The Evolution of Professional Versatility: From T-Shaped to V-Shaped Talent

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD
Sep 19
11 min read

Listen to this article:

Abstract: This article examines the evolution from T-shaped to V-shaped professional competency models in response to rapidly changing workplace demands. While T-shaped professionals combine deep expertise in one domain with broad knowledge across multiple areas, V-shaped professionals develop graduated depth across adjacent domains, creating a more fluid transition between specialization and generalization. Drawing on empirical evidence and theoretical frameworks, this paper analyzes the drivers behind this shift, its organizational and individual impacts, and evidence-based strategies for developing V-shaped capabilities. Case studies across technology, healthcare, and consulting sectors demonstrate how organizations are successfully cultivating V-shaped talent to enhance adaptability, innovation, and cross-functional collaboration. The article concludes with a framework for building sustainable talent development systems that foster professional versatility in an increasingly complex business environment.

For nearly three decades, the concept of the T-shaped professional has dominated talent development conversations. First popularized by McKinsey & Company in the early 1990s and later championed by IDEO's Tim Brown, the T-shaped model represented an ideal balance: deep expertise in one area combined with sufficient breadth to collaborate across disciplines. This model served organizations well in an era of increasing specialization coupled with the need for cross-functional teamwork.

However, today's business landscape—characterized by rapid technological change, industry convergence, and unprecedented disruption—demands a more nuanced approach to professional versatility. The static dichotomy between deep and broad knowledge embodied in the T-shaped model is giving way to something more fluid: the V-shaped professional. This evolution isn't merely theoretical—it reflects the practical realities organizations face as they navigate talent shortages, skill obsolescence, and the need for greater organizational agility.

As research from the World Economic Forum (2020) indicates, organizations now cite building critical skills and competencies as a top workforce priority, while also emphasizing the need for versatile talent who can move between functions and adapt to changing demands. This shift raises important questions about how we develop, deploy, and retain talent in today's environment.

The Talent Versatility Landscape

Defining T-Shaped and V-Shaped Professionals

The T-shaped professional model describes individuals with deep expertise in one area (the vertical bar of the T) combined with broad knowledge across multiple domains (the horizontal bar). These professionals excel in their specialization while maintaining sufficient understanding of adjacent fields to collaborate effectively across disciplinary boundaries (Brown, 2009). The model gained traction because it addressed a fundamental organizational tension: the need for both specialized expertise and cross-functional collaboration.

In contrast, the V-shaped professional model represents an evolution rather than a replacement. V-shaped professionals maintain deep expertise in a core domain but develop graduated depth across adjacent areas rather than uniform shallow knowledge. This creates a continuum of competency that slopes gradually from deep to broad, forming the V shape. The critical distinction lies in the "adjacent knowledge" zone—areas of medium depth and breadth that bridge between primary expertise and general awareness.

As Leonard-Barton (1995) noted in her seminal work on knowledge and innovation, this adjacent knowledge enables professionals to apply their expertise contextually, adapting core principles to varying circumstances rather than applying standardized solutions.

Prevalence, Drivers, and Distribution

The shift toward V-shaped talent is being driven by several factors observed across industries:

Technological change: The accelerating pace of technology evolution means that skills and knowledge requirements are changing more rapidly than ever before (World Economic Forum, 2020).
Increased organizational agility requirements: Companies need employees who can quickly pivot to new priorities or temporarily fill gaps in other functions.
Talent scarcity in specialized domains: Organizations face challenges finding and retaining specialists in high-demand areas, making versatile professionals who can operate across adjacent domains increasingly valuable.
Cross-disciplinary innovation: As Johansson (2006) observed in his research on innovation, breakthrough ideas often emerge at the intersection of disciplines rather than within siloed domains.

The distribution of T-shaped versus V-shaped talent varies by industry and function. Traditional professional services like law and accounting still predominantly value T-shaped professionals, while technology, healthcare, and creative industries increasingly seek V-shaped talent. Cross-functional roles like product management, user experience design, and enterprise architecture have become natural habitats for V-shaped professionals.

Organizational and Individual Consequences of Talent Versatility Models

Organizational Performance Impacts

The choice between developing T-shaped versus V-shaped talent has significant organizational performance implications. Research suggests several specific performance dimensions are affected:

Innovation capacity: Organizations with diverse knowledge combinations demonstrate greater innovative problem-solving, particularly for complex challenges requiring multiple disciplinary perspectives (Amabile, 1998).
Organizational agility: Research on adaptive organizations indicates that companies with talent capable of working across domain boundaries respond more effectively to market shifts and demonstrate greater success in change initiatives (Worley & Lawler, 2010).
Knowledge transfer effectiveness: Studies of knowledge management show that individuals with bridging capabilities across domains facilitate more effective information flow and reduce communication barriers that often impede cross-functional collaboration (Argote & Ingram, 2000).
Resource flexibility: Research on organizational resilience suggests that companies with versatile talent require fewer temporary specialists during periods of volatility and demonstrate higher productivity during reorganizations (Lengnick-Hall et al., 2011).

However, these advantages come with trade-offs. Organizations heavily weighted toward V-shaped talent may sacrifice some depth of specialized expertise, potentially limiting breakthrough technical innovations that require extreme specialization.

Individual Wellbeing and Career Impacts

For professionals, the V-shaped development path offers both opportunities and challenges:

Career resilience: Research on career adaptability indicates that professionals with diverse skill sets demonstrate greater employability during industry disruptions and more successful career transitions (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012).
Compensation considerations: While specific premium percentages vary by industry and role, labor market research suggests that professionals who combine depth with versatility often command higher compensation than pure specialists with equivalent years of experience (Cappelli, 2008).
Cognitive benefits: Studies in cognitive psychology show that knowledge transfer across domains can improve problem-solving capabilities through conceptual transfer and analogical reasoning (Gentner & Stevens, 1983).
Engagement and satisfaction: Research on job design indicates that roles involving diverse knowledge application typically report higher engagement levels than highly specialized positions (Hackman & Oldham, 1976).

Nevertheless, developing V-shaped capabilities requires significant sustained learning investment. Professionals must balance the depth required for credibility in their primary domain against the breadth needed for versatility—a tension that can create stress and identity challenges, particularly for those trained in traditional specialist models.

Evidence-Based Organizational Responses

Strategic Adjacent Domain Mapping

Organizations can systematically identify and cultivate adjacent knowledge domains through strategic competency mapping. This process determines which knowledge areas complement core expertise and create the most value.

Research on knowledge structures suggests that organizations using structured domain mapping approaches are more effective at developing versatile talent than those using ad hoc approaches (Prahalad & Hamel, 1990). Effective implementations share several features:

Domain proximity analysis: Assessing which knowledge domains naturally complement each other based on shared concepts, methods, or contexts
Value-creation opportunity mapping: Identifying where domain combinations create unique problem-solving capabilities
Learning pathway design: Creating progressive learning journeys that build from core expertise into adjacent domains

Microsoft's Technical Leadership Development Program exemplifies this approach. The company analyzes performance patterns across its technical workforce to identify complementary domain combinations that predict leadership success. For example, software engineers who develop adjacent knowledge in user experience design and business strategy are more likely to advance to architectural leadership roles. Microsoft designs targeted rotation programs and learning pathways to systematically develop these high-value adjacent domains across its technical workforce, resulting in improved internal leadership readiness (Nadella et al., 2017).

Cross-Functional Project Immersion

Structured cross-functional project experiences provide powerful mechanisms for developing adjacent domain knowledge. Unlike traditional job rotations, these immersive project experiences target specific adjacent knowledge acquisition while allowing professionals to apply their core expertise.

Time-bounded project secondments: 3-6 month assignments to adjacent functions
Cross-functional innovation teams: Diverse teams addressing complex challenges requiring multiple perspectives
Knowledge exchange partnerships: Paired working relationships between professionals from adjacent domains
Challenge-based learning communities: Groups tackling shared problems from different disciplinary perspectives

Mayo Clinic implements a Clinical-Technical Innovation Fellows program where clinicians and technical specialists work in paired relationships on healthcare innovation challenges. Each professional maintains their primary role while spending a portion of their time immersed in their partner's domain. This approach enables physicians to develop sufficient adjacent technical knowledge to effectively co-create digital health solutions, while technical specialists gain enough clinical context to design solutions that integrate into care workflows. Projects led by these cross-disciplinary pairs demonstrate higher adoption rates and greater clinical impact than those developed by traditional siloed teams (Bates et al., 2018).

Expertise Network Cultivation

Organizations can systematically develop the connections that facilitate adjacent knowledge development through expertise network design. These networks create the infrastructure for knowledge exchange across domains.

Communities of practice bridges: Formal connections between related practice communities
Knowledge broker roles: Designated positions responsible for translating between specialized domains
Shared learning forums: Regular cross-functional learning events focused on intersecting knowledge domains
Collaborative knowledge repositories: Systems that make specialized knowledge accessible across boundaries

Accenture's Technology Innovation Hub employs a sophisticated expertise network approach. The company maps expertise relationships across domains and deliberately constructs "knowledge bridges" between complementary specialties. These bridges include formal mentorship pairings, scheduled cross-training sessions, and collaborative problem-solving forums. This approach has contributed to improved innovation capabilities and client solution development through more fluid exchange of knowledge throughout the organization (Cantrell & Smith, 2010).

Learning Ecosystem Redesign

Developing V-shaped professionals requires fundamentally reimagining organizational learning systems. Traditional learning models that segregate content by discipline or function reinforce T-shaped development but impede V-shaped growth.

Interdisciplinary learning pathways: Progressive learning journeys that span multiple related domains
Context-based learning modules: Content organized around business contexts rather than isolated disciplines
Knowledge application forums: Structured opportunities to apply specialized knowledge in adjacent domains
Credential stacking systems: Recognition frameworks that value combinations of expertise

IBM redesigned its technical learning ecosystem around "knowledge constellations" rather than isolated competencies. Learning journeys are mapped as interconnected clusters of related knowledge, with clear pathways between adjacent domains. Each professional maintains primary expertise while systematically developing adjacent knowledge areas relevant to their career trajectory. Learning experiences blend technical depth with business context, ensuring that adjacent knowledge development remains practical rather than theoretical. This approach has contributed to improved talent retention and internal mobility (Lesser & Rivera, 2006).

Building Long-Term Versatility Capabilities

Competency Architecture Evolution

Organizations must evolve their fundamental competency frameworks to support V-shaped talent development. Traditional competency models that rigidly separate domains and emphasize depth over versatility create structural barriers to V-shaped growth.

Next-generation competency architectures share several characteristics:

Relational competency mapping: Defining how competencies relate to and complement each other, not just what each contains
Graduated proficiency metrics: Measuring knowledge depth along a continuum rather than binary expert/non-expert designations
Context-based application standards: Evaluating how effectively knowledge is applied in varying contexts, not just technical correctness
Bridge competency recognition: Explicitly valuing the ability to connect and translate between specialized domains

As Grant and Parker (2009) note in their research on work design, these evolved competency frameworks shift focus from "what one knows" to "how one uses knowledge across contexts"—a critical distinction for V-shaped development.

Adaptive Career Pathing

Traditional career ladders designed for specialist progression often impede V-shaped development. Organizations need more flexible career architectures that value and reward versatility alongside depth.

Lattice vs. ladder models: Multi-dimensional progression frameworks that value both depth and breadth
Portfolio role design: Positions that deliberately combine responsibilities across adjacent domains
T-to-V transition support: Structured programs helping specialists expand into adjacent domains
Recognition systems for knowledge versatility: Rewards that specifically acknowledge successful knowledge application across contexts

Unilever has redesigned its marketing function around a more adaptive career model. Rather than progressing along a single specialist track, marketing professionals pursue customized pathways that combine traditional marketing expertise with adjacent domains like data analytics, consumer psychology, or sustainability. Each professional maintains a "portfolio of expertise" that evolves throughout their career. Performance evaluation explicitly measures both depth and versatility. This approach has contributed to improved marketing effectiveness while reducing external hiring costs through greater internal versatility (Unilever, 2019).

Learning Culture Transformation

Developing V-shaped talent ultimately requires transforming organizational learning culture from one that prizes narrow expertise to one that values versatile knowledge application.

Normalized continuous learning: Cultural expectation that all professionals continuously develop adjacent knowledge
Psychological safety for knowledge exploration: Safe environment for professionals to extend beyond their core expertise
Celebrated knowledge synthesis: Recognition of innovative combinations of knowledge from different domains
Redefined expertise concept: Shift from "knowing everything about one thing" to "effectively integrating knowledge across domains"

Adobe transformed its engineering culture through a "T to V" initiative that systematically reshaped learning norms. The company introduced expertise expansion opportunities giving engineers dedicated time to develop adjacent skills, created cross-functional problem-solving forums, and redesigned performance evaluations to reward knowledge versatility. Leadership modeling was crucial—senior leaders publicly shared their own adjacent domain learning journeys. Engineering managers were trained to coach for versatility rather than just technical depth. This cultural transformation has contributed to increased engineer-initiated innovations and improved cross-functional collaboration effectiveness (Adobe, 2020).

Conclusion

The evolution from T-shaped to V-shaped talent represents a significant shift in how organizations develop professional capabilities for an increasingly complex environment. While T-shaped professionals remain valuable, the graduated depth across adjacent domains that characterizes V-shaped talent offers distinct advantages for both organizations and individuals navigating rapid change and complex challenges.

The evidence presented demonstrates that organizations systematically developing V-shaped talent realize measurable benefits in innovation capacity, organizational agility, and knowledge transfer effectiveness. For individuals, the V-shaped development path enhances career resilience, cognitive flexibility, and long-term employability.

Successfully cultivating V-shaped talent requires deliberate organizational strategies: mapping high-value adjacent domain combinations, creating immersive cross-functional experiences, building expertise networks that facilitate knowledge flow across boundaries, and redesigning learning systems to support interdisciplinary development. These tactical approaches must be reinforced by more fundamental transformations in competency architectures, career pathing, and learning culture.

As organizations and professionals navigate an increasingly interdependent knowledge landscape, the ability to develop and deploy versatile talent will become a critical differentiator. The most successful organizations will be those that effectively balance specialized expertise with adjacent domain knowledge—creating workforces that are both deeply knowledgeable and remarkably adaptable.

References

Adobe. (2020). Adobe for all: Diversity and inclusion annual report. Adobe Inc.
Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, 76(5), 76-87.
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Bates, D. W., Landman, A., & Levine, D. M. (2018). Health apps and health policy: What is needed? JAMA, 320(19), 1975-1976.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. Harper Business.
Cantrell, S., & Smith, D. (2010). Workforce of one: Revolutionizing talent management through customization. Harvard Business Press.
Cappelli, P. (2008). Talent on demand: Managing talent in an age of uncertainty. Harvard Business Press.
Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (1983). Mental models. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1), 317-375.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279.
Johansson, F. (2006). The Medici effect: What elephants and epidemics can teach us about innovation. Harvard Business School Press.
Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Beck, T. E., & Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (2011). Developing a capacity for organizational resilience through strategic human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 21(3), 243-255.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the sources of innovation. Harvard Business School Press.
Lesser, E., & Rivera, R. (2006). Closing the generational divide: Shifting workforce demographics and the learning function. IBM Institute for Business Value.
Nadella, S., Shaw, G., & Nichols, J. T. (2017). Hit refresh: The quest to rediscover Microsoft's soul and imagine a better future for everyone. Harper Business.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79-91.
Savickas, M. L., & Porfeli, E. J. (2012). Career Adapt-Abilities Scale: Construction, reliability, and measurement equivalence across 13 countries. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 661-673.
Unilever. (2019). Unilever annual report and accounts 2019. Unilever PLC.
Worley, C. G., & Lawler, E. E. (2010). Agility and organization design: A diagnostic framework. Organizational Dynamics, 39(2), 194-204.
World Economic Forum. (2020). The future of jobs report. World Economic Forum.

Jonathan H. Westover, PhD is Chief Academic & Learning Officer (HCI Academy); Associate Dean and Director of HR Programs (WGU); Professor, Organizational Leadership (UVU); OD/HR/Leadership Consultant (Human Capital Innovations). Read Jonathan Westover's executive profile here.

Suggested Citation: Westover, J. H. (2025). The Evolution of Professional Versatility: From T-Shaped to V-Shaped Talent. Human Capital Leadership Review, 25(3). doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.26.3.7