Skip to main content

The T-Shape Deception

December 13, 2017

Do you think people need to be forged into a T-shape? Think again. Focus on the aspects preventing people from employing their intrinsic T-potential.

I have never worked with a single person who mastered no more than a single skill. Every individual I worked with had the intrinsic capability to perform in more than one type of work. Every individual I worked with had the intrinsic ability to join forces with people that master other areas of expertise.

Every individual is naturally T-shaped. Ultimately, people can unite to form collectively T-shaped eco-systems, entities, often teams.

I have never worked with a single person who mastered every possible skill needed to perform any type of work that might arise when dealing with complex challenges. The demand for people to be able to do just that, is absurd. Yet, it is how the T-shape metaphor is abused. The idea that a cross-functional entity can only be composed of fully cross-functional individuals.

Every individual is naturally T-shaped. People are impeded or blocked from employing their intrinsic T-potential rather than being unwilling to do so. Common causes are function descriptions, hierarchy, systems, structures, procedures, instructions, incentives, rewards and other HR processes, enterprise career pressure.

The iron triangle of valuationThe message that external forces need to mould people into T-shapes is an expression of distrust and disbelief in the potential of people. People are not resources or an assembly of ‘skill’ parts. People don’t need to be deconstructed, disassembled, reconstructed or amended for any preferred shape, like parts forged to fit a pre-empted construction. Systemic impediments need to be removed that prevent people from exploring and discovering their needs and interests, from growing their talents and potential.

Rather than judging people for the expertise they (don’t) demonstrate, focus on creating a context, an environment in which people can unleash their motivation and their multi-skilled potential. An environment where people can bring in their multi-skills and expertise to leverage a cross-functional and multi-skilled entity (like contributing to T-shaping a team). In the end, problems in the Complex Novelty space go beyond any individual’s problem-solving capabilities, T-shaped or not. They need T-shaped teams and eco-systems to be an integral part of. And -ultimately- a context in which cross-fertilisation happens; people extending their skill sets through peer collaboration and peer learning.

Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done.
(Principle #5 from the Agile Manifesto)

The purpose of the Scrum framework is to establish essential boundaries of such an environment of self-organization and intrinsic motivation thriving on the professional drive of people to create excellent products. Scrum Master, as a modern manager, is accountable for fostering such an environment of Scrum. A safe environment where people can demonstrate traditionally unsafe behavior, like going beyond the limitations of their function descriptions.


What did you think about this post?

Comments (5)


Michael Wallace
07:34 pm December 13, 2017

I HAVE worked with individuals that were not interested in learning new technical skills, and preferred to focus on their known, favorite technology. They may have had the capability to learn new skills but not the interest.


Brandon Wittwer
09:35 pm December 14, 2017

The "T-shaped skills" mantra has different effects on different people. On me it feels restricting, that I am expected to be bad at things that aren't in my job title and therefore I shouldn't be trusted to do them. I identify with the core of this article. To others, T-Shaped skills is an expressed challenge to expand their expertise into areas they are less comfortable in. I think this is the reason for the term; to usher inspiration and motivation to expand yourself.

I agree with this article, that the practice of identifying a person by the vertical stroke of their T inadvertently trims the expectations and , for some, the motivation to expand the width of their T.

I rather prefer the term Subject Matter Expertise (SME). Any developer can grow to earn the right to claim to be an SME on any number of topics, no matter their job title.


Brandon Wittwer
09:36 pm December 14, 2017

The "T-shaped skills" mantra has different effects on different people. On me it feels restricting, that I am expected to be bad at things that aren't in my job title and therefore I shouldn't be trusted to do them. I identify with the core of this article. To others, T-Shaped skills is an expressed challenge to expand their expertise into areas they are less comfortable in. I think this is the reason for the term; to usher inspiration and motivation to expand yourself.

I agree with this article, that the practice of identifying a person by the vertical stroke of their T inadvertently trims the expectations and , for some, the motivation to expand the width of their T.

I rather prefer the term Subject Matter Expertise (SME). Any developer can grow to earn the right to claim to be an SME on any number of topics, no matter their job title.


Eduardo Valenzuela
08:52 am July 31, 2020

Thank you Mr. Verheyen, nice article :) Natural T-shaping vs forced T-shaping. Setting up the environment vs setting up the people.


Irina Michiels
03:21 pm July 31, 2020

This is often situation. It is clear, that if people are ok for an overlapping level which is not damaging for their carrier (and will be happy to study in such case), but there will be a heavy conflict with possible contractual consequences if, for example, a full-stack developer is forced by "self-organization" to do full-time testing during months. He understands that this will damage his sellability on the market, he will not have time to follow the technology in which he has already invested his time and his money. Missing skills should be hired, the team members should be able safuly enter and quit the team if there is no way to find a good balance.
Citations from the Scrum Guide:
1. Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their work...
2. Cross-functional teams have all competencies needed to accomplish the work... (team, but not necessary that individuals)
3. The team model in Scrum is designed to OPTIMIZE flexibility, creativity, and
productivity...
If the balance based on the common sense is not reacheable, then yes, person will not be interested. He will not feel safe in the team and he will quit.