Working With Others

One of the toughest things a manager might have to do sometime in his/her career is to admit a mistake. When University of Minnesota Men’s Athletic Director Joel Maturi hired Tim Brewster as the head football coach, I thought it was a mistake to hire a head coach of a NCAA Division I football program who not only had no head coaching experience, but also lacked a track record as an offensive or defensive coordinator. When he was offered the job, Brewster was a tight ends coach with the Denver Broncos – the equivalent of a first line manager in the corporate world. With a 6-18 record in Big Ten play – and dismal late season performances both this year and last, you would think that Maturi would have the courage to acknowledge a mistake was made and send Brewster on his way.

Instead, this morning the StarTribune reported that Maturi is planning on offering head football coach Tim Brewster a contract extension! Here is Maturi’s primary reason:

“We need stability with the coach, with the coaching staff,” Maturi said. “And this should also bode well for the recruiting going on and for the future of Gophers football.”

I supposed you could make a case for a contract extension if there was a glimmer of hope that there would be some improvement in performance. But I’m not buying the stability argument.

The decision to extend this contract rewards less than stellar performance and that is a dangerous practice in any organization. However, the stability argument just does not hold water. Since Brewster took over there have been five different coordinators (3 defensive and 2 offensive) in the three years of his tenure. Having that much turnover in these leadership positions is generally not a good thing – and does not promote consistency or stability in the program.

Of course, the Gophers do play Iowa State in a bowl game on December 31, 2009, and Maturi did fire the previous coach after his team blew a huge lead in a bowl game in December, 2006. So stay tuned…

As I mentioned the other day on a recent post on Working With Twenty Somethings, I spent last weekend at The Fourth Annual Solstice Film Festival in Minneapolis MN. While I was underwhelmed by many of the offerings, another documentary that I thought was incredibly well-done was the award-winningBicycle Dreams.

Bicycle Dreams, directed by Steve Auerbach, is the story of the 2005 Race Across America – a 3000 mile bicycle race from San Diego, CA to Atlantic City, NJ. The synopsis from the official website reads:

They are seekers, madmen, and angels hell-bent on riding across America on a bicycle in less than ten days. But what begins as the adventure of a lifetime is transformed in an instant when tragedy strikes the race. These voyagers discover what is truly at stake as they pedal on, praying for the deliverance only the finish line can bring. By journey’s end, some are saved, others are lost, but all learn that the fuel that takes a soul toward its own true destiny is desire. … Top riders finish in under 10 days, riding over 300 miles per day and sleeping only a few hours per night. Amid the sleepless grind, riders must endure the searing heat of the Mojave Desert, the agonizing climbs and descents of the Rockies, the driving winds of the Great Plains, and the twisting switchbacks of the Appalachians before the final sprint to the finish line in Atlantic City. With little prize money at stake, the fundamental goal of the race is simply to finish, a challenge half of all riders fail to meet.

I have seen a lot of documentary films. This one is without question in my top 5 of all time. See it.

What I do want to address is the concept of individual contributor. In most organizations, this is the place where everyone starts. We have no direct reports. Our manager, who hopefully is competent, gives us assignments. And while we may work on a team, we deliver results by doing the work ourselves – alone. Bicycle Dreams and the Race Across America it documents is a story about individual contributors – those “seekers, madmen, and angels hell-bent on riding across America on a bicycle in less than ten days”. However, what becomes crystal clear is that while one individual is pedaling the high tech machine called a bicycle across deserts, mountain ranges and tall grass prairie, they are not alone. In each case, a sizable support team accompanies the racers in a large RV and provide medical, physical, mechanical, nutritional, and emotional support along the way. Each cyclist needs – no, is totally dependent on – his/her support team to succeed. And what is amazing is that the race is not necessarily won by the fastest racer, but by the fastest racer with the best support team.

So after seeing this movie, I began thinking about whether or not individual contributors in the workplace actually go it alone. Are the individuals who receive the highest performance ratings totally independent or – like the riders in the Race Across America – are they dependent on others for their success? Before I share my point of view, I’d invite comments from others. What do you think?

Last weekend was the Fourth Annual Solstice Film Festival in Minneapolis,MN. According to the organizers, “The Solstice Organization, over the past 4 years, has solidified itself as one of the premiere newcomers in the film industry.  Solstice Film Festival, has garnered a reputation of being one the best film festivals in the mid-west. The 2009 Solstice Film Festival once again boasts an award-winning program featuring exclusive premieres, top-notch short galleries and thought provoking documentaries.”

Quite frankly, I was a bit disappointed. While the overall quality was generally good, with over 800 submissions, I expected more.

There were, however, a couple of blog-worthy entries: “Bicycle Dreams” which I will discuss on Working With Others; and “Our Time” which I’ll address here.

Directed by Matt Heineman and Matt Wiggins, Our Time originally premiered as The Young Americans Project. Here is the official synopsis:

What’s up with kids these days? After graduating from college, four friends load up an RV and embark on a journey across America to find out what their generation is really about. The group travels to all 48 continental states asking their peers the same questions they had been asking themselves. They explore issues such as race, the Internet, political awareness, the environment and pop culture. Along the road the foursome meets a cross section of American society, ranging from a farmer in Kansas to a drug dealer in New Mexico, from a cancer researcher in Boston to the founder of Facebook in Silicon Valley. ‘The Young Americans Project’ is a passionate portrayal of a generation, a meditation on coming of age in 21st Century America, and a rallying cry against apathy.

I’ve had some first hand experience with documentary films and film makers. What you learn very early on is that you may start out wanting to make a film about “A” and you end up with something about “B”. And the best documentary films have a “cinema verite” quality about them where the film makers let the story come to them as it unfolds rather than trying to influence or shape it in a certain way. Eudora Welty’s approach of “listening for a story” works well here.

In the narration at the beginning of the film, you hear these words:

“Much of what is said about Generation Y comes from people who are not part of it… This generation is too big and too diverse to fit under one label”.

What strikes me about this documentary is that Heineman and Wiggins stuck to the premise that this generation is “too big and diverse” and they let the film show that. However, when I watched this film – and I hope everyone who has the opportunity will also see it – I found myself asking at least two questions.  First, what do each of the people featured really have in common with one another? For example, what does Facebook founder Mark Zuckerman have in common with Xavier Jirron from New Mexico?  And second, what are the similarities and differences between the coming of age of my Boomer Generation and that of Gen Y?

In considering the first question, what jumps out at me is the entrepreneurial aspect of the members of this generation.  In just about each of the examples you have people engaging life the best that they know how, meeting it on its own terms, and trying to make a difference by not plugging into a big corporation but by creating opportunity by seeing a need and addressing it. What you also see is a generation that is essentially asking the same existential questions about what is next – some more deeply than others.

In some ways answering the second question is actually easier.  When I was in college, my parents’ generation had about as many complimentary things to say about us as the older generations did about Gen Y in this film.  As we paraded around in our blue work shirts and red arm bands (OK-I was one of those people!) we were as much a puzzlement as the twenty-somethings are with their flip-flops, tattoos and cell-phones. And we both had an undercurrent of discontent about the establishment. Ours was about the Vietnam War and the military industrial complex. I see Gen Y as having more of a steady push for change or at least questioning just about every institution.  And I think that examination is not only a good thing, it is a necessary thing.

What I really appreciated about Our Time was that it was a film about Gen Y by Gen Y.  As someone who primary focus is helping members of each generation work and play well together, I am constantly in learning mode.  It was just nice to have a data point about the Millennials that was not another survey or book.  Hearing the voices of this generation has, if nothing else, increased my interest in not only wanting to understand them, but also wanting them to succeed.

If others have seen Our Time I’d love to hear your comments. Its next screening is during the ACEFEST on July 11, 2009 at 4:30PM at the Tribeca Cinemas, 54 Varick Street, NY, NY.

Last Saturday I took time out to see Every Little Step.  As noted on Yahoo:

“Explores the journey of A Chorus Line from its initial idea to its current Broadway revival and goes behind the scenes with exclusive interviews and footage of the revival’s audition process, revealing the dramatic journey of the performers.”

First of all, run don’t walk to a theater near you to see this documentary.  The film has a lot to say about the creative process. However, what I want to address here is the competitive nature of the audition process.

In thinking about this post I came across a blog titled, Gen Y Driven by Affirmation.  Alyssa Carter talks about everyone getting a trophy or an award.  Contrast that reality with the audition process for the current remake of A Chorus Line.  According to the documentary, there were over 3000 people auditioning for thirteen primary roles in this production.  In contrast the typical Ivy League School gets about 20,000 applications and makes about 2000 admission offers.

So how does the Millennial prepare himself or herself for such an audition process when the conventional view of this generation is one of entitlement and neediness?

Here is my hypothesis.  For the Millennials who show up for an audition like the one for the casting of A Chorus Line, it is not their first rodeo.  These twenty-somethings are a product of schools like Fiorello H. LaGuardia High School of Music, Art & Performing Arts (formerly The NYC School for Performing Arts made famous in the movie Fame). Getting into such places is an audition.  So when most Millennials show up for an audition for a Broadway Show, they know that most will not get the “trophy”.

I learned about this Christian Science Monitor article “Do You Get The Millennial Generation” from Carol Phillips on Twitter.com.  (BTW – Check out Carol’s blog – MillennialMarketing!)  The premise of the article is that the Baby Boomer, Gen X, and Millennial generations each have a coming of age movie that is emblematic of the characteristics/values of each generation.  For the Baby Boomers, it was The Graduate. For Gen X, it was Risky Business. And for the Millennials, the authors offer The Devil Wears Prada as the leading candidate.  Amidst a busy travel/work schedule, I never got around to seeing The Devil when it made its theater run.  So I found a copy of the DVD for $8.99, stuck it in my MacBook and settled in with a glass of iced tea in hand.  In the spirit of full disclosure, I’ve always been a Meryl Streep fan and she did not disappoint.

Here is the relevant summary from the Christian Science Monitor article by Morley Winograd and Michael D. Hais:

“Millennials are the American generation least bound by gender role expectations, so it isn’t surprising that the protagonist is a young woman with an androgynous name, Andy (Sachs). Because Millennials are also the most tolerant American generation, it’s not surprising that Andy’s best friends are an African-American woman, a gay man, and her sensitive boyfriend who aspires to be a chef. In true Millennial fashion, Andy constantly relies on her friends and parents, whom she adores, for love, advice, and support.

Andy is temporarily attracted by the glitter of the world of high fashion. However, like others of this generation who are driven by a desire to solve society’s problems, she realizes her true calling is far different.

She breaks with her boss, Miranda Priestly, at the fashion magazine where she works, so that she can take a job writing for a liberal newspaper. But, as a polite and conventional Millennial, the break is not harsh. In fact, her old boss, the devil herself, provides the crucial reference for Andy’s new job.

Everyone in politics and pop culture should learn the lesson MTV belatedly has. To really understand the preferences of young people, take a look at their generation and not simply their age. That will tell you everything you need to know”

Of course this a view of the Millennials.  I am curious if Millennials see The Devil Wears Prada as their coming of age movie.

What I have noticed is that researchers, the media, and people in general refer to the generation whose first members were born around 1980 (plus or minus a year) as Gen Y, Millennials, Twentysomethings, Nexters, and other names that are best unmentioned.  So which one is correct?

I use the moniker “twentysomethings” on this blog.  However, the members of this generation won’t always be twentysomethings.  So while that title works today, we may need a more permanent one.

I would rule out “Nexters” because like twentysomethings it will not endure.  It will only work until the “next” “nexters” come along.  The folks over at Generational Differences Consulting vote for “Millennials” as the name of choice.  In fact, on Twitter.com today, they state that they are on a mission “to get unknowing people to stop using Gen Y for Millennials”.  They claim that this new generation is not a repeat of Gen X.  Instead they are truly unique.  I tend to agree that Millennials – because the first members of this generation came of age at the time of the new millennium – is a good choice for an enduring title.

My friend Laura is a public health nursing supervisor.  She knows that I do cross-generational work and recently shared this experience with me.

Mary is a twenty-something on Laura’s staff that is in her first professional job out of school.  At Mary’s annual review, Laura did what every good manager does, she asked Mary for her input on how Laura could me more effective in providing work direction or if there is anything in the way they work that could be done differently.  Mary told Laura that she thought she was a great boss and then ask why they had to follow a certain process for client visits because she thought there might be a better way.  Now, Laura could have given, the “that’s the way we’ve always done it” response and moved on.  Instead, she asked Mary, “What ideas do you have about how things could be done differently?” Mary then outlined a well-thought out recommendation for the process with great reasons.  Laura told me that her first reaction was “that’s a great idea” and she asked Mary to write up her recommendation so that Laura could get the necessary approvals for change (they do live in a hierarchical organization afterall).  Mary completed the written recommendation in a nanosecond, and Laura got the approvals very quickly.  This new practice made the operation a whole lot more efficient and effective and had other staff saying, “Why didn’t we do this sooner?’

Here is the lesson.  One of the many gifts that the Millennial Generation brings to the workplace are fresh eyes, an enthusiasm to contribute immediately, and the ability to see solutions that simplify the way things are done. When a baby boomer manager dismisses a suggestion of a Gen Y employee because they are too young or new or whatever, they leave that young employee with the feeling that they can’t make a difference where they are and increase the likelihood that person will be texting their network to find another job. In contrast, Laura’s response really helped Mary feel included and the fact that many loved the suggestion increased Mary’s credibility with everyone. And … because the manager has such a strong impact on job satisfaction, Mary is probably texting her friends about what a great place to work she has. This is a win-win for everyone!