ALMA 2012 CONFERENCE ROUNDTABLE SUMMARIES
Specialists vs. Generalist – What is the Right Mix?
summarized by Scott Hanton, Intertek
The roundtable focused on the question of developing specialists vs generalists. Here
are some of the key points from the discussion:
 The business model of the lab greatly impacts the need for specialists and
generalists
o Labs focused on problem-solving and methods development require more
specialists
 These specialists provide the diversity and expertise needed to
deliver this new science
o Labs focused on QA, QC, and standard methods require more generalists
 These generalists provide the coverage required for efficient
delivery of these methods
o These kinds of labs are likely to be staffed with a great majority of one or
the other
o It is vital for the lab manager to fully understand the business model and
the impact on the kind of staff to develop
o While these labs may have a preponderance of one type of scientist, it is
important to recognize the value of having a few of the opposite type
 Having a specialist available can provide troubleshooting and
problem-solving that can be very valuable to the lab
 Having a generalist available provides flexibility and helps the lab
operate more efficiently
 Motivating employees is a key part of developing specialists and generalists
o Motivation is relatively straight-forward if the type of scientist is consistent
with the focus of the lab
o It is much more difficult to find the motivation to help develop scientists
with the skill opposite the lab’s primary focus
o Using creative rewards and recognition (different than money) to address
motivation can encourage people to follow these paths
 Tips for other managers
o Look for staff that are naturally inclined to develop as specialists or
generalists
o Use creative rewards to help motivate staff to follow new paths
o As the manager, ensure you can articulate the value of every position in
the lab
o Understanding each individual’s motivation at work is the lab manager’s
responsibility and a great tool for driving change and improving lab
performance
o Recognize that dedicated specialists are often motivated by that scientific
depth and may be unlikely, or even, unable to change
o Recognize that dedicated generalists are often motivated by change and
diversity and may be unlikely, or even unable to change
What Would Steve Jobs, John Wooden and Walt Disney Do If They Were Lab
Managers
summarized by John Sadowski, ALMA
The roundtable discussed the styles of highly successful, famous leaders and then
identified the best traits of each.
Steve Jobs
- Unconventional
- Visionary, anticipated customer needs before they did
- Created excitement, team ownership
- Created Value
- Poor people skills, dismissive, belittled staff
- Recognized what talent he needed
- Pushed outside of the box thinking, out of their comfort zone
- Innovative
- Uncompromising, tenacious, demanded excellence
- Provided clear expectations
- Dictator
- Micromanaged
- Impulsive
John Wooden
- Teacher of life skills
- People focus
- Attracted talented people and recognized talent
- Galvanized talent into a winning team
- Beloved leader
- Inspiring
- Recognized the needs of individuals and customized his message to maximize
their growth
- Humble
- Excellent communicator
Walt Disney
- Dictator, micromanager
- Visionary
- Created a happy environment
- Sought perfection
- Created engagement
- Motivated people to do the impossible
- Treated customers as guests
- Created pride in the organization
Colin Powell
- Great communicator
- Recognized that leaders must earn respect
- Commanded respect
- Strategic leader
- Humble
Jack Welch
- Energetic
- Uncompromising
- Strong business results focus
- Six Sigma driven
- Analytical
- Promoted leadership training
The Best of the Best - Traits that we can emulate as laboratory managers
- Have a vision and share it
- Be a great communicator
- Earn respect and be humble
- Recognize the talent you need and go get it
- Galvanize the talent into a high performance team
- Engage people and create pride in the organization and its purpose
- Recognize people as individuals and customize your message and approach to
maximize their growth
- Provide clear expectations
- Motivate people to go beyond what they think they can do
- Have a strong business and customer focus
- Be results oriented
Leading in a Flatter Organization
Summarized by Lynne Garone, EInk
Definition of Flat organization – less layers of management; group oriented; f(size and
culture of an organization dictates how many layers of mgmt to claim it is a flat
organization)
Positives/requirements for Manager in a flatter organization








Develop more soft skills
Better communications needed – walk about
Quicker Decisions
Increased visibility
Engaging employees more
Less costl
More efficient
Empowered to make decisions


Move quicker
Suggestion was made to use a contract with employees and set out expectations
Negatives for managers in a flatter organizaiton









Too much work for the manager
Less time for under performers
Generation gaps more difficult to motivate; don’t see path for growth
More multi-tasking
No time to grow business
Fighting fires all the time
No time for strategy
No time to mentor
Disservice to high performers
Flatter organization positives for employees


Self –motivated
Develop good communication skills
Flatter organization negatives for employees



More confusion
Growth potential is harder
No time to be mentored
Benefits for Hierachal Organization

Easier for a quality organization because more levels needed for qualification
Discussion re: need to provide a technical ladder for employees in a flat organization
(good reference is the Radford Index- job descriptions as a function of level)
How to Manage Data Productively
summarized by Richard Durand, Sun Chemical
This roundtable focused on two aspects:
1. Effective Systems for Data Management
2. Managing Data Appropriate for Customers
The following points were discussed over the course of the sessions:
A. LIMS
- Most participants felt LIMS were important to their operations
- Many are not happy with the flexibility of LIMS systems they have
-General sentiment was that whatever the system chosen, they tend to fall short of
expectations
-Concern on whether some vendors understand what really needed in our environments
-There was some discussion on the possibility that ELNs and data management tools
could be implemented and replace LIMS systems
B. Data Warehousing
-Several participants noted that large data sets are often generated and manipulate such
that data warehousing was important
-The desire is to provide for warehouses in which direct customer interfaces are
available
-A discussion of Cloud Computing suggested that there is not much participation and/or
clarity of concept. Security is still considered an issue.
-Data warehousing is a topic not fully clear to all labs (possible future discussion?)
C. Data to Knowledge Conversion
-Discussion of data management versus information processing suitable for the
customer
-In today’s collaborative environment, data is spread over several analysts and collective
responses need to be managed in some way to insure customer takeaways are clear
-Different delivery formats need to be considered. Formal reports don’t always fit the
need or response time.
-Faster pace of data collection leads to bottlenecks for more complex processing issues
-Audience did not have much experience with automated software processing schemes
which interface with data generate on a variety of different instruments from various
vendors.