Yes, there is a balance in skills. But I disagree about the skill. Every skill can be refined infinitely. It can seem obvious that if somebody is expert programmer in one narrow application, he reached his "peak". It is however less obvious that a product manager of the same thing has reached the very same peak, yet the product obviously needs the work of both.
There is an interesting dichotomy in thinking, which again points to the social status game. People who we deem to have low social status (e.g. blue collar workers) we relegate to this taylorist idea that they must be super-specialized, otherwise they are useless. On the other hand, people who we think should have high social status (e.g. managers) we categorize that they need to be flexible and have broad (rather than deep) skill set, and indeed, we consider being deep a disadvantage.
But in reality, both sides benefit from the mix of skills, both sides often have the mix of skills (especially the productive people), and it has not much to do with their actual day-to-day jobs.
There is an interesting dichotomy in thinking, which again points to the social status game. People who we deem to have low social status (e.g. blue collar workers) we relegate to this taylorist idea that they must be super-specialized, otherwise they are useless. On the other hand, people who we think should have high social status (e.g. managers) we categorize that they need to be flexible and have broad (rather than deep) skill set, and indeed, we consider being deep a disadvantage.
But in reality, both sides benefit from the mix of skills, both sides often have the mix of skills (especially the productive people), and it has not much to do with their actual day-to-day jobs.