The shapes
Six archetypes to describe the shape of a tech professional: depth, breadth, balance. The quiz doesn't pigeonhole you — it shows where you stand today.
The pure specialist. Very deep expertise in a single domain, little lateral breadth. The default vertical shape: you go far, in one direction.
Archetypes
- ▸Domain lead the whole team relies on
- ▸Specialist hire in a company with one hard problem to solve
- ▸Senior engineer who has spent 8+ years in the same stack
When you're a I
- +You are the go-to person for hard problems in your domain
- +Your résumé lists long years in the same expertise
- +You hate being pulled away from what you master
- +You see nuance where others see a single block
The trap
Your domain can become obsolete. If you never broaden, you get stuck the day the tech shifts or the context demands something else.
Deep expertise in one domain, plus broad culture across many others. You can go to the bottom of your home turf and hold a serious conversation everywhere else.
Origin
The term appears in a 1991 paper by David Guest ("The hunt is on for the Renaissance man of computing"), and was popularized by Tim Brown at IDEO and in his book Change by Design (2009).
Archetypes
- ▸Tech Lead with a dominant discipline who can argue architecture with anyone
- ▸Senior dev who has lived through two or three stacks and kept a clear favorite
- ▸Consultant with a core craft who reads broadly around it
When you're a T
- +You have a clear domain where you are noticeably above average
- +You can ask the right questions in most other tech topics
- +You get cross-cutting problems because you bridge worlds
- +You read and listen broadly outside your core craft
The trap
You get hired for your depth but expected to deliver breadth — a fragile balance, and easy to drift into pure generalist if you stop maintaining the vertical bar.
Two legs of depth instead of one, plus a transverse layer above. You do not have one reference domain — you have two, and you make them talk to each other.
Origin
Concept formalized around 2007 by Phil Gardner of the Collegiate Employment Research Institute (Michigan State University), in research on the employability of multi-skilled graduates.
Archetypes
- ▸Backend + Data, comfortable on both sides
- ▸Product + Tech, able to write the spec and push back on architecture
- ▸Architect who still codes, or senior dev who shapes the product
When you're a Π
- +You are credible in depth across two different worlds
- +You bridge two teams that struggle to talk to each other
- +You switch hats during the same day without friction
- +You see the traps on both sides before everyone else
The trap
Keeping two expertises sharp takes twice the ongoing investment. The risk is the silent erosion of one leg while you feed the other.
Several domains of depth (three or more), like the teeth of a comb, sitting on a shared base. No longer one or two legs — a row of them.
Archetypes
- ▸Staff Engineer in a scale-up where everything is on fire at once
- ▸Early-stage startup CTO who touches everything out of necessity
- ▸Senior IC in a product company who has carried several verticals
When you're a Comb
- +You have more than two domains where people seriously ask your opinion
- +You move between frontend, infra, data, security without shifting posture
- +You get sent on new topics because you absorb fast
- +You hate being pulled away from either tech or product for too long
The trap
With many depths, you may no longer be "the best" anywhere — seen as versatile and useful, but not indispensable on any single topic.
A profile combining serious technical depth with a leadership / management dimension. Several vertical pillars connected at the top, but one pillar is people.
Archetypes
- ▸VP Engineering with a Staff Engineer background
- ▸Director who still codes occasionally and watches architecture
- ▸Engineering Manager who steers architecture as much as people
When you're a M
- +You manage people while keeping real technical depth
- +You are heard on architecture, not only on team matters
- +You refuse to choose between the IC and the manager track
- +You see tech decisions with their human cost, and vice versa
The trap
Management eats cognitive time that tech does not give back. You can drift into pure manager mode without noticing, and lose the depth that made you credible.
Polyvalent or visionary profile: depth across several domains, and above all a transverse reading that connects what others see in silos. You are not defined by a single turf.
Archetypes
- ▸Founder / CTO of a startup in scale phase
- ▸Principal Engineer in a large product company
- ▸Multi-vertical Tech Director, or senior multi-industry consultant
When you're a X
- +You read problems at several levels at once
- +You get called when the topic does not fit any existing box
- +You make connections that specialists miss
- +You are comfortable with ambiguity and brand-new topics
The trap
No home turf — you can be seen as "everywhere, therefore nowhere". Requires a senior posture and strong legibility to avoid being filed under a default category.
Further reading
- Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World — David Epstein (2019). The central book on the value of generalists in complex domains. Relevant for understanding T, Pi, Comb, X shapes.
- Team Topologies: Organizing Business and Technology Teams for Fast Flow — Matthew Skelton & Manuel Pais (2019). About team shapes rather than individual ones, but many ideas apply to how shapes complement each other.
- Staff Engineer: Leadership beyond the management track — Will Larson (2021). For I and T profiles who want to grow without becoming managers — the senior IC path.
- Change by Design — Tim Brown (2009). Tim Brown (former IDEO CEO) on the T-shape concept in design and tech hiring.