The 20.5th century workforce

Solving the incompatibility problem between “Millennial” workers and 20th century organizations is a two-way road

You’ve obviously heard about “Millennials” [if you haven’t, start here]. As far as I know, they’re both a generation [Y, right after X] and the marketing stereotype of a person born between 1980 and 1995 [roughly, because it’s a rough concept]. Whether or not this stereotype is relevant or somewhat useful to anyone is the topic of a never-ending debate. I’m not here to feed it. Not exactly, at least. As a business person AND someone who fits the basic description of a “Millennial”, I’ve grown pretty interested in the relationship between the two. And more specifically, in the work relationship between my generation and 20th century organizations. I think this particular aspect is the most misunderstood of all, which also makes it far from optimal. And dangerous. That’s what I want to talk about today. But for starters, I guess we need a little background.

“Businesses must adapt or die”, they say

From what I’ve read on the issue so far, one thing we know for sure is that the business world is both fascinated by, and afraid of, us “Millennials”. Fascinated because we are quickly becoming the dominant generation of workers. Afraid because — as the first people who grew up in a technology-rich world — we’re supposed to have developed a very different set of behaviours, tastes, expectations, whatever, from the ones our parents developed. And, obviously, from the ones most 20th century business leaders built their companies upon. There’s an incompatibility here. The conclusion conventional wisdom is starting to draw from this is that our organizations need to adapt to the new generation’s worldview. That is, if they are to remain efficient and successful. Hence their ongoing effort [and struggle] to understand us better and faster than the competition.

It makes sense somehow.

But before adapting, they need to know what they’re adapting to. That’s where the problem lies. The people in charge of studying “Millennials” — marketers, most of the time — are known for their tendency to oversimplify people. By means of reassurance, or because it’s worked in the past, they fool themselves into trying to fit big, dynamic chunks of the population into uniform, easy to understand buckets. Well, this approach won’t work. It can’t. Especially this time. Because, it appears, one of our main characteristics as a group is that we’re all very different from one another. In other words, we’re much more diverse in our behaviours, tastes, convictions and dreams, than our parents were.

There’s a logical explanation to this. One of the biggest impacts of the web — and digital technologies — is that they radically widen our worldviews and possibilities. They give us unprecedented access to information. They help us explore the world, connect with different people, different cultures. And most of all, by celebrating every individual’s voice, dreams and choices, they help us explore ourselves. A radical evolution from the centralized world of the 20th century that essentially pushed for more conformity. Again, we “Millennials” are the first people to have grown up in this technology-rich world. The digital culture — and not only the diversity but also the sense of entitlement it promotes — are now engraved in our DNA.

Meaning… In our eyes, most organizations — with their closed systems, centralized hierarchies, rigid processes and pre-digital mindsets — represent the remnants of a conformity-based society we were not made to live in. And whether it’s conscious or not, we’re rejecting it. There are two possible outcomes to this. Either we’ll keep working in these existing — outdated — organizations without any semblance of motivation, bringing them down in the process, or we’ll put our passion into our own businesses and startups, gradually replacing 20th century firms with new ones more in tune with the dynamics of their era. This is the incompatibility problem we seem to be dealing with. This is also what makes adapting to Gen Y really important to the business world. And really hard.

Now that we’re done with the background, let’s take a step back.

Is it all really just a matter of conformity VS diversity? Of centralization Vs openness? Is finding clever ways to celebrate diversity and ownership in organizations the key to success? More important: do the solutions really lay in the hands of the business world alone? These are all rhetorical questions. The way I see things, our incompatibility problem is the consequence of something even more profound than the classic generational conflict, or the rigidity of archaic management practices.

Businesses are not the only ones who need adapting… at all

Before we carry on, please bear in mind that I’m no sociologist. All I have to offer here are interpretations, none of which are backed up by fancy studies and stats. Also, I’m French, which certainly influences the nature and scope of my analysis. Yet as a 28-year-old who is surrounded by “Millennials”, and has been for a long time, I’m confident I can be of some help.

If you’re okay with this, let’s have a closer look at the “Millennial” side now.

The first thing I can tell you is that my conversations with friends, acquaintances — and the people my age I happen to meet in bars — have changed lately. After a few years into our adult lives, it seems like a lot of us are suddenly realizing they hate what they’ve seen of the world so far. Not a week passes without one or more of my peers telling me they’re depressed, disillusioned, afraid, suffering… to the point I’m starting to wonder if the real common trait my generation shares couldn’t simply be that we’re lost. Our relationships with organizations are certainly part of the reason, but I think there’s more. I think we “Millennials”, are in deep conflict with ourselves.

Although the business world loves to call us “digital natives”, it couldn’t be less true. The reality is that we all grew up in an incoherent mixture of two very different eras. We, too, were born in a pre-digital society, where soccer, radio and TV were both our best friends and main conversation topics. Then times began to change. And we had to evolve with them. From my own experience, Napster was cool because it suddenly prevented me from listening to shitty radio stations all day long just to catch the only couple tracks I liked and record them on tape. I was 14 or 15 at the time. I only began to make a decent use of the internet [AOL messenger aside, that is] at something like 18. So yeah, we were probably the first generation to adopt these new tools, but it was far from innate. The truth is, we were the first generation to get disrupted by technology. But disruption is a long process, not an event. And I think for a lot of us, its real impact is only happening now.

While the landscape around us was changing at an increasingly fast pace, our education, the basic principles we were given, and the way we were prepared for the future remained almost intact. For over 20 years, most of our parents and teachers kept telling us we were going to live a certain kind of life. The only life they knew. The life they, themselves, had to live.

They taught us competition, not collaboration. They taught us to fear failure, not to embrace it. They taught us school and work were chores to trade for our dose of “happiness” in the evenings, weekends and holidays. That diplomas were more important than experience and passion. In other words, we were trained to comply with what society would want from us, not to find what is unique in each of us. Not to detect what we want for ourselves. Although we can’t blame our masters, all these lessons have finally proven to be critical mistakes. Because the life our generation is now propelled into is just something else. Today’s digital world demands that we know exactly who we are and what we want. The one-company career is long gone. Change is permanent and opportunities are everywhere. Passivity is not an option. And we sense it.

My point: the past is forcing an uncomfortable duality upon “Millennials”

Of course, we don’t all share the exact same past. We’ve all had different family contexts, different stuff to go through, different role models and different rules to live by. I like to think those of us whose parents were entrepreneurs, artists or anarchists were taught a couple special tricks and got somewhat luckier than most. But the reality is, no family education can totally protect children from the aberrations of the outside world.

One way or another, we’ve all ended up with some sort of internal duality. A part of us needs stability and conformity, while the other part craves movement and self-development. While the latter keeps getting bigger and bigger, the institutions that are supposed to support us — our companies, our political system, our schools and for many, even our parents — only respond to the former. And keep dragging us down. Paralyzing us.

Today, many of us are realizing that maybe the professional and life paths that were created on our behalf are just a decoy. But we’re not sure how to make this right. Today, we want to choose, but we’re afraid. Afraid of exposing ourselves, of pursuing the jobs of our dreams. Not to mention building stuff with our own — “unpaychecked” — hands. Heck, some are even afraid of learning. They prefer to lament that they lack the right credentials, that no one has the decency to give them permission, while their incompetent bosses stay hidden behind their diplomas and their undeserved years of experience. Truth is, as diverse and independent as they want to be, many “Millennials” master the tools but not the spirit.

At least, that’s what I understand from my peers’ overwhelmingly frequent complaints. I know there is another way. I know there’s a growing portion of GenYers that don’t settle for denying the “system” but begin to do the work instead. And they will succeed. They will either grab the best jobs — the jobs worth doing — or carve out their own paths. And they will be happy. No doubt about this. But as of today, they remain a tiny minority.

Therefore, “Millennials” and 20th century organizations are far less disconnected than we like to think. Two deeply intertwined entities, they both find themselves trapped in a difficult adaptation cycle. As in any disruption story, some will take the plunge earlier than others, thereby creating a dangerous gap between two classes: those who “have it” and the rest. In a world of intense competition — either for jobs or market resonance — the latter will keep feeling more and more pressured and paralyzed. We need to keep this from happening.

We’re not playing a winners / losers game. Or at least, we shouldn’t be. This is what Gen Y, the business world, and society at large need to understand now.

To Organizations and “Millennials”: you need to adapt to each other

As much as I would love to focus on how institutions like our political or schooling systems should evolve to ease the burden on young people’s shoulders, this is not the topic of the day. Changing them now would have limited impact on us anyway. So let’s stick to our primary — and most pressing — concern: the business case.

It seems clear that both organizations and “Millennials” have entered their own respective cycle of change. It’s only the beginning though. On either side of the spectrum, the only thing that’s changing for now is the level of understanding of what the opposite side should do. More and more GenYers are asking the business world to stop betting everything on diplomas, help them grow and lead instead of manage them, give them real reasons to get up in the morning… without doing the hard work of proving they’re worth it. As for companies, many of them are slowly adapting their hiring practices to the digital economy, looking for credentials and experience — of course — but also for the right mix of cognitive and creative skills: people who take initiatives, learn constantly, work well in a team, are great writers, great networkers and so on. In a nutshell, “if you don’t have the right credentials, blog or startup your way into the job”. And it makes sense, as long as organizations have a management structure that values this kind of people. Which 99% of the time, they don’t. Conclusion: each side is raising its expectations without seeing its own shortcomings.

Looks like a vicious cycle indeed. Reversing it won’t be easy. So what do we do? From where I stand, a real debate between all parties involved is the best way forward. Opening such a debate is the secret ambition behind this post, actually. Each side needs to stop seeing the other as the enemy until proven wrong. Waiting — in silo — for the next post about “10 things GenYers like” or “the best times to publish something on LinkedIn” is irrelevant. Our futures being deeply connected, we must dig deeper. And we must do it together.

Following are a few ideas which, I hope, will both be actionable enough and trigger more thoughts in some of you. So you can share them too ☺

My hypothesis: Despite all our differences, it seems 20th century businesses and “Millennials” have three things in common. Three fundamental pillars we can lean on to start moving the needle on our incompatibility problem.

1. Both are getting disrupted, struggling to adapt to the moving target that is today’s society.

2. Before understanding each other, both need to figure themselves out: who they are, what they really want / stand for, how they’re gonna do it.

3. Both are diverse, in terms of background, values, culture and definitions of success. They’re just not fully aware of it yet.

Brainstorming: How do we adapt?

Considering these pillars, here are three things we could do. To increase the odds of them having an impact, we need to see them as complementary. Also, both parties have to play together.

Self-knowledge and personal / cultural development

If companies want to succeed in the digital era, they must be fast. One of the best ways to increase speed is to be less centralized and thus, promote ownership. Which in turn, demands employees who feel like they’re working for themselves, not for “the man”. The sense of entitlement “Millennials” have developed — and keep developing — through their use of digital technologies makes them the primary target of this shift in management principles. To know why they get up in the morning, they must share their company’s vision, purpose and culture. Finding this match is, obviously, easier said than done. Part of our heritage from the 20th century is that most companies, just like most “Millennials”, don’t really know what they stand for [apart from making money to survive]. This is where the work begins. On the business side: Who are we as an organization? What do we value? What’s our definition of success? And more important, how do we build a company culture that both drives this success and attracts / keeps the right people? Answering those questions will require at least 1. A culture assessment [Jamie Notter can do this for you] and 2. A will to help employees — especially GenYers — evaluate their match with the working environment. Promoting self-development oriented therapy, personality tests and writing workshops internally seems like a valid starting point to carry out “2”. Needless to say, such tools can also be used by “Millennials” on their own terms, so they can answer their own introspective questions: What’s unique in us? How can we find the firms that will allow us to best harness it? What if we can’t? If both parties care enough to do all this, the outcome could be a more coherent working environment, where credentials are less important than accomplishments and passion. A world where young people would be less and less afraid to change, either because they have sufficient trust in their inner worth to build on it on their own, or because more and more companies hire for culture, and train for skills later.

Collective pledge to learn about the digital philosophy

“Digital isn’t software, it’s a mindset.” That’s the main point of this talk by Aaron Dignan, CEO of digital strategy agency Undercurrent. I couldn’t agree more. Digital is a philosophy, a set of rules that are very very different from — even contradictory to — what “GenXers” and “Millennials” have been taught in the past. If they want to be relevant in the digital economy, both business leaders and GenYers must understand these rules, let them impact their beliefs, and their behaviors. Of course, the learning process is already underway. But it will be slower and harder if we have to figure it all out on our own. For it to be more efficient, we need to read, read, read and learn, learn, learn from those who really get it. And from one another. Maybe we could build a big pool of cool resources for everyone to tap into and grow together? Would you use it? At any rate, it’s time to stop wondering how to beat the Facebook Edgerank or how to tell better lies on your CV and dive deep into real, solid thinking about at least these three topics [together with a few book suggestions for each]:

1. Managing organizations in the digital era: Humanize [Jamie Notter & Maddie Grant], Getting Real [37Signals], the 50-minute video I used to introduce this paragraph

2. Self-development in the digital era: Linchpin [Seth Godin], Evil Plans [Gapingvoid], and Choose Yourself [James Altucher]

3. The match between the two: To Sell is Human [Dan Pink], CTRL-ALT-DEL [Mitch Joel], How to work at Google [NYTimes]

This is stuff I consider vital to bringing Organizations and “Millennials” together in the 21st century. And I know there’s a lot more out there. Care to add your own links? The goal is obviously not for us all to think in the same way, only to get a collective opportunity to reflect on fundamental problems our school system remains really good at ignoring. So no one gets left behind.

Permanent discussions between managers and GenYers

Learning more about who we are and how to create our future — as workers and businesses — is clearly a first step in the right direction. Yet at some point, we’ll have to recognize a real and healthy discussion is needed. A discussion about each side’s expectations, fears, goals and potential grudges. Starting this discussion means removing the hierarchical barriers that limit communication and maintain the status quo. Few workers are ready to get kicked out for being too honest. Few leaders are ready to be challenged or feel weak… This has to change. We need to create environments where it’s safe for everyone to speak up and be mistaken. And I think it’s important to do it both within and outside the walls of the organization. This way, companies can focus on their own cultures and problems with their own “Millennials”, while strenghtening their relationships with the new generation of workers across the board. The tools to put this into practice can range from the classic internal focus groups — again, as long as they’re safe — to open digital platforms dedicated to broader, cross-industry discussions between all parties. At the end of the day, this will mean better learning, better hires, healthier career paths and increased success for everyone.

Again, this is all but a personal interpretation of a very complex, dynamic problem: the blatant incompatibility between 20th century organizations and the next dominant generation of workers. I fully expect some of you to dismiss it as utopian, naive or even plain wrong. It’s fine with me. As long as you have something better in store ☺

I don’t need to be right. I need solutions.

Because I’m sick. Sick of hearing my peers say they’re unhappy or depressed without knowing what to do to make things right, sick of seing organizations spend millions in budget to buy themselves an image of “social businesses” without having the first clue of what it means, and yes, just like everyone else, I’m sick of the term “Millennials”. Or at least, of the uniform, utterly useless meaning it’s been given by marketers all these years. I’ve been using it here because I’m convinced my generation — in all its diversity — also exists as a group. A group that is both suffering an uncomfortable internal duality due to the messy environment it had to grow up in, and struggling to find its place in a society that was built for a very very VERY different kind of people. This society — and all the institutions that keep representing [and defending] it — have to change.

Organizations will come first, because they’re suffering too. Partly due to their incapacity to use this new pool of resources and skills correctly. Yet as long as “Millennials” and the business world will be afraid of each other, we’re stuck. It’s about time we realized they have more reasons to be friends than to be enemies. They’re experiencing the same kind of duality after all. The amount of things they have to learn is only as big as the stuff they have to unlearn. And they need each other to get better. So let’s do this.

If the concept of “Millennials” has to mean something, let’s make it the generation that not only built a healthy foundation for the digital society, but did so by collaborating with their parents instead of fighting them. Just… Let’s not leave this to our children.

The mission is ours.