Working With Others

One of the frequent laments from those who comment on generational issues in the workplace is the absence of real data.  Many insights about the different generations – particularly about Gen Y – seem to come from anecdotal observations. While those viewpoints are a kind of data, having more objective information is always helpful.  So when Michelle Pinchev’s post entitled, “Finally! The Facts About Gen Y At Work” appeared on Brazen Careerist, I thought it would be worth reviewing.

Michelle, who is an e-Marketing Specialist for Career Edge Organization, describes the study this way:

…Career Edge Organization commissioned a survey with Angus-Reid Strategies. From September 2 to September 10, 2009 they surveyed 1000 Canadians who are Angus Reid Forum panelists, ages 18 to 29, online. The sample was designed to ensure an over-sample of visible minority groups within the Canadian population (made up of approximately 54% of all respondents), as well as Canadians with at least some experience with post-secondary education (made up of approximately 95% of all respondents).

The objectives were to better understand the aspirations and expectations of Gen Y, and to better understand what Gen Y can offer in the workplace.

Pinchev cites three major findings of the study:

1. Gen Y values merit over tenure.
2. Gen Y employees are loyal rather than job-hoppers.
3. Work-Life Balance is the top long-term Gen Y goal.

Let’s look at this study and the key findings in more detail.

First, the study used a sample of 1000 Canadian Gen Y employees. I have worked extensively with both Canadian and US business organizations in my career. While there are similarities between organizational environments in each country, there are also differences. For example, there are differences in employment law as well as health care systems in each country. Therefore, generalizing the findings of this study needs to be done with great care.

Second, the major findings actually confirm the aspirations and expectations of Gen Y rather than provide either new or definitive insights for this group.

In valuing merit over tenure, the respondents are simply confirming that just “paying one’s dues” for a period of time is not acceptable. That Gen Y wants to be rewarded for performance rather than the amount of time they have been in a position is not new information and yet it remains one of the major deterrents to retaining this group of employees in organizations that fail to grasp this concept.

The finding that Gen Y rates work-life balance as a top goal also confirms the prevailing view of this generation. The value-added insight would be what work-life balance looks like to Gen Y as opposed to the Baby Boomers who still set most of the policies at major companies. For example, I remember when “business casual” became the prevailing dress code in US corporations.  One senior executive interpreted it to mean that he could now wear a bow-tie to work with his three piece suit while many others viewed it differently.

Finally, Pinchev claims that the finding that Gen Y is more loyal to employers is new data. If you read her explanation, it is really not. She states, “When treated loyally, Gen Y reciprocates”.  That’s the caveat that cannot be underestimated. When Gen Y employees are not valued, not rewarded, and do not have a chance to learn and grow, they will leave. A number have reported to me that they would rather leave and live with their parents rather than work for a bad employer. And there are many employers and bosses who fail to understand this dynamic.

All in all, I think this study adds value in confirming what is already known about Gen Y. Given that Gen Y is the pipeline for new leaders in organization, getting an understanding of how this generation views leadership and the how they will play that role in the future is an important next question.

DrJohnDrozdal

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 week’s favorite posts on Brazen Careerist were “Generation Y is Annoying to Manage, But That’s a Good Thing” and “Why Generational Stereotypes are Important”. Regardless of your generational affliation, if you take time to read the posts and the comments, I think you will get a feel for the range of viewpoints that each engendered as well as a deeper insight into what’s important to Millennial generation employees.

I’d like to offer a few comments about each one.

First, in “Generation Y is Annoying to Manage…”, Ryan Healy’s main point is that Gen Y direct reports “are basically begging and pleading to be managed closely” and are seeking   managers who wants to manage.  The reality is that for many organizations,  managers learned how to manage by emulating previous managers they’ve had in their career. If they had a great manager, then they learned good management practices. If they had a bad manager… well, you know the story. And  managers tend to manage the way they want to be managed and use that approach as their primary style. Since your typical Boomer or Gen X employee didn’t want to be micro-managed, they are not likely to be comfortable with that style – and that is what they believe Gen Y seems to want. Let’s look at this situation a little more deeply.

All direct reports – regardless of generation or organizational level – want to know four things:

1.    What’s expected of me? (Goals, Behaviors)
2.    How am I doing? (Feedback)
3.    How are you going to provide me with work direction, in other words manage me?
4.    How will you help me develop?

Many managers will assume  the answer to those four questions for their employees is the same one as they would give.  The biggest challenge for these managers is to actually talk to their direct reports to find out what matters to them and that is the job of a manager – to get work done through others. So attention all managers; Ryan is giving you good data here.  However, let’s not assume that all Millennials would answer these four questions the same way.

And that brings me to the second post of note: “Why Generational  Stereotypes are Important”. In this post, author Desiree Kane offers a response to the comments from her previous post, Managing Generations Past. In that post she shares her insights as a Millennial manager of members of the Boomer and Gen X generations.  As the comments show, that post pushed a lot of hot buttons as did the follow-up one.

Students of generational differences come to appreciate that the major events and societal trends that occur during the formative years of members of a generation can  influence the central worldview of that generation quite deeply. For example, the invention of TV, the emergence of suburban living, and the Vietnam War are examples that impacted the lives of Boomers.  However, I think there is a difference between generalizations about members of a generation and its tendencies.  When we make generalizations about a generation we are painting that entire generation with a broad brush and assuming that every member of that generation acts a certain way.  When we speak in terms of tendencies it leaves open the possibility that not every member of that generation is exactly alike.  So I would rephrase the title of the second post to “Understanding Differences and Similarities Among Generations is Important.”

I also encourage everyone to check out Brazen Careerist.  To post on this blog, authors must be between the ages of 18-35.  So if you want to get first hand insights into the thoughts of that age group, check it out.

I happened to catch this segment on Book TV and think it is still relevant to introduce now.  This clip is a discussion between authors Mark Bauerlein (The Dumbest Generation) and Neil Howe (Millennials Rising: The next Great Generation) that took place at the American Enterprise Institute on September 20, 2008.  As you can tell from the two titles, the authors have diametrically opposed views of Gen Y.  I’m interested in hearing others’ points of view on this point and counterpoint discussion before I weigh in.  The segment is 90 minutes long.  However, I think you will find it provocative.

In researching media coverage of the Millennial Generation, I just came across this CBS News video that aired on November 21, 2008. Titled “Gen Y Social Misfits?”, I am still trying to figure out the point of the story.  Is that Gen Y is the most techno-savvy generation?  Is it that twenty-somethings spend so much time online that they have lost the ability to communicate face-to-face.  Or is it that the Millennials spending so much time online has altered their brain wave patterns?

In general, I found the title of the piece to be inflammatory, the overall tone of the video to be negative, the focus unclear, and the net result to be one that perpetuates the “we (all of us well-adjusted people) vs. they (the Millennial Generation that needs to be fixed)” diversity tension.

Here is what I see as relevant:

1.    The fact that twenty-somethings are “native” technology speakers is a good thing. That is their gift.
2.    When a Millennial texts his or her friends, they are engaging in their version of “face-to-face” conversations.
3.    Yes, by the year 2011, Gen Y will make up between 50 and 60 percent of the workforce.  Ernst & Young is a company ahead of the curve in recognizing this demographic fact.
4.    Why not make training in generational differences and face-to-face communication required for EVERYONE? Finally, visit any organization today and I think you will agree that it is not only the Millennial Generation that could benefit from a refresher course on face-to-face communication