Anthropology, Politics and the 20-Something Worker
A recent episode of the television newsmagazine, 60 Minutes, said it all: the workplace is being dramatically changed by one group of individuals. And this group is not changing the workplace through the traditional route of “office politics” where power struggles typically ensue; this group is changing the workplace, according to the newsmagazine, by the very culture and political savvy they embody and represent. Their power source, however, comes from something just about everyone in western civilization has access to: computer technology. They just know how to use it a lot more effectively than the rest of the population (The Millennials, 2007).
And therein lies one of the most subtle, transformative developments occurring in the workforce of the early 21st century: a workplace in which—in most instances--the younger workers are more adept than the senior workers at navigating resources critical to the very survival of the organization. For unlike the typewriter and dictation machine of mid-20th century, technological marvels that were tools mostly for support personnel, the personal computer’s use and access (and this includes the wide host of digital devices) spans all ages and all stations of life; and it is used by both support personnel and thought leaders. Mastery of this technology, though, tends to rests with workers who, in many cases, are just entering the workforce--the 20-somethings (also known as the Millennial Generation) (The Millennials, 2007).
For organizational managers, this condition of irony brings with it the opportunity to study and learn from these developments within the context of two of the five components comprising organizational behavior (OB) study: anthropology and politics (the other three being psychology, sociology, and social psychology) (Robbins, 2007, pp 12-13). Anthropology, from an OB perspective, is concerned with the study of both the dominant and subtle cultures that are present in an organization. Politics involves the informal interactions between workers that can and often does influence behavior and workplace conditions both favorably and unfavorably. These are selected as preferred instruments for such a study because unlike any other generation, this group has the ability (due to being liberated by computer technology) to blend both personal life and work life in unprecedented ways; such a blending has particularly strong cultural and political implications.
This paper will review the impact the 20-something worker is having on the worker from the OB perspective of anthropology and politics. It will first provide some background that profiles this unique demographic group, and then offer a more defining explanation about anthropology and politics’ role in the OB process, to be followed by a brief case example of these dynamics being played out in one workplace. The paper will conclude offering the writer’s concept of Human Resource Design (HRD)--a potential bridge-builder that OM policymakers might apply in the 20-something challenges they face.
Here Come…the Millennials
They are 80 million strong and are the fastest growing number of new workers. They were born between 1984 and 1995. Unlike the Baby Boomers (1945-1965), and Generation Xers (1968-1978), two groups that were born during the zenith of the industrial age, work as a priority over family and personal pursuits for Millenials is considered unthinkable. This generation has watched (often been part of) parents and grandparents going through divorces; they have seen family members work for one institution for most of their lives (and in some cases being thrown out of work because of the encroachment of globalization), and they have had a front row seat watching as the Great Society of the 1960s created a huge federal government that has not been able to sustain the promises of economic empowerment for all people. And a caveat for this generation is computer technology…or technology itself (The Millennials, 2007; Rubel, 2007).
The writer recalls the observations of a colleague some years ago who pointed out that the generation that was coming up (that would later come to be known as the Millennial Generation) would be the first to have control over how media content was delivered to them (personal communication, 1990). What the colleague used as an example of this was the video tape recorder which, at that time, had just fully come of age. From 1980 to 1990 the sale of the VCR tripled and as it did, so was there the emergence of cable television. Both of these media technologies offered control of media content that was unprecedented.
Incorporated with these developments as well was the emergence of video games as a mainstream product that was readily embraced by this. After a seemingly awkward start in the mid-1970s, the video game industry found its niche in the market with the launch of Pac Man. This was shortly followed by the launch of Mario Brothers (and shortly thereafter, Super Mario Brothers). And in just a short time of their introduction to the mass market, the quality of these games—visual resolution and intuitiveness of player control—continually improved.
The VCR, cable television, and video games were as common to the child growing up between 1980 and 1985 as had been the radio and the motion picture for a child in the 1930s and 1940s, and as had the television and the record player been for the child growing up in the 1950s and the 1960s. It should be noted, at this point, that there were certain characteristics about this generation that was very different from the previous one. Most notable was something that the writer’s colleague had pointed out: the clear sense of empowerment that these young people had with the media that was in their possession. Unlike the radio listener and television watcher of previous decades, these participants could—if they so choose—actually influence and have control over how content was delivered to them. Most important, though, is that they knew they had this power from a very early age.
It was shortly after the VCR reached its zenith in popularity that it was not uncommon to hear jokes from late night comedians that parents were recruiting their children to “program” their VCRs. It was also about this time that parents began to notice a seeming fanciful interest their children were having in a thing called a “personal computer” was taking shape to be much more than that (The History of the Computer, Parts I and 2, 1995).
For many adults, the phrase “personal computer” seemed an oxymoron—a contradiction in terms. Society had been conditioned to believe that a computer was a huge, complex mass of nuts and bolts that existed in obscure buildings of academia and government. While this had been true at one time, the launching of Apple Computer and Microsoft changed this perception forever (The History of the Computer, Parts I and 2, 1995). Steve Jobs of Apple and Bill Gates of Microsoft understood intrinsically that the computer was a natural evolution—a synthesis—of technological developments that began with the radio tube and the handheld calculator and ended with the explosion of a global culture that was becoming more knowledge driven rather than industrial driven. This transformation of the “Fordism” mentality [in which productive techniques were based on the assembly line concept e.g. Ford Motor Company] to the information or digital age [where creativity became a preferred driving force for economic growth] was wholly integrated with the launch of the personal computer; as was it integrated with the confluence of other technological developments which included satellite and telecommunications making the personal cell phone yet another instrument of empowerment (Orisini, 2006: Liparito 2006).
These developments are discussed at length in the book The Third Wave. Published in the late 1970s, the book has since become one of the most accurate prescient blueprints to what would unfold in the years that embodied the technological revolution of the 1990s and the early 2000s.
And for the Millennial Generation, these developments were as natural a way of life as had been the driving of a “horseless carriage” been for young people growing up in the late 19th century. While the adults fretted that these new technologies were indicators that the world was going to hell in a hand basket, in both eras the young people intuitively understood that these developments were instruments of progress and would open doorways to possibilities scarcely dreamed about by previous generations.
It is no wonder, then, that when the Millennial Generation began to come of age these young people brought skill sets in to the workplace that were no match for the status quo. Few major industries that survived the enormous disruption of being pushed into the globalized world of knowledge work have been able to fully make this transition to date. Many companies did not begin making significant investments in information technology and its required ancillary support resources (that include training and re-training of personnel) until the early 2000s; and today, there are many companies that are still making such adjustments. Added to this is a “graying” of the managerial workforce in many industries, a condition noted for the presence of many Baby Boomers who survived this transition into the globalized world of knowledge work but who are now nearing retirement (or second career choices). Following close behind the Boomers are Generation Xers who carry with them “institutional memory” of the Boomer-era legacy and, in some ways (to hearken back to a previous analogy), are—like their parents--inclined to have a more experiential range of reference for the “horse and buggy” than the “horseless carriage.”
Like the industries they are employed by, many of the older workers have embraced the confluence of computer technology (which also includes self-serve kiosks at grocery stories, and credit-card friendly gas pumps) in fits and starts. It has been a disruption in their lives but they have reached a level of acceptance. And computer technology is, to them, certainly more science than an art.
This is just the opposite for the Millennials. To them it is much more of an art form—a way- of-life form. Computer technology’s confluence has transformed the world into something that makes sense to them. It is simply those of the generation preceding them that is much less clear to them. And this condition readily plays itself out in the context of anthropology and politics.
Anthropology, Politics and the Millennials
As mentioned in the introduction, anthropology, from an OB perspective, is concerned with the study of both the dominant and subtle cultures that are present in an organization. Politics involves the informal interactions between workers that can and often does influence behavior and workplace conditions both favorably and unfavorably (Ante, 2006). Both are components of what make up the discipline of organizational management. The other three are psychology, sociology, and social psychology.
Briefly…
• Psychology as it relates to organizational operations is an element in human reaction and behavior to the work place experience. This also involves the fundamental qualities of who the worker is—emotionally and, to some extent, intellectually. The psychological component of OB is concerned with the internal and external forces that influence a worker’s perception of the workplace and of him in relationship to the workplace.
• Sociology factors in to the OB equation as a discipline concerned with group behavior. This is especially useful in the study of teams and how teams respond to both internal and external circumstances.
• Social psychology builds a bridge between psychology and sociology in that it observes responses to how individuals, or groups, respond to external stimuli such as certain degrees of change. Understanding such reactions can help develop programs and policies that make adjusting to change a more meaningful experience. (Cited from the writer’s Threaded Discussion post, October 11, 2007)
The unique skill sets and lifestyle perspectives of the Millennial Generation make a discussion about this group’s impact on the workplace one best offered within the context of anthropology and politics. The reason for this is that the Millennial worker tends to blend work and personal life in a fashion unprecedented for the *industrial age. [*It should be noted that during the agricultural age the blending of work and personal life was actually how farm life was structured. In this sense the Millennials are actually returning to a previous model of social lifestyle.]
Anthropological. The Millennial worker brings an entrepreneurial mindset to the workplace, even as he brings his laptop, iPod, and Personal Digital Assistant (PDA).
Having been reared in a home where the concept of work was often framed by some variation of the 9-5 model, this individual chose to rebel against this at an early stage. For him the embracing of such a model has shown itself to yield strained (or no) family relations, and no guarantee that the employer he has committed so much of his life to will in fact be reciprocal of such loyalty. This employer, the Millennial worker has seen, may not only move operations to another country but also not make good on pension money that had been promised.
The Millennial worker has seen first hand what loyalty to the company can yield. He has also seen thousands of hours of television and movies and has put in a similar number of hours playing video games. Significant degrees of graphic violence and strong sexual content have been part and parcel of most of his media experiences from any early age. There is an understanding about the dark side of human nature present in this individual that could rival the same understanding arrived at by a veteran from the bloodiest of battlefields. The problem, however, is that seldom is there the degree of emotional maturity in place for many of these individuals that would allow a balanced contexualizing of their experiences. This leaves many of them to have high degrees of social intelligence yet not have the emotional intelligence to build lasting relationships. And for this reason, the Millennial man or women invests significant amounts of time exploring relationships, varied forms of relationships, participating in them, and talking about them. It is this characteristic that also serves as a hallmark of the Millennial.
Unlike any other group, these individuals are more likely to have friends and associates with those of a race, ethnic background, and sexual orientation other than their own. As inheritors of the many social movements of the 1960s, the Millennial man and woman does not carry the raw memory of the political demonstrations of that era and have, in essence, moved on. Many of them grew up using some of the early forms of the internet and by their teen years considered it a common occurrence to make contact with, and have social relationships, with a person from another country (Casagrande, Hope, Farley-Metzger, Cook, et al, 2007).
Predictably, the Millennials’ work ethic also has distinctiveness. While the writer did not find any specific evidence that this group was skewed to being one way or another when it came to having the work ethic of their predecessor, there are some commonalities in characteristics for them that is worthy of note. As a rule, Millennials tend to…
• Be hard workers and thrive in environments that embrace innovation.
• Expect to be provided a clear path to reaching a position in an organization that is well compensated—and as soon as possible.
• Be entrepreneurial and think nothing of having several jobs over a short period of time.
• Think of computer technology and themselves as being “one” with it, as it being an enhancement of themselves, not (as is often the case with Boomers and Xers) being a necessary external resource that must simply be “tolerated” and “endured.”
• Not expect a company to provide a guaranteed retirement plan. They are more given to be lured by the promise of adequate health insurance and/or financial support for education and professional development.
• Approach the workplace as one that functions within the conscripts of their own time clock and sense of priority. Personal life and social networking is a top priority—not getting to work at 9 a.m.
Given these cultural cues, the Millennials do represent an interesting bit of irony for today’s workplace. On the one hand they are clearly “high maintenance” from a management perspective, yet they bring with them the exact type of mindset necessary for a company to thrive in the diverse, globally-focused work environment of today. To this extent the Millennial worker and his complex personal culture can actually serve as a model for an organization when it comes to designing the human resource components of the strategic plan (Pink, 2007). In short, if it wants to be competitive in today’s marketplace the company needs to “look” more like the personal culture of the Millennial worker and less like the personal culture of the Boomers and the Xers.
Political. The Millennial worker does not make a distinction between the workplace and his or her personal life; computer and digital technology allow these environments to become one. Hence, if the worker has a run-in with the boss due to coming in late, within minutes a best friend who is located maybe a few miles or a few continents away will know about it via text messaging on the cell phone. And a back and forth “conversation” like this may take place throughout the day as the worker conducts his or her work. [It is not unusual to see a Millennial worker using a cell phone or PDA several times a day, and do so while seamlessly conducting work activities.] Participants in the “discussion” will likely expand to include other members of the Millennial worker’s “social network” and by day’s end the worker will have been given a number of options that could be pursued to address the problem with the boss (ranging from quitting and looking for another job to exploring virtual work options that will allow more flexibility in having to physically be in the office).
The scenario presented is quite a more expansive one from that which was typical of the Boomer workplace of the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Grievances (unless it was a unionized environment) simply often had to be endured, or would become the grist of discussions at the local bar after work. And the thought of quitting a job as being an immediate short term solution to a grievance was unthinkable. Instead, the tensions in the office between management and employees often transformed into subcultures of power represented by various groups; and on a daily basis, the leveraging or co-opting of this power became a type of give and take that is consistent with all political environments.
The essence of political environments is an ever shifting back and forth effort to reach compromise in a given situation. In the Boomer era, political power in the workplace was often most readily wielded by the management ranks; although this could vary depending on the type of product or service being provided (i.e. a television or movie company’s executives are trumped in power by the writers. Although clearly not in the position to directly impact the bottom line, without the content provided by the writers, these companies would have no product worthy of selling). As a rule, though, “top down” organizational structures tended to be dominant; and even highly unionized environments tended to follow this model.
In the workplace inhabited by Millennials, however, political power has taken on a much more dynamic and unpredictable modality. Ultimately power rests with the person or persons who are most savvy in computer technology’s various uses. And not surprisingly, the Information Technology department is where this power rests in most organizations today. Also not surprising is that these departments tend to be largely staffed by Millennials. A typical IT department will be headed by a Boomer or an Xer but those actually doing the work will be tech savvy Millennials.
Having this sort of power is not a fact lost on these workers; instead it is often a source of their deepest frustrations. They fully understand the priceless value they bring to operational functions while also understanding that everything about them is a threat to a status quo that became wealthy on products, services, and concepts that—in many cases—are nearing the end of their self life. Literally, the Millennials are “caught” in the middle of the exodus from the old economy to the new economy and the battlefield for them is often the day to day workplace environment.
It is no wonder, then, that as the 2008 presidential race approaches, the candidate who seems to best understand these dynamics about this generation has also garnered the lion’s share of support from them; Barak Obama (The Millennials, 2007). The Illinois Senator, who comes from a mixed race background and believes fervently in the entrepreneurial culture embraced by the Millennials, has been emphatic about making the point Boomer’s need “to get over themselves” and learn to co-exist with the new world being ushered in by the Millennial Generation. And notably, these 20-something supporters have been wizards in making Obama the first presidential candidate ever to raise almost all of his campaign funding (and at levels that nearly rival frontrunner Hillary Clinton) by use of the internet. His Millennial Generation-bolstered support has made him—and them—an undeniable force to be reckoned with in American politics. Although an Xer and not a Millennial, Obama’s connection to this group serves as a bell weather of their sociopolitical leanings and, defacto, their ability to influence the workplace politics of the places that employ them; and clearly it is a leader’s tactical error of the most grievous kind to ignore them.
Anthropology, Politics, and the New Boss. Through a restaurant ownership experience (2002-2004), the writer has had first hand contact with facing some of the Millennial Generation dynamics discussed in this paper.
The writer and his spouse took over ownership of a fast food restaurant and with this came 20 employees, about half who were 20-somethings or close to being so. It was quickly discovered that these workers were well versed in doing their jobs. And being typical Millennials, the change in ownership was met with only casual anxiety. The sense was that they simply wanted to be assured that there would be no disruption in pay scales and work schedules.
The writer, being a Boomer, immediately set about instituting quality assurance initiatives such as in-service training and long term planning while his wife, a professional chef, handled the day-to-day managing of the restaurant itself. It helped that two of our four children are Milennials (and were also employed at the restaurant) so some understanding about what to expect from them as workers was present.
What could not have been anticipated, however, was the extent to which the integration of the personal life/work life elements would influence workplace activities. Talking on cell phones while at work and being chronically late for work were the two biggest challenges. On the other hand, as new computer systems were introduced to better track inventory and costs, the workers were often teaching the owners a thing or two about how those systems worked.
These workers were also very receptive to trying new marketing initiatives and were often given to coming up with marketing ideas of their own.Ultimately we came to the conclusion that there was a certain degree of trade off that occurred; while, yes, it was disconcerting to us that their job was not their first priority, it was quite reassuring to know that they were forward thinking and creative and were technologically savvy. This required us to modify our management style to actually become more family-oriented rather than of the top down model initially implemented.
It was from this experience that the writer first began to fully recognize the subtle yet very powerful ways that this emerging generation was affecting the workplace.
A Synthesis is Born
Human Resource Design (HRD) is a concept created by the writer that has come about as a result of his study of and experience with human generational dynamics in the organizational management and behavior field. HRD is a synthesis of the anthropology and political components of OB’s characteristics. It creates a qualitative picture that is useful in helping make management decisions within the context of the realities discussed in this paper.
HRD has two parts: micro and macro.
The micro perspective takes in to consideration every informal, seemingly obscure or trivial aspect about an individual or circumstance. From this a sort of “history” or mosaic is built, a picture filled with all the flaws, unpleasantness, quarks, anomalies, and imperfections that are revealed.
The macro perspective is then created to showcase all the official and known qualities present in the individual or situation. This might include goals, objectives, mission statements, strategic plans and policy initiatives.
From a careful analysis of these perspectives using a auto-ethnographic method (journaling of observations and thoughts in a real-time stream-of-consciousness format) a more realistic picture emerges (Penaloza, 2007),. This picture provides points of commonality and points of demarcation that exists in the situation. Doing this for both individuals and situations can greatly assist in design strategies requiring the accomplishment of some goal or objective. Like the Millenial worker, this method blends the highly social (informal) with the highly structured (formal). An ingredient in HRD, though, is to also engage a certain degree of reflection and analysis. The journaling plays an important role in facilitating this.
A working example of HRD’s application would be in a situation where a manager wants to get a team headed by a Millennial worker but staffed by Boomers and Xers working together more effectively. By first doing an honest assessment of each individual with emphasis on the micro area, a manager will get a more realistic picture of who comprises this team. Because the criteria here is brutal honesty about informal matters (and it should be noted, of course, this would have to be strictly confidential), there is a greater likelihood the manager will unearth something underlying about these individuals not considered previously.
The macro perspective will then provide a more objective perspective about what is expected of the group or situation and regarding matters that are known. As a rule, information from this perspective will tend to be more objective and less (seemingly) negative.
All of this information is carefully documented in a journal as it is being gathered. Then a reflective review of the findings is conducted. Being sought are patterns or similarities. Also being sought would be information that is simply found to not be true or questionable at best. Finally, with this information in mind a strategy may be conducted to find the best approach to making the tensions of this group work more in favor of meeting the goals. This might include changing some personnel or convening an informal gathering (a “retreat”) that allows for directed discussion about problems preventing the accomplishment of goals. It might also include offering assistance for a member in obtaining additional training or counseling.
What HRD does essentially is break a situation down into manageable pieces that can then be reviewed for finding realistic solutions. It is the human resource equivalent of what automotive engineers do with engine systems in order to find the critical point causing a malfunction.
A final word about HRD: While it is implied here, it is important to make clear that the use of the HRD process should only be conducted by someone who possesses a high level of emotional intelligence, a strong penchant toward being accountable, and someone who possesses the leadership skill to use this process in an ethical manner; in short, an individual who is mature and has a healthy understanding of self.
Final Thoughts About the Millennials
When history writes the story of the Millennial Generation it may be found that this group’s greatest contribution was that it forced a convergence of sociopolitical factors to be considered as important to the bottom line as financial and economic considerations. In this sense, the needed—but difficult to obtain—condition of embracing continual change, diversity, and entrepreneurial thinking as being tantamount to society’s economic survival becomes a real and definable thing as personified by the Millennial (Woods & King, 2002, pp.19-23).
It is likely too that further study of this group might offer insight in to a host of ancillary human behavior developments that occurred as they came of age. One of those developments is the emergence of ADHD in young people during the early 1980s. Known more commonly as Attention Deficit Disorder, there is ample evidence that suggests ADHD’s emergence was parallel to the Millennial Generation’s introduction to and embracing of computer technology. As a result, what is considered a negative medical condition might simply be blatant evidence of the woeful shortcomings of the educational system and society’s inability to fully understand the implications of the digital era; maybe it’s not them that has the problem but us (i.e., their ability to process information due to being coupled with computer technology so early in life has actually been heightened/accelerated beyond what would be considered “normal”). And like the popular comic book heroes that have amassed legions of fans in the Millenial ranks, The X-Men (outcast super powered mutant teenages), it might be that the Millennials actually have reason to be a bit paranoid. In this sense, they now represent a group much more powerful than the Boomer’s—they represent, perhaps, the beginning of a merging between technology and human society itself.
References
A History of the Computer: Parts I & 2 (1995). Public Broadcasting Corporation.
Ante, S.E. (2006, June 25). The science of desire. Business
Week, p. 100.
Casagrande, D.G., Hope, D., Farley-Metzger, E. Cook, W. et al
(2007, Summer). Problem and opportunity: Integrating
anthropology, ecologym and policy through adaptive
experimentation in the urban U.S. southwest. Human
Organization, 66(2), p.125. Retrieved November 10, 2007
from ProQuest database.
Rubel, S. (2007, September 3). As technology develops, so
does role of geek marketers. Advertising Age, 78 (35), p.
15. Retrieved November 10, 2007 from ProQuest
database.
The Millennials (11 November, 2007). 60 Minutes. Retrieved, December 12, 2007
from http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/113/millennials
Lipartito, K. (2006, Spring). How institutions think. Business
History Review, 80(1),p. 135. Retrieved November 10,
2007 from ProQuest database.
Orsini, J. F. (2006, September). Why is cultural harmony so
elusive? Mergers and Acquisitions, 41(9),p. 59. Retrieved
November 10, 2007 from ProQuest database.
Penaloza, L. (2007). Mainstree U.S.A. revisited. The
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27
(5/6), p.234. Retrieved November 10, 2007 from
ProQuest database.
Pink, D.H. (2007, July). Revenge of the right brain. Human
Organization, 89 (6), p.10. Retrieved November 10, 2007
from ProQuest database.
Robbins, S.P. (2005). Organizational behavior (eleventh edition). N.J: Prentice Hall.
Woods, R.H. & King, J.Z. (2002). Leadership and management
in the hospitality industry. Lansing, MI: Educational Institute.
And therein lies one of the most subtle, transformative developments occurring in the workforce of the early 21st century: a workplace in which—in most instances--the younger workers are more adept than the senior workers at navigating resources critical to the very survival of the organization. For unlike the typewriter and dictation machine of mid-20th century, technological marvels that were tools mostly for support personnel, the personal computer’s use and access (and this includes the wide host of digital devices) spans all ages and all stations of life; and it is used by both support personnel and thought leaders. Mastery of this technology, though, tends to rests with workers who, in many cases, are just entering the workforce--the 20-somethings (also known as the Millennial Generation) (The Millennials, 2007).
For organizational managers, this condition of irony brings with it the opportunity to study and learn from these developments within the context of two of the five components comprising organizational behavior (OB) study: anthropology and politics (the other three being psychology, sociology, and social psychology) (Robbins, 2007, pp 12-13). Anthropology, from an OB perspective, is concerned with the study of both the dominant and subtle cultures that are present in an organization. Politics involves the informal interactions between workers that can and often does influence behavior and workplace conditions both favorably and unfavorably. These are selected as preferred instruments for such a study because unlike any other generation, this group has the ability (due to being liberated by computer technology) to blend both personal life and work life in unprecedented ways; such a blending has particularly strong cultural and political implications.
This paper will review the impact the 20-something worker is having on the worker from the OB perspective of anthropology and politics. It will first provide some background that profiles this unique demographic group, and then offer a more defining explanation about anthropology and politics’ role in the OB process, to be followed by a brief case example of these dynamics being played out in one workplace. The paper will conclude offering the writer’s concept of Human Resource Design (HRD)--a potential bridge-builder that OM policymakers might apply in the 20-something challenges they face.
Here Come…the Millennials
They are 80 million strong and are the fastest growing number of new workers. They were born between 1984 and 1995. Unlike the Baby Boomers (1945-1965), and Generation Xers (1968-1978), two groups that were born during the zenith of the industrial age, work as a priority over family and personal pursuits for Millenials is considered unthinkable. This generation has watched (often been part of) parents and grandparents going through divorces; they have seen family members work for one institution for most of their lives (and in some cases being thrown out of work because of the encroachment of globalization), and they have had a front row seat watching as the Great Society of the 1960s created a huge federal government that has not been able to sustain the promises of economic empowerment for all people. And a caveat for this generation is computer technology…or technology itself (The Millennials, 2007; Rubel, 2007).
The writer recalls the observations of a colleague some years ago who pointed out that the generation that was coming up (that would later come to be known as the Millennial Generation) would be the first to have control over how media content was delivered to them (personal communication, 1990). What the colleague used as an example of this was the video tape recorder which, at that time, had just fully come of age. From 1980 to 1990 the sale of the VCR tripled and as it did, so was there the emergence of cable television. Both of these media technologies offered control of media content that was unprecedented.
Incorporated with these developments as well was the emergence of video games as a mainstream product that was readily embraced by this. After a seemingly awkward start in the mid-1970s, the video game industry found its niche in the market with the launch of Pac Man. This was shortly followed by the launch of Mario Brothers (and shortly thereafter, Super Mario Brothers). And in just a short time of their introduction to the mass market, the quality of these games—visual resolution and intuitiveness of player control—continually improved.
The VCR, cable television, and video games were as common to the child growing up between 1980 and 1985 as had been the radio and the motion picture for a child in the 1930s and 1940s, and as had the television and the record player been for the child growing up in the 1950s and the 1960s. It should be noted, at this point, that there were certain characteristics about this generation that was very different from the previous one. Most notable was something that the writer’s colleague had pointed out: the clear sense of empowerment that these young people had with the media that was in their possession. Unlike the radio listener and television watcher of previous decades, these participants could—if they so choose—actually influence and have control over how content was delivered to them. Most important, though, is that they knew they had this power from a very early age.
It was shortly after the VCR reached its zenith in popularity that it was not uncommon to hear jokes from late night comedians that parents were recruiting their children to “program” their VCRs. It was also about this time that parents began to notice a seeming fanciful interest their children were having in a thing called a “personal computer” was taking shape to be much more than that (The History of the Computer, Parts I and 2, 1995).
For many adults, the phrase “personal computer” seemed an oxymoron—a contradiction in terms. Society had been conditioned to believe that a computer was a huge, complex mass of nuts and bolts that existed in obscure buildings of academia and government. While this had been true at one time, the launching of Apple Computer and Microsoft changed this perception forever (The History of the Computer, Parts I and 2, 1995). Steve Jobs of Apple and Bill Gates of Microsoft understood intrinsically that the computer was a natural evolution—a synthesis—of technological developments that began with the radio tube and the handheld calculator and ended with the explosion of a global culture that was becoming more knowledge driven rather than industrial driven. This transformation of the “Fordism” mentality [in which productive techniques were based on the assembly line concept e.g. Ford Motor Company] to the information or digital age [where creativity became a preferred driving force for economic growth] was wholly integrated with the launch of the personal computer; as was it integrated with the confluence of other technological developments which included satellite and telecommunications making the personal cell phone yet another instrument of empowerment (Orisini, 2006: Liparito 2006).
These developments are discussed at length in the book The Third Wave. Published in the late 1970s, the book has since become one of the most accurate prescient blueprints to what would unfold in the years that embodied the technological revolution of the 1990s and the early 2000s.
And for the Millennial Generation, these developments were as natural a way of life as had been the driving of a “horseless carriage” been for young people growing up in the late 19th century. While the adults fretted that these new technologies were indicators that the world was going to hell in a hand basket, in both eras the young people intuitively understood that these developments were instruments of progress and would open doorways to possibilities scarcely dreamed about by previous generations.
It is no wonder, then, that when the Millennial Generation began to come of age these young people brought skill sets in to the workplace that were no match for the status quo. Few major industries that survived the enormous disruption of being pushed into the globalized world of knowledge work have been able to fully make this transition to date. Many companies did not begin making significant investments in information technology and its required ancillary support resources (that include training and re-training of personnel) until the early 2000s; and today, there are many companies that are still making such adjustments. Added to this is a “graying” of the managerial workforce in many industries, a condition noted for the presence of many Baby Boomers who survived this transition into the globalized world of knowledge work but who are now nearing retirement (or second career choices). Following close behind the Boomers are Generation Xers who carry with them “institutional memory” of the Boomer-era legacy and, in some ways (to hearken back to a previous analogy), are—like their parents--inclined to have a more experiential range of reference for the “horse and buggy” than the “horseless carriage.”
Like the industries they are employed by, many of the older workers have embraced the confluence of computer technology (which also includes self-serve kiosks at grocery stories, and credit-card friendly gas pumps) in fits and starts. It has been a disruption in their lives but they have reached a level of acceptance. And computer technology is, to them, certainly more science than an art.
This is just the opposite for the Millennials. To them it is much more of an art form—a way- of-life form. Computer technology’s confluence has transformed the world into something that makes sense to them. It is simply those of the generation preceding them that is much less clear to them. And this condition readily plays itself out in the context of anthropology and politics.
Anthropology, Politics and the Millennials
As mentioned in the introduction, anthropology, from an OB perspective, is concerned with the study of both the dominant and subtle cultures that are present in an organization. Politics involves the informal interactions between workers that can and often does influence behavior and workplace conditions both favorably and unfavorably (Ante, 2006). Both are components of what make up the discipline of organizational management. The other three are psychology, sociology, and social psychology.
Briefly…
• Psychology as it relates to organizational operations is an element in human reaction and behavior to the work place experience. This also involves the fundamental qualities of who the worker is—emotionally and, to some extent, intellectually. The psychological component of OB is concerned with the internal and external forces that influence a worker’s perception of the workplace and of him in relationship to the workplace.
• Sociology factors in to the OB equation as a discipline concerned with group behavior. This is especially useful in the study of teams and how teams respond to both internal and external circumstances.
• Social psychology builds a bridge between psychology and sociology in that it observes responses to how individuals, or groups, respond to external stimuli such as certain degrees of change. Understanding such reactions can help develop programs and policies that make adjusting to change a more meaningful experience. (Cited from the writer’s Threaded Discussion post, October 11, 2007)
The unique skill sets and lifestyle perspectives of the Millennial Generation make a discussion about this group’s impact on the workplace one best offered within the context of anthropology and politics. The reason for this is that the Millennial worker tends to blend work and personal life in a fashion unprecedented for the *industrial age. [*It should be noted that during the agricultural age the blending of work and personal life was actually how farm life was structured. In this sense the Millennials are actually returning to a previous model of social lifestyle.]
Anthropological. The Millennial worker brings an entrepreneurial mindset to the workplace, even as he brings his laptop, iPod, and Personal Digital Assistant (PDA).
Having been reared in a home where the concept of work was often framed by some variation of the 9-5 model, this individual chose to rebel against this at an early stage. For him the embracing of such a model has shown itself to yield strained (or no) family relations, and no guarantee that the employer he has committed so much of his life to will in fact be reciprocal of such loyalty. This employer, the Millennial worker has seen, may not only move operations to another country but also not make good on pension money that had been promised.
The Millennial worker has seen first hand what loyalty to the company can yield. He has also seen thousands of hours of television and movies and has put in a similar number of hours playing video games. Significant degrees of graphic violence and strong sexual content have been part and parcel of most of his media experiences from any early age. There is an understanding about the dark side of human nature present in this individual that could rival the same understanding arrived at by a veteran from the bloodiest of battlefields. The problem, however, is that seldom is there the degree of emotional maturity in place for many of these individuals that would allow a balanced contexualizing of their experiences. This leaves many of them to have high degrees of social intelligence yet not have the emotional intelligence to build lasting relationships. And for this reason, the Millennial man or women invests significant amounts of time exploring relationships, varied forms of relationships, participating in them, and talking about them. It is this characteristic that also serves as a hallmark of the Millennial.
Unlike any other group, these individuals are more likely to have friends and associates with those of a race, ethnic background, and sexual orientation other than their own. As inheritors of the many social movements of the 1960s, the Millennial man and woman does not carry the raw memory of the political demonstrations of that era and have, in essence, moved on. Many of them grew up using some of the early forms of the internet and by their teen years considered it a common occurrence to make contact with, and have social relationships, with a person from another country (Casagrande, Hope, Farley-Metzger, Cook, et al, 2007).
Predictably, the Millennials’ work ethic also has distinctiveness. While the writer did not find any specific evidence that this group was skewed to being one way or another when it came to having the work ethic of their predecessor, there are some commonalities in characteristics for them that is worthy of note. As a rule, Millennials tend to…
• Be hard workers and thrive in environments that embrace innovation.
• Expect to be provided a clear path to reaching a position in an organization that is well compensated—and as soon as possible.
• Be entrepreneurial and think nothing of having several jobs over a short period of time.
• Think of computer technology and themselves as being “one” with it, as it being an enhancement of themselves, not (as is often the case with Boomers and Xers) being a necessary external resource that must simply be “tolerated” and “endured.”
• Not expect a company to provide a guaranteed retirement plan. They are more given to be lured by the promise of adequate health insurance and/or financial support for education and professional development.
• Approach the workplace as one that functions within the conscripts of their own time clock and sense of priority. Personal life and social networking is a top priority—not getting to work at 9 a.m.
Given these cultural cues, the Millennials do represent an interesting bit of irony for today’s workplace. On the one hand they are clearly “high maintenance” from a management perspective, yet they bring with them the exact type of mindset necessary for a company to thrive in the diverse, globally-focused work environment of today. To this extent the Millennial worker and his complex personal culture can actually serve as a model for an organization when it comes to designing the human resource components of the strategic plan (Pink, 2007). In short, if it wants to be competitive in today’s marketplace the company needs to “look” more like the personal culture of the Millennial worker and less like the personal culture of the Boomers and the Xers.
Political. The Millennial worker does not make a distinction between the workplace and his or her personal life; computer and digital technology allow these environments to become one. Hence, if the worker has a run-in with the boss due to coming in late, within minutes a best friend who is located maybe a few miles or a few continents away will know about it via text messaging on the cell phone. And a back and forth “conversation” like this may take place throughout the day as the worker conducts his or her work. [It is not unusual to see a Millennial worker using a cell phone or PDA several times a day, and do so while seamlessly conducting work activities.] Participants in the “discussion” will likely expand to include other members of the Millennial worker’s “social network” and by day’s end the worker will have been given a number of options that could be pursued to address the problem with the boss (ranging from quitting and looking for another job to exploring virtual work options that will allow more flexibility in having to physically be in the office).
The scenario presented is quite a more expansive one from that which was typical of the Boomer workplace of the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Grievances (unless it was a unionized environment) simply often had to be endured, or would become the grist of discussions at the local bar after work. And the thought of quitting a job as being an immediate short term solution to a grievance was unthinkable. Instead, the tensions in the office between management and employees often transformed into subcultures of power represented by various groups; and on a daily basis, the leveraging or co-opting of this power became a type of give and take that is consistent with all political environments.
The essence of political environments is an ever shifting back and forth effort to reach compromise in a given situation. In the Boomer era, political power in the workplace was often most readily wielded by the management ranks; although this could vary depending on the type of product or service being provided (i.e. a television or movie company’s executives are trumped in power by the writers. Although clearly not in the position to directly impact the bottom line, without the content provided by the writers, these companies would have no product worthy of selling). As a rule, though, “top down” organizational structures tended to be dominant; and even highly unionized environments tended to follow this model.
In the workplace inhabited by Millennials, however, political power has taken on a much more dynamic and unpredictable modality. Ultimately power rests with the person or persons who are most savvy in computer technology’s various uses. And not surprisingly, the Information Technology department is where this power rests in most organizations today. Also not surprising is that these departments tend to be largely staffed by Millennials. A typical IT department will be headed by a Boomer or an Xer but those actually doing the work will be tech savvy Millennials.
Having this sort of power is not a fact lost on these workers; instead it is often a source of their deepest frustrations. They fully understand the priceless value they bring to operational functions while also understanding that everything about them is a threat to a status quo that became wealthy on products, services, and concepts that—in many cases—are nearing the end of their self life. Literally, the Millennials are “caught” in the middle of the exodus from the old economy to the new economy and the battlefield for them is often the day to day workplace environment.
It is no wonder, then, that as the 2008 presidential race approaches, the candidate who seems to best understand these dynamics about this generation has also garnered the lion’s share of support from them; Barak Obama (The Millennials, 2007). The Illinois Senator, who comes from a mixed race background and believes fervently in the entrepreneurial culture embraced by the Millennials, has been emphatic about making the point Boomer’s need “to get over themselves” and learn to co-exist with the new world being ushered in by the Millennial Generation. And notably, these 20-something supporters have been wizards in making Obama the first presidential candidate ever to raise almost all of his campaign funding (and at levels that nearly rival frontrunner Hillary Clinton) by use of the internet. His Millennial Generation-bolstered support has made him—and them—an undeniable force to be reckoned with in American politics. Although an Xer and not a Millennial, Obama’s connection to this group serves as a bell weather of their sociopolitical leanings and, defacto, their ability to influence the workplace politics of the places that employ them; and clearly it is a leader’s tactical error of the most grievous kind to ignore them.
Anthropology, Politics, and the New Boss. Through a restaurant ownership experience (2002-2004), the writer has had first hand contact with facing some of the Millennial Generation dynamics discussed in this paper.
The writer and his spouse took over ownership of a fast food restaurant and with this came 20 employees, about half who were 20-somethings or close to being so. It was quickly discovered that these workers were well versed in doing their jobs. And being typical Millennials, the change in ownership was met with only casual anxiety. The sense was that they simply wanted to be assured that there would be no disruption in pay scales and work schedules.
The writer, being a Boomer, immediately set about instituting quality assurance initiatives such as in-service training and long term planning while his wife, a professional chef, handled the day-to-day managing of the restaurant itself. It helped that two of our four children are Milennials (and were also employed at the restaurant) so some understanding about what to expect from them as workers was present.
What could not have been anticipated, however, was the extent to which the integration of the personal life/work life elements would influence workplace activities. Talking on cell phones while at work and being chronically late for work were the two biggest challenges. On the other hand, as new computer systems were introduced to better track inventory and costs, the workers were often teaching the owners a thing or two about how those systems worked.
These workers were also very receptive to trying new marketing initiatives and were often given to coming up with marketing ideas of their own.Ultimately we came to the conclusion that there was a certain degree of trade off that occurred; while, yes, it was disconcerting to us that their job was not their first priority, it was quite reassuring to know that they were forward thinking and creative and were technologically savvy. This required us to modify our management style to actually become more family-oriented rather than of the top down model initially implemented.
It was from this experience that the writer first began to fully recognize the subtle yet very powerful ways that this emerging generation was affecting the workplace.
A Synthesis is Born
Human Resource Design (HRD) is a concept created by the writer that has come about as a result of his study of and experience with human generational dynamics in the organizational management and behavior field. HRD is a synthesis of the anthropology and political components of OB’s characteristics. It creates a qualitative picture that is useful in helping make management decisions within the context of the realities discussed in this paper.
HRD has two parts: micro and macro.
The micro perspective takes in to consideration every informal, seemingly obscure or trivial aspect about an individual or circumstance. From this a sort of “history” or mosaic is built, a picture filled with all the flaws, unpleasantness, quarks, anomalies, and imperfections that are revealed.
The macro perspective is then created to showcase all the official and known qualities present in the individual or situation. This might include goals, objectives, mission statements, strategic plans and policy initiatives.
From a careful analysis of these perspectives using a auto-ethnographic method (journaling of observations and thoughts in a real-time stream-of-consciousness format) a more realistic picture emerges (Penaloza, 2007),. This picture provides points of commonality and points of demarcation that exists in the situation. Doing this for both individuals and situations can greatly assist in design strategies requiring the accomplishment of some goal or objective. Like the Millenial worker, this method blends the highly social (informal) with the highly structured (formal). An ingredient in HRD, though, is to also engage a certain degree of reflection and analysis. The journaling plays an important role in facilitating this.
A working example of HRD’s application would be in a situation where a manager wants to get a team headed by a Millennial worker but staffed by Boomers and Xers working together more effectively. By first doing an honest assessment of each individual with emphasis on the micro area, a manager will get a more realistic picture of who comprises this team. Because the criteria here is brutal honesty about informal matters (and it should be noted, of course, this would have to be strictly confidential), there is a greater likelihood the manager will unearth something underlying about these individuals not considered previously.
The macro perspective will then provide a more objective perspective about what is expected of the group or situation and regarding matters that are known. As a rule, information from this perspective will tend to be more objective and less (seemingly) negative.
All of this information is carefully documented in a journal as it is being gathered. Then a reflective review of the findings is conducted. Being sought are patterns or similarities. Also being sought would be information that is simply found to not be true or questionable at best. Finally, with this information in mind a strategy may be conducted to find the best approach to making the tensions of this group work more in favor of meeting the goals. This might include changing some personnel or convening an informal gathering (a “retreat”) that allows for directed discussion about problems preventing the accomplishment of goals. It might also include offering assistance for a member in obtaining additional training or counseling.
What HRD does essentially is break a situation down into manageable pieces that can then be reviewed for finding realistic solutions. It is the human resource equivalent of what automotive engineers do with engine systems in order to find the critical point causing a malfunction.
A final word about HRD: While it is implied here, it is important to make clear that the use of the HRD process should only be conducted by someone who possesses a high level of emotional intelligence, a strong penchant toward being accountable, and someone who possesses the leadership skill to use this process in an ethical manner; in short, an individual who is mature and has a healthy understanding of self.
Final Thoughts About the Millennials
When history writes the story of the Millennial Generation it may be found that this group’s greatest contribution was that it forced a convergence of sociopolitical factors to be considered as important to the bottom line as financial and economic considerations. In this sense, the needed—but difficult to obtain—condition of embracing continual change, diversity, and entrepreneurial thinking as being tantamount to society’s economic survival becomes a real and definable thing as personified by the Millennial (Woods & King, 2002, pp.19-23).
It is likely too that further study of this group might offer insight in to a host of ancillary human behavior developments that occurred as they came of age. One of those developments is the emergence of ADHD in young people during the early 1980s. Known more commonly as Attention Deficit Disorder, there is ample evidence that suggests ADHD’s emergence was parallel to the Millennial Generation’s introduction to and embracing of computer technology. As a result, what is considered a negative medical condition might simply be blatant evidence of the woeful shortcomings of the educational system and society’s inability to fully understand the implications of the digital era; maybe it’s not them that has the problem but us (i.e., their ability to process information due to being coupled with computer technology so early in life has actually been heightened/accelerated beyond what would be considered “normal”). And like the popular comic book heroes that have amassed legions of fans in the Millenial ranks, The X-Men (outcast super powered mutant teenages), it might be that the Millennials actually have reason to be a bit paranoid. In this sense, they now represent a group much more powerful than the Boomer’s—they represent, perhaps, the beginning of a merging between technology and human society itself.
References
A History of the Computer: Parts I & 2 (1995). Public Broadcasting Corporation.
Ante, S.E. (2006, June 25). The science of desire. Business
Week, p. 100.
Casagrande, D.G., Hope, D., Farley-Metzger, E. Cook, W. et al
(2007, Summer). Problem and opportunity: Integrating
anthropology, ecologym and policy through adaptive
experimentation in the urban U.S. southwest. Human
Organization, 66(2), p.125. Retrieved November 10, 2007
from ProQuest database.
Rubel, S. (2007, September 3). As technology develops, so
does role of geek marketers. Advertising Age, 78 (35), p.
15. Retrieved November 10, 2007 from ProQuest
database.
The Millennials (11 November, 2007). 60 Minutes. Retrieved, December 12, 2007
from http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/113/millennials
Lipartito, K. (2006, Spring). How institutions think. Business
History Review, 80(1),p. 135. Retrieved November 10,
2007 from ProQuest database.
Orsini, J. F. (2006, September). Why is cultural harmony so
elusive? Mergers and Acquisitions, 41(9),p. 59. Retrieved
November 10, 2007 from ProQuest database.
Penaloza, L. (2007). Mainstree U.S.A. revisited. The
International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27
(5/6), p.234. Retrieved November 10, 2007 from
ProQuest database.
Pink, D.H. (2007, July). Revenge of the right brain. Human
Organization, 89 (6), p.10. Retrieved November 10, 2007
from ProQuest database.
Robbins, S.P. (2005). Organizational behavior (eleventh edition). N.J: Prentice Hall.
Woods, R.H. & King, J.Z. (2002). Leadership and management
in the hospitality industry. Lansing, MI: Educational Institute.
posted by Robert McTyre Sr. at 12:12 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home