| You are not logged in | Free Registration | Add to My AOL, MyYahoo, Google, Bloglines | |
>>advanced search |
Tammy Erickson is an author and expert on organizations and the changing workforce and, in particular, the generational differences between workers today. She has also done extensive research on how corporations innovate through collaboration. Here Erickson talks with Des Dearlove about the best ways to unite generations into a productive workforce.
Because they grew up at a time when events such as terrorism and school violence were very much in the news, they tend to think in terms of how to make the most out of today and make sure that what they are doing is meaningful, interesting and challenging. They are a little less likely to defer gratification than some of the other generations.
So we actually have an alarming situation developing in which we'll have a shortage of people with higher-level skills and, unfortunately, a surplus of under-educated people.
Interestingly, it's skewed; girls tend to finish more than boys and some of that, I think, is a sense of relevance. A lot of the boys I interviewed felt they had opportunities available to them but that the college classes just weren't relevant to achieving what they wanted to achieve.
Generation Y doesn't see that at all: feedback has a totally different meaning. For them, feedback is a tip, it's coaching, and it's something they want all the time, multiple times a day. So you can now witness some funny organizational situations in which a senior person will say, "Look kid, I told you; you're doing fine!" But it's not enough for Generation Y; the young person wants more and more bits of feedback.
If you were going to get together with a friend for dinner, you'd probably call in advance; you'd probably decide on a time and a place you were going to meet. They wouldn't do any of that. They'd wait until the moment and then would send a message, probably by text instead of trying to connect voice-to-voice.
But the interesting thing is, even then, the message would not say, "Let's meet": it would say, "Where are you?" It would be a request for your coordinates. Then they would text back their coordinates and begin a process of homing in on each other, like ships with radar, until they meet up at a particular place. They're coordinators. Also, they love to text message. Often they prefer to text rather than talk.
For example, he or she should discuss how the team is going to communicate with each other, what will be considered as "office hours", what the start time for the day is (and be precise: does everyone have to come in at 08:00 or 08:30?).
Those are workplace issues this generation doesn't understand much about, so bring those kinds of normative behaviours out into the open: encourage the team to have a conversation if the manager's rules are difficult for some to understand, or accept.
Decide which rules are something you must have, and yes, they'll adapt; they'll live by them. But I think you have to make them clear.
We found out that diversity works against collaboration. If you and I are different in just about any way — generationally, politically, educationally — that will make collaboration more difficult, if not impossible.
Collaboration is a discretionary activity. A worker can think, "I don't have to do it if I don't want to: you can't make me." And so to encourage such a worker, a company needs to make it easy to collaborate. If it's really difficult, I'm just going to take off and work somewhere else. It also helps build collaboration if all team members have a clearly defined role.
I would suggest that managers need a physical meeting to get that to happen. They need to make sure roles are clear; they need to make sure that the process of collaborating is easy; and they need to role-model what it means to be a team player. That makes a big difference.
Collaboration, in fact, goes against about five centuries of management practice and theory; and it certainly affects our younger generations in terms of their ability to feel comfortable and fit in, so that is the kind of thing we need to think about.
Organizations in the past were based on an equation that essentially traded loyalty to the organization and the boss for protection and care. That's not a collaborative concept; that leads to silo kinds of behaviour, so organizations need to begin to break that equation with different kinds of arrangements with employees.
So it would be impolite in many companies for me to comment directly to you on the quality of your work. I might gossip a bit, but I wouldn't talk to you directly about it. That won't work in a collaborative organization. So there are lots of behavioural things that we need to address head-on in order to begin to shift organizations, both to take advantage of collaborative technology and to welcome younger members of the workforce.
My initial interviews with Gen Xers were a bit shocking to me as a Boomer. But over the course of several years of research, I really came to appreciate and respect Gen Xs. Their values are very different from mine, the way they approach things.
For example, one man told me that Boomers are intent on climbing the beanstalk: "You just want to get as high as you can go." He continued, "I'm worried about the base of the beanstalk. I want to make sure that it's as sturdy and as broad as it can be."
I think that's a pretty good characterization of the difference. Gen X workers think in terms of options, what ifs. What would I do if this were to happen? Have I got a back-up plan? They're very thoughtful about keeping multiple balls in the air at the same time, whereas Boomers may be much more full-steam-ahead toward one goal.
Given our world today, given the challenges we face, I think Xs are going to be fantastic leaders. I think they actually bring the mindset that we need to lead our organizations in new directions over the next several decades. That makes me feel optimistic.
Des Dearlove is a long-term contributor and columnist for The Times and a contributing editor to Strategy+Business. Stuart Crainer is a contributing editor to Strategy+Business and executive editor of Business Strategy Review.
[more]