Amidst a swirl of divergent forces, firms are being challenged as
never before at their core management strategies, operations and human
resource philosophies levels. With slings and arrows launched both
externally and internally, the next few years will be telling to the
future composition of the profession. Since law (and accounting, consulting,
etc,) are service businesses with the "product" or service
provided being primarily people and their knowledge and judgment,
the people and how they are treated will determine the outcome - who
survives, who thrives, what organizations look like.
Given the ever more diverse potential customer and client population,
all businesses are taking diversity of personnel more seriously. "Diversity"
has been defined most commonly as increasing the number of hiring
and growth opportunities for women and minorities in firms and legal
departments. This is essential but is too limiting a definition.
The curtains of the diversity tent must be thrown open wider. Within
both the majority and minority populations of firms and other organizations,
a greater respect for diverse perspectives, experiences, talents,
skills and capabilities needs to be built. Unless people are valued
for a broader range of contributions than purely legal skills as defined
by the law school curriculum, firms will be overshadowed and surpassed
by other types of professional services firms, and legal departments
will be largely considered "overhead that gets us and keeps us
out of trouble" rather than a business-building asset.
I think that we have to look beyond gender and race and ethnic origin
to other areas that affect even "majority" populations in
the workplace. Age is certainly one of them. We have a renewed focus
on generational issues, which gained the spotlight particularly through
Generation X and their establishment (not a Gen X word) of Internet
companies or dot-coms. Now the tenets on which those organizations
were built are being challenged as the very youth dominated managements
found they could not take most of the companies into the profitable
arena. The youngest generations in the workplace need to give more
credence and respect to old economy thinking or more traditional economics
as well as benefit from the judgment and maturity that comes from
experience.
Clashes of generations have always been a factor, and some confrontation
and difference in approach and thinking is generally healthy. Sometimes
radical differences are just what the circumstances need. Yahoo, as
an example of an Internet company that actually has been profitable,
has found as the economic wind changed that the lack of diversity
of age and thinking (cultural) has brought the growth and success
to a halt. Insular cultures cannot sustain growth or embrace new ideas
and new people with differing ideas. The company now has to face possibly
wrenching detours, firings and an infusion of new hirings to adjust
to the realities of the marketplace.
Elsewhere as well, including in law firms, there needs to be more
willingness to benefit from what the people of different generations
bring to the table. Each has to let go of the "entitlement mentality"
or the "playing-by-the-old-rules mentality." Gen X is not
the only group to watch. Starting now there is Gen Y knocking on the
door. (See www.pdcounsel.com/XY.html
for a comparison.) They are expected to clash with Gen X in outlook
and some values; this is already evident with entry level hires. Gen
Y may be showing even more entitlement mentality than the younger
part of the Gen X cohort. Nonetheless, they will all have to live
together in the workplace, along with the Boomers who are not in a
hurry to give up power, influence and their quite hefty sense of worth
as movers in the business and cultural world.
Frank Genovese, publisher of the new magazine Darwin, raises salient
points (in the March 2001 issue). He wrote,
"I wonder if the dotcom dilemma would've been so severe if more
of those youthful startups had been peppered with older businesspeople
- men and women with the wisdom of experience and common sense that
no MBA program can accelerate. So many of the dotcoms were never really
in touch with the realities of the marketplace because they didn't
mirror it.
But diversity isn't limited to ethereal startups. Too many businesses,
big and small, paint themselves in monotone hues, even if they don't
do it with premeditated calculation. It seems as though they're not
paying enough attention to the issue because they don't recognize
that it's important."
He concludes "If you spend time now to explore this topic, you'll
be less likely later to appear as a headlined company drowning in
legal fees with a damaged public image and a hostile workforce."
With three generations solidly represented and a fourth just entering,
most firms find that there are understanding and communication gaps
between the partner and director level people and the associates and
younger staff. These gaps can probably be attributed to different
generational backgrounds and to personal behavioral styles, as well
as how different generations expect professional resposibilities to
be delegted and accountability ensured.
CLASH
AND COLLABORATION OF GENERATIONS
INTERGENERATIONAL
TENSIONS/ISSUES
What are we hearing from the two generations most prevalent in the
workplace now?
(Warning: These are generalizations)
Boomers
Say Generation
X Says
| Gen X has a poor work ethic |
I want a life! |
| Be in the office long hours |
I don't need anyone looking over
my shoulder: face time; micro-managing is non-productive |
| We learned ourselves; learn on
your time; clients won't pay for training |
There is not enough training,
mentoring, direction |
| Big salaries require long hours
to earn and support them |
I want a life; I have education
debt |
| In-person meetings are better |
Older guys are inefficient, don't
relate to technology |
| We're here to work; not play |
We want a fun working environment |
| We prefer large personal spaces |
We prefer opportunities for collaboration |
| Have regard for precedent, experience |
I want a hearing and credit for
my ideas |
| This is the way our firm does
it |
Innovate, let me use my creativity.
I don't get respect. People hoard information that
I need. |
| People need to pay their dues.
There is no security |
I need to make big money as soon
as possible because we won't be as well off for retirement
as our parents. There is no security. |
So we have here what is
clearly a divergence of work and life objectives. Either can make
a strong argument for their viewpoint, but the fact is, they have
to work together. Some ideas for resolution are presented in the Sidebar
following. But first, how can firms evaluate which approaches, attributes
and behaviors produce the best results for the firm and for clients?
Firms need to look at their own worker success profiles - at every
level. Most professional firms have not given more than superficial
attention to what makes for success in their firms. There is no magic
formula, even for those firms that are annually in the front of the
line to hire what they optimistically, if superficially, expect to
be "the best and brightest," that is, the top of the class
of the highest ranked law schools. And even if they should be proven
right in their recruiting (there is little evidence of this), few
firms have devoted the sincere attention necessary to keep their high
potential people happy and fulfilled. That is not what they think
the firm's mission is about.
The other side of the coin is assessment of incoming and early-stage
associates to help them - and the firm - better understand their life
and work objectives, behavioral styles and team role preferences.
For example, there are instruments we use, with a great deal of research
supporting them, that are valuable for training and self-awareness
of interpersonal behavior, learning and communication styles, and
values; others help to achieve productivity enhancement for the roles
people play and identify work expectations and how to fulfill them.
These instruments can be incorporated into the ongoing coaching and
professional development process.
In order to resolve tensions and improve collaboration and teamwork,
it is important to:
- increase familiarity with how each
generation sees the world and what motivates them;
- become aware of behavioral style
differences, strengths and weakness across generational lines;
- use collaborative techniques to
begin to change/modify/adjust the quality of interaction among
the various levels of authority and the generations.
STEP BY STEP PROGRAM
I recommend that the best way to address the issues and show actual
progress in awareness and making new habits is a three or four step
process which encompasses large groups and small group activities.
A large group seminar/workshop can deal with generational differences
and their implications. This includes: a brief primer on characteristics
and differences of three (and soon four) generations in the workplace;
facilitated discussion of inter-generational conflicts or tension
points in a firm that affect client service delivery and marketing;
exploration and identification of opportunities for cooperation specifying
strategies and tactics for getting the generations to appreciate each
other's strengths; discussion of examples in which multi-generational
teams work - capitalizing on the assets of each, building trust and
respect. Then personnel at all levels come away knowing how understanding
generational differences helps to understand and serve clients better.
The next step addresses each individual, using an assessment instrument
completed and interpreted to provide an understanding of one's own
and other people's personal behavioral styles. This helps to increase
inter-generational understanding too, as people see that styles cross
generational boundaries.
With this foundation, I recommend breakout groups on different issues
that were pinpointed in the seminar/workshop discussion. These discussions
will enable inter-generational and multi-dimensional group problem-solving
based on issues determined previously in key player interviews before
the large group session.
Another piece of the puzzle that will eventually lead to better inter-generational
collaboration is an assessment of work expectations using an assessment
tool for self-reporting, analysis and action planning. This research-based
self-assessment provides feedback on how to take the initiative to
get one's expectations met and adjust expectations when necessary.
Questionnaires and interviews with young associates and laterals,
as well as exit interviews with those who do leave, provide a wealth
of information for firms to understand employees' individual and generational
work and lifestyle objectives. This information can be used to redesign
and restructure, as necessary, the work environment to meet the needs
of individuals, different generations and the firm as a whole. Individuals
should be asked early on to prepare three-to-five year work and life
goals and plans, which will be reviewed and updated with them periodically
by partner-mentors, directors of associate relations or outside consultants.
From their own perspectives, each generation may be justified and
consistent in their views. Generation X is discontent and frustrated
in the workplace. Baby Boomers have been getting to feel that way
too (ameliorated by high compensation in good years). Generation Y
probably will be frustrated too unless greater diversity and flexibility
is instituted for the long-term and becomes a core part of the "professional
business." Law firms, as well as all businesses, need to embrace
and truly appreciate age/generational diversity. Members and employees
need to see the value of dealing with intergenerational issues and
tensions promptly and with sensitivity to all viewpoints.
© Phyllis Weiss Haserot. All rights reserved.
__________________________________________________________________________________
This article appeared in
Of Counsel, August, 2001.
[SIDEBAR]
INTERGENERATIONAL TENSIONS/ISSUES POSSIBLE
SOLUTIONS
The differing views between
Boomers and Generation X set out above may be addressed as
listed below.
- Look to clients, Deloitte
& Touche, and Ernst & Young, for life balance practices.
Plan ahead and balance workload.
- First work out set objectives
and end products expected.
-- It's OK to work late outside the office as long as you
are accessible and meet deadlines.
-- The supervisor must be accessible too for questions and
feedback.
- Provide "just in time",
task-related learning.
- Be flexible on hours, compensation,
switching tracks.
- Learn to run efficient, productive
meetings, brief, detailed. Train for technology use.
- Lighten up; create a conducive
environment, provide perks if long hours are required.
- When offices are redesigned,
provide flexible spaces that encourage collaboration.
- Give people responsibility
for their own piece of a project from start to finish. Collaborate
on goals.
- Give leeway for presenting
new solutions at first in limited situations; give prompt
feedback and guidelines.
- Consider restructuring compensation
and tracks based on merit and amount of effort the individual
is willing to expend.
|