>The "someone else is better at the stuff I don't want to do than me" argument rarely holds up either. The friction that comes from dividing the work along line

>The "someone else is better at the stuff I don't want to do than me" argument rarely holds up either. The friction that comes from dividing the work along lines like modeling and production and trying to hand off is rarely worth it when one person can do both. This was always my attitude. Every time you split something you add coordination overhead. This overhead gets worse the more times you split. Of course there is specialization that can make someone else sufficiently more effective that you shouldn't do everything. But every gain in specialization has to be weighed against increased communication costs. Add to that a lot of problems don't need a lot of specialization but touch on many different disciplines. This is why I think, contrary to the trend of specialization, we need generalists that can cover most bases at once and decrease the communication overhead considerably. It's often still good to have specialists, but you should mostly employ generalists and only a few specialists in key technologies that set your company apart from others.