into specialized roles regularly perform tasks that fall outside their defined domain of expertise.
  2. In this condition, the proportion of time spent on core expert work decreases while time spent on general support or coordination activities increases.
  3. In this condition, job descriptions continue to reference deep expertise even though daily work consists largely of broad operational tasks.
  4. In this condition, complex domain-specific deliverables are delayed or reduced in scope compared to reactive cross-functional requests.
  5. In this condition, stakeholders consult specialists for a wide range of issues, regardless of their relevance to their formal mandate.
  6. In this condition, formal standards and review processes tied to specialized knowledge are applied inconsistently or bypassed.
  7. In this condition, hiring and performance evaluations still reference specialist titles, even though the role functions as a generalist position.

Assessment

  1. This occurs because managers expand the scope of specialists to absorb adjacent tasks rather than initiate formal role redesign or additional hiring.
  2. This occurs because budget and headcount controls make consolidating responsibilities into existing roles structurally easier than adding new specialized capacity.
  3. This occurs because performance systems reward responsiveness and breadth of contribution more visibly than depth of domain output.
  4. This occurs because short-term operational demands override long-term investment in maintaining protected expert focus.
  5. This occurs because specialists lack enforceable authority to refuse out-of-scope work when priorities are set externally.
  6. This occurs because coordination across multiple narrowly defined roles is perceived as more costly than having a single specialist handle everything.
  7. This occurs because organizational narratives about flexibility and agility legitimize the gradual erosion of strict specialization boundaries.

Consequence

  1. Without a structural decision to protect domain boundaries, the effective depth of expertise will continue to decline even if specialist titles remain unchanged.
  2. Without explicit reallocation of workload, complex domain-specific work will remain deprioritized relative to reactive cross-functional demands.
  3. Without revised authority over scope definition, specialists will remain accountable for outcomes they lack the time to properly execute.
  4. Without intervention in performance criteria, responsiveness and breadth will continue to displace depth as the dominant measure of value.
  5. Without capacity adjustments or role clarification, the organization will increasingly rely on diluted generalist output while still expecting specialist-level quality.

Decisions

  1. We decide to allocate a fixed minimum of 50 percent of our working time exclusively to core domain tasks and refuse additional requests beyond that capacity because this gives us protected depth of execution instead of informally absorbing all incoming cross-functional work, and accept that some stakeholders will escalate complaints about reduced availability.
  2. We decide to require written prioritization that explicitly ranks any new out-of-scope task against existing core commitments before we start it, because this gives us documented scope control instead of immediately switching tasks based on verbal requests, and accept that we will be perceived as procedural and less flexible.
  3. We decide to publish and maintain a visible backlog that distinguishes domain-critical work from auxiliary support and to pull new tasks from the auxiliary category when core items are cleared because this gives us an enforceable sequencing mechanism instead of continuously reprioritizing in meetings, and accept that some low-urgency requests will remain unresolved for extended periods.

Direct formulations

  1. I will reserve at least 50 percent of my working time for core domain tasks and decline additional requests once that capacity is filled.
  2. I will not start any new out-of-scope task until I receive a written prioritization that ranks it relative to my existing core commitments.
  3. I will maintain a visible backlog that separates domain-critical work from auxiliary support, and I will only take on auxiliary items after core items are completed.