I have been seeing a lot of discussion on how especially in IT on how top talents are really hard to find. This is somewhat confusing to me. What is the difference between good talent vs. top talent? Many recruiters and companies are just looking for top talents. But what I would like to know how you define “top talent” and how he or she is different from “just good talent”.
Is it years of experience with a certain technology? But what if you don’t have deep knowledge but you have instead broad knowledge on technologies and you get deeper knowledge on “need to know basis”. Can you still be a top talent?
I have about 17 years of expertise in the IT field and I have been doing all kinds of things. I have been an architect, developer, integration specialist, lead developer, and scrum master to name a few. I don’t consider having a really deep knowledge of anything but “good enough” knowledge of a broad range of technologies. Does this mean that I cannot be a “top talent”?
I don’t know why I get annoyed about these vague terms but I do. 🙂 Maybe it has something to do with these unbelievable job requirements that you see sometimes. You should be a master of almost everything related to IT and software development.
What I would like is that people would be considered also on how “good guy or gal” they are and how willing they are on learning new things and how they fit your organization. Not just blindly stare at acronyms in the CV. But then could you have these “top talents” that the recruiters are raving about? 🙂