Synthesized from the futureneering work of the storytellers and organisational
alchemists in the Business Intelligence Unit (BIU) of TomorrowToday.biz. – http://www.tomorrowtoday.biz

During December and January every year, magazines and websites are filled with predictions of the future. From one year to one century ahead, it seems that everyone has an opinion about what will happen. Of course, there is a danger in doing this. Virtually all predictions about the future turn out to be wrong: if not in content, then at least in timing. Futurology is as much science as it is art. But knowing these challenges doesn’t stop our fascination with looking ahead. TomorrowToday.biz’s Business Intelligence Network (BIU) undertook its own survey – find it here: http://tomorrowtoday.biz/research/future2005.

… Continue Reading

Any organisation – any group of people working together – needs to have a shared view of what they are trying to achieve, the structures through which this will be achieved and a guiding set of operational and environmental ‘rules of engagement’ to guide behaviour and ethics. Whether these are explicit or implicit, good or bad, they will exist and they will guide how companies operate.In order to try and guide organisational behaviour and development, increasingly, companies around the world are adopting formal statements of corporate values.

These values were often entrenched in the companys ethos by the founders of the company. Most of these lists of values are fairly generic and common sense, including such items as honesty, integrity, trust, respectand other basic human decencies. A few of them, however, go further than just the obvious and common sense, and add values that are specific to the functioning of the company.

But there are three major problems:

1. Values that are not really values

Many of the values on corporate lists have more to do with brand, customer service and market reputation than actual guiding principles for organisational behaviour. They are often mainly stated as business outcomes, rather than human attributes. Most executives appear to link values to branding, rather than to bottom line business performance.

For example, Xeroxs values include: customer satisfaction, quality and excellence, premium return on assets, use of technology for market leadership, valuing employees, and corporate citizenship. This is not an unusual list for a multinational corporate. But these are not so much values as they are business imperatives. And they may even be self-contradictory (if we value employees are we allowed to retrench them when were not getting a premium return on assetsand shareholders are demanding greater returns?).

The reason most corporates dont focus on behavioural values is that it is much easier to measure ROA (return on assets) or ROI (return on investment), than ROV (return on values). In fact, I do not know of a company that measures ROV (return on values, or something equivalent). In a recent survey by the American Management Association, only 63% of Executives surveyed indicated that their companies even made an attempt to reward people based on their adherence to corporate values.

But that raises the interesting question of how to measure your values. True values are not, and cannot be, objective. Its therefore absolutely essential to decide up front who gets to measure them, and what yardstick will be used.What information will they need, and how often will they do an analysis? And what will you do with the feedback?

2. Incentivising adherence to the values

If companies truly believed their values, they would incentivise adherence to them, and punish any deviance from them. While many companies have vague scorecards that measure how their people stack up against some ofthe business performance linked values, very few actually reward staff for brave ethical behaviour.

In our consulting work, we find that only a very few of our corporate clients refer regularly to their values, or use their value statements to guide behaviour in meetings and interactions, both internal and external. One of the best in this regard is Investec (http://www.investec.com/GroupLinks/AboutInvestec/MissionStatement) a bank, focusing on high end private clients. Its not just their hard hitting statement of values, but also our knowledge of how these values are applied and referred to during meetings. Another company phrases it like this: Everyone may demand that these values be applied, and everyone’s behaviour is assessed for compliance with them.

Consider the following questions:

• If we value staff development, how much money and time do we allocate to this every month?And is it the staffs decision about whether they have been developed/valued or not?
• If we value innovation, do we encourage experimentation, and therefore expect (and measure and reward) the failures that will go along with it?
• If we value honesty, what do we do to someone who withholds information from colleagues or clients?Do we reward the people who through honesty, reduce profitability?
• If shareholder wealth creation is never a stated core value, why do we place it at the top of our company priority lists?
• If living your values means that you will lose money for a period, or have a competitive disadvantage, will you stick by them?
  

3. The Personality (and Behaviour) of the CEO/MD

The final major problem with living out corporate values is that every piece of research done on values indicates that one of the single most important factors is the involvement and attitude of the CEO. For example, in a 2004 Booz Allen Hamilton and Aspen Institute survey of senior executives across 30 countries, 85 percent of the respondents said their companies rely on explicit CEO support to reinforce values, and 77 percent say such support is one of the most effectivepractices for reinforcing the companys ability to act on its values.

Ultimately, the CEO shapes the company, not just by corporate directives and organisational design, but also by sheer force of personality and character. To ensure that your corporate values are lived out, you need to be absolutely dogged about ensuring that your leaders have the values you espouse (rather than simply acknowledge them or aspire to them).

Living the Values

Jack Welch, former CEO of General Electric used a very simple matrix to explain how values and work environment connected at GE. He talked about two ways of thinking of employees: whether or not they bring in the numbers(i.e. their performance and contribution), and whether or not they live by the values of the organisation.

	Does not bring in the numbers	Brings in the numbers
Has the values	II	IV
Does not have the values	I	III

Quadrant I is an easy decision. Theyve got to go. Get rid of them quickly. Quadrant IV is excellent give them a raise, hold them close, keep them happy and working.

But given the choice of working with and retaining people from either Quadrant II or Quadrant III, which would you choose. This can be tough, but Jack Welch says you have no choice: you must get rid of the person who is bringing in the numbers but not living the values. Thats where leadership has to step in and make the difficult decisions.Quadrant II people can always be trained and developed. You can teach skills. You cant teach attitude, character or values.

Values cannot be imposed on a company. When doing an exercise to create a list of corporate values, most companies end up with an idealistic wish list. However, a better approach would be to identify what values actually exist in the company. These are the only ones that will actually be lived through thick and thin. Your values are what you are, not what you want to be. You can possibly have a few aspirationalvalues on your list, but these should be clearly marked as such.

In a small company, thats easier to do, as it relates to the individual founders. As companies grow, it becomes increasingly harder to ensure that employees live by the original values of the company. And the only way to change the values of the organisation is to get more people into the organisation who actually believe and live the values you want to exhibit. This is just another reason why people are our most important asset, and deserve the full attention of the senior leaders of every organisation in the world.

It is no secret that we are living in a fast-paced world that requires new skills, attitudes and approaches from individuals and organisations. A world where the ability to adapt, learn and relate is critical for survival and success. Adapt, learn, relate three competencies without which your organisation will not survive the next ten years. Three competencies greatly supported by the effective use of teams in your organisation.In this article I will explore why an organisation structured around dynamic teams, also called X-teams, has a competitive advantage moving into the future. X-teams are teams that change continuously. Their goals and objectives change. Their members change. Their members are also part of other teams. Their environment changes. In fact, there is nothing static about x-teams. Still these teams and, subsequently, organisations that structure themselves around dynamic teams like these, have an extra-ordinary potential to adapt to change, learn form experiences and form strong, long-lasting relationships. (For some more background on X-teams, read The comparative advantage of X-teams Ancona & Bresman, 2002). This article supposes that the teams we are talking about, are effective, optimally functioning teams. Of course this is not something to take for granted or to underestimate. The purpose of this article is only to indicate why a structure of effectively functioning teams can be highly beneficial. It does not deal with how to implement this or how to ensure that these dynamic teams remain dynamic and effective. I will focus on the how in the next few e-zines.Adapt
Adapt refers to more than an organisations ability to change. Contrary to our normal understanding of the word adapt, which is mostly used in a reactive sense, we are talking here about proactive adapting, or proactive change. Adapting not to current circumstances, but to your understanding of future circumstances. In a recent study I did on the characteristics individuals need to succeed in the future workplace, this mindset aptitude for proactive change was called a passion for change which refers not only to the ability to cope with change, but also the ability to embrace and create change. In order to survive in today and tomorrows economy, organisations need to have both the mindset of proactive adapting (a passion for change) and the dynamic organisational design that will support, sustain and encourage this continuous change.

As organisations are faced with an increasing demand for flexibility and adaptability, huge strain is being placed on current organisational structures. It often happens that we try to operate in a complex, multi-dimensional, fast-changing and chaotic environment with organisations that are still Taylored (excuse the pun) for a previous era. This creates a great deal of confusion regarding roles and responsibilities (which leads to conflict, insecurity and often a breakdown of trust) as the environment continually forces employees to cross departmental, functional and hierarchical boundaries. Government departments especially struggle with this dilemma, but they are not alone. Many corporates (and their organograms) do advocate a loose, project-oriented, matrix structure, but middle management often still covertly cling onto little silos/empires of their own, making the confusion, conflict and insecurities even worse than within an overtly rigid structure.

On the contrary, an organisation that looks more like a fluid alliance of teams can respond quicker to change and notions of change. Dont get me wrong Im not suggesting that you should restructure your company into fixed, long-term teams. This will most probably only create a new, differently structured, structure. What you probably could consider (for a start) is to loosen up a number of project-oriented teams that assemble around specific project goals and then disassembles again at the completion of the objectives. No matter how you decide to do it, you need to build flexibility(and the ability to respond to chaos) into the very fibre of your organisation.

Learn
A lot has been written on the learning organisation (see Peter Senges work). This learning, amongst other things, refers to an organisations ability to learn from its experiences. Do we capture what we learn? Are these learnings being fed back into the system for future reference? Do we have an atmosphere where people are willing and able to give honest opinions and feedback? Are we open to experimenting and failing? Does failure get punished or rewarded?

Teams, as functional sub-units within an organisation, can be highly effective in generating and capturing learning, developing individual team members and feeding learning and experience back to the organisation. The fact that people can relate and connect better in smaller units, where a common goal is sought, also makes people more willing to ask and give honest feedback, risk making mistakes and develop each other. In the team a safe atmosphere can be created where this learning can take place. Of course the feedback and accountability mechanisms need to be in place in order to ensure that the learning is captured and really fed back into the system. And of course a general openness to learning need to exist in the bigger organisation before it will be truly effective in the sub-units (teams) that the organisation is made up of. But teams can be highly effective units to foster, grow and sustain a learning climate in the organisation.

A further benefit of seeing your teams as your primary learning units, is the potential for cross-functional or inter-disciplinary learning. In dynamic project teams we find people who would normally sit in different departments, working in one team towards one goal. Suddenly the financial and environmental specialists are working shoulder to shoulder with the engineer and sales executive. A great opportunity for debate, conflict, learning from diversity and innovation.

Relate
Relate refers to your companys ability to connect with its people. Not only the people drawing salaries from it, but also the people spending money on its products and investing capital in it. We are thus talking about your companys ability to relate to its stakeholders. Or, put differently, to engage in, grow, and sustain meaningful relationships with employees, customers, investors and the community it operates in. We live in a connection economy where an organisations competitive advantage lies more and more in this relational ability. The challenge is to create strong and effective relationships through which people can fulfill their true potential and thus be of optimal value to the organisation. Also remember that the people working for you today will be your customers, business partners, community leaders and investors tomorrow. Strong relationships pay off sooner or later.

Teams are exceptional vehicles for an organisation to connect with its people on an inter-personal level. Teams provide the closeness and togetherness through which relationships can start and develop. The team is the link between the intra-personal, inter-personal, organisational and customer-interface relationships. It is on the project-team level that the organisations vision and values become practical and authentic. It is also on this level where the customer-experience is felt and where people connect on levels beyond day-to-day operations and deadlines. And if the broadband information-flow that results out of these, more personal, connections are fed into the organisational consciousness, you can get an organisation that is in sync with the values, dreams and fears of its people.

Finally
The DNA of your organisation is what really carries the information about your existence. Unlike, biological DNA, however, you can determine what you want to embed into the DNA of your company. And if what you want your company to be is to realise at all, then it needs to be reflected in the smallest sub-systems you are made up of. Teams. Not just departmental sub-groupings. Multi-disciplinary teams that are mini-versions of the bigger system. Teams that can change and make decisions. X-teams.

Leadership is tough. And perhaps it is made even tougher by the never-ending stream of information and advice directed at leaders from all quarters. Everyone has their say, from those who have been there and done itto those who have studied, postulated and theorised about leadership from the vantage point of lofty towers and marbled institutions. Of course there are valuable insights and input to be had from both these quarters and any leader intent on learning can always benefit from an attitude where openness overrides one of, I already know in response to new information concerning the tough ask that is leadership.

In his book Good to Great, Collins describes the kind of leadership encountered in companies who were great as level 5 leadership. According to Collins, Level 5 leadership is the combination of professional will and humility. It is the latter of these two characteristics that poses the challenge. Not much has been written and said within the corporate corridors when it comes to humility. In fact in most corporate environments, conditioned as they have been by a dog eats dog mentality, the twin notions of humility and leadership go together about as well as oil and water. To many the concept of humble leadership remains nothing more than an oxymoron.

As leaders are required to lead in a world that is increasingly chaotic, unpredictable and connected, questions are being asked of leaders for which their professional training and formation has not prepared them. What is obvious is that something else is needed when it comes to present and future leadership. Certainly if Collins Level 5 leadership is the desired template from which to lead, then new places will need to be searched in order to discover the how when it comes to understanding concepts such as humility in the context of leading. Meg Wheatley provides a clue as what this could mean and even where to look when she states that, leadershipin turbulent times is spiritual (Finding Our Way p125).

So what then is humility – and how does a leader acquire such a trait?

These are difficult questions but represent a start along a path where I suspect answers if you can call them that, find you rather than the other way round. Humilityis a somewhat nebulous thing: For one thing, it cannot be claimed for in doing so, the claimant simply provides evidence to the contrary! Authentic humility, as with authentic leadership, is conferredrather than claimed. Many years ago I recall being at a seminar with John Adair the British author and management consultant, when someone in the audience began a question with, Dr Adair, as leaders…Before the poor fellow could utter another word, Adair interrupted him with, thats a very presumptuous statement you have just made (as leaders)…Adair then went on to say something which I have never forgotten, he said, …leadership is always conferred, never claimed

I have thought a lot about that over the years as I have exercised various leadership positions that would, by title and rank at least, suggest leadership, but if Adair is to be believed, might not necessarily have meant the presence and practice of authentic leadership. Leadership as something conferred not claimed it merits serious thought and invites honest evaluation of ones own leadership!

The practice of Zen teaches that it is impossible to add to a cup that is already full. To do so would be to waste whatever is being added. The same is true of the mind where being fullis represented by the attitude spoken about earlier which, if given a voice would be heard to say, I already know. Such an attitude makes learning difficult if not impossible. It is what anesthetizes the leader to new information. In contrast to this Zen teaches openness and in his book Deep Survival, Laurence Gonzales, informs us that Survival instructors refer to that quality of openness as, humility.

So, as to what is humility? we have our first clue: openness.When it comes to leadership it is possible that experience, expertise and success can all serve as obstacles to cultivating an attitude of openness. When our existing paradigms are challenged it is far easier to adopt a defensive pattern, automatically downloading and applying our mental models, rather than embrace an openness to engage the new information: An impregnable defensive guard of, I already know locks into place.

Humility (openness) allows leaders to develop the capacity to avoidimposing old frameworks on new realities. It takes a great deal of courage to remain open, to see differently. Certainly Savvy leaders are those who determine to see these new realities using both their heads as well as their hearts. Dr Jon Kabat-Zinn, one of the pioneers of meditation and pain research maintains that learning to see with your eyes and your hearts open involves inner work and until we learn to do this work, deep problems will persist. Paying attention to our inner territory or undertaking what I call interior landscaping, is simply no longer optional for leaders. Not if that is, you are serious about leading in a Connection economy.

I am convinced that leadership in the emerging Connection economy will be both deeply personal and inherently systemic in nature. Both these areas represent blind spots in much of the current research and practice of leadership. The intentional exploration of this territory will become the primary task of the Savvy Leader. Furthermore, this exploration will be dependent on the individual and collective sense of openness and awareness; In other words it will mean learning to see how we see.

If openness represents the initial building block in humility the question remains how does one go about acquiring such a trait? This becomes problematic when reduced to some sort of formula or three step approach. Unfortunately, much of the current (and popular) literature has become intoxicated by this kind of methodology and the temptation is to allow bad habits and quick fixes to influence what essentially needs to be a new approach.

The how becomes a personal journey. It is one with few guarantees, unfamiliar measurements and a willingness to get stuck along the way. Not very inviting for leaders from the old school! If openness is the first building block towards humility then the seventeenth Century Chaplain to Charles I, Jeremy Taylor, offers us a glimpse as to the first step in the how to journey towards humility: Humility does not consist in criticizing yourself, or wearing ragged clothes, or walking around submissively wherever you go. Humility consists in a realistic opinion of yourself He further advices against comparing oneself to others, harbouring secret anger, doing good for the sake of acclaim, seeking out compliments and being ashamed of ones birth, parents and occupation.

Could it be that further clues for such a journey, are to be found by looking back as well as within? Sounds to me like a good place to start! Bon voyage.

Acknowledgements & References:
Good to Great by Jim Collins, Random House Publishers, (ISBN 0 7126 7609 0)
Finding Our Way by Margaret J. Wheatley, BK Publishers (ISBN 978-1-57657-317-0)
Presence by Senge, Scharmer, Jaworski & Flowers, Doubleday Publishers (ISBN 0-385-51624-X)
Devotional Classics, edited by Richard Foster & James Bryan Smith, Hodder & Stoughton (ISBN 0-340-60121-3)
Deep Survival by Laurence Gonzales, W.W. Norton & Company, (ISBN 0-393-32615-2)

Seven imperatives for those leading the Bright Young Things

One of the greatest challenges facing leaders everywhere is the need to adjust to the irresistible avalanche of changing demands they encounter. For a leader, encountering change is as natural as horse flies to a horse!It is par for the course and should not be denied, ignored or, for the most part at least, resisted.

Much has been said and written about technology as a primary change driver. A case in point is how smarter technology has revolutionized our basic understanding and approach to information. There was a time when access to information was the deferential between those who had the power and those who didn’t in an organization. It made sense then to guard that information. The reality today is that information is only as powerful in so far as it is shared. Furthermore the barriers guarding access to information have crumbled and anyone who knows where to look and how to look (normally those under 30!) can extract information that once was privy to the select few. ‘Managing information’ has become yet another modern-day oxymoron and a more accurate approach might be the need to learn how to ‘unmanage information’. The fact that the term ‘unmanage’ immediately incurs the wrath of my clever and trusty spell-check friend merely underscores my point and does little to distract from the need to embrace such a notion! The myth of management extends to several areas that leaders would be better served by ‘unmanaging’ – innovation for one, but that subject is best left for another time.

Yet another significant change driver that impacts on leaders everywhere is that of the change in values. The shift in values has placed leaders under increasing pressure. On the one hand there is the pressure to preserve traditions and guard the way things have been done whilst on the other hand is the need to adjust to the demands of changing realities and worldviews. An easy place to see this tension being played out is within education institutions, especially high schools. Tradition plays an important part in many such institutions yet that same tradition is often what inhibits the practice of creating an effective environment and methodology for the education of today’s generation.

These twin challenges of technology and values provide the backdrop to explore perhaps the greatest challenge facing the majority of leaders today: that of leading Generation X. Here is where the real crux lies. The biggest challenge facing corporates into the next decade will be their ability to attract and retain talent, or what we in TomorrowToday.biz refer to as the, “Bright Young Things� (BYT). The war for talent is beginning to become a familiar refrain among the more credible strategic management sages worldwide. In an emerging Connection Economy it makes perfect sense that this shift is where the new battleground will be found. But if these Bright Young Things are to be retained once they have been attracted into the corporate web then some changes will be required from those in charge. The temptation will be to merely make cosmetic changes in the quest for retention. It is a strategy doomed to failure before it is even started. In BYT you are dealing with a faker-savvy group and creating an internal environment that is authentic and coherent with the external message that your company is transmitting is a minimum requirement. What follows are at least some of the adjustments that you as a leader will be required to make in the quest to lead and retain Generation X.

1. Walk your talk. BYTs are not impressed by carefully crafted mission statements adorning the office walls. They look to see if the words translate into meaningful behaviour. In other words, are you living what you say you are? I heard a story recently of a top graduate who was offered an excellent position at a leading audit firm. Having been shown around the office environment she declined the position. When the surprised HR Director inquired as to why she had declined the offer, he was told that it was due to the fact that no one had greeted her during their tour, no one seemed to be having fun and consequently this wasn’t the kind of environment in which she wished to spend the majority of her week. A company that had worked hard to project a smiling face to the outside world and claimed to be an employer of choice simply wasn’t! They had been found out by someone for whom a job meant more that showing up at work, performing a function and collecting a pay cheque. There was a sizable gap between who they said they were and what they were and with this BYT at least, it cost them. Jack Welch had the honesty to say that in so far as personal issues were concerned it was best that others did as he said and not as he did. Full marks for honesty there Jack, but that simply won’t cut it when in comes to the kind of leadership the BYT demand. Authenticity within and without will be required. This isn’t anything new and as Collins points out in Good to Great those leaders who exhibit what he terms Level 5 leadership, demonstrate this quality – harmony between who they are and how they lead. This quality is a characteristic rather than a skill. It is something that is forged over the long-haul.

2. Forget your title. You need to understand that your impressive title will count for little in garnering the respect you feel it merits. Your title alone was sufficient to get that respect with the older folk but that is no longer the case with the BYTs. For them respect has to be earned and is done so through relationship. “Until I get to know you, how can I respect you?� is their guiding mantra. Of course as they get to know you, so their respect might grow. But the emphasis here is in the, “getting to know you�. My colleague tells of an occasion when in a group discussion he was facilitating the BYT (and in this case he really was Young) in the group, when he learnt that he and the CEO lived in the same suburb, enthusiastically suggested to the CEO that they share lifts to work. And he wasn’t kidding! Positional respect (I respect you for your title/status/position) has given way to relational respect (I can respect you because I know you) and best you as a leader understand this shift. Failure to understand this shift will result in misinterpreting attitudes and behaviour, something you as a leader can ill-afford in any circumstance.

3. Fire the change management consultants. Tell BYTs to change and they change. Tell them not to change…and they change anyway! Change and flexibility is to BYT what water is to fish. They need it and should you not provide it, they will create it. Jobs, environments and mindsets need to be flexible. Training should go beyond functional training and embrace a more holistic approach. This means that you need to be flexible. You need to embrace change and try new things including the technology Shrek that haunts you. But you knew all this and let it be said that it is never too late to teach an old dog new tricks. Believing that is an insult even to an old dog! I know of a large multi-national company where the different ranks within the corporate structure are distinguished by things such as the proximity to a window – a desk with a view, the type of chair one has and the amount of pot plants allowed. Such stereotypical approaches to corporate life will drive BYTs not only to distraction but to the exit door. They don’t indulge in playing these corporate games that make sense to us Baby Boomers who may not have invented all of them but have certainly perfected them! And while I am on the subject of tinsel trappings, here’s a tip: get rid of reserved parking! If you dont think it is an issue, then why not ask your BYTs what they think of such policy. Go on…I dare you! Allow those who get to the office first to park where they like…chances are the Boomers will always beat the BYT in the door anyway!

4. Allow the use of technology in the work environment…yes , even internet access . Here’s the thing: the internet (being connected) is to BYTs what newspapers, magazines and books are to Boomers. Think about that for a while. Withdrawing the privilege of internet access because some abuse it, is not the solution. BYT lives are online. They shop, bank, date and access information online. Being connected will increasingly become a commodity in much the same way that we currently regard light and water in the developed world. Blanket bans on the use of the internet will have to give way to more constructive ways to deal with the issue given what such assess means. A one size fits all rule worked for the Silent generation accustomed to a hierarchal, military world. It achieves less spectacular results amongst those accustomed to be seen and treated as individuals. Finding ways to allow access without abuse will provide the opportunity for great conversation and ought to lead to a collective ownership of any solution formulated. Consequently, respecting and maintaining that solution should then be that much easier.

5. Adjust your understanding of what it takes to build effective teams. Teamwork in the work place is one of the enduring legacies of Boomers. Simply put, Boomers get what it takes to build effective teams. Boomers are preoccupied with the necessity for teams as evidenced by the overwhelming amount of literature on the subject. For Boomers, teams need to be aligned and this is best understood in the oft uttered ideal of the need to all be on the same page. To be realistic this can loosely be interpreted as my way or the highway perhaps softened by a participative management façade. But let me correct what might be a growing (but inaccurate) perception on your part that I don’t believe in the Boomer concept of teambuilding! I do, after all you can’t argue with the results! They are there for all who care to look: powerful and influential multi-nationals hinged on sound teamwork and aligned in the pursuit of a common vision and goal. But that was then! BYTs don’t have the same approach or understanding of what it takes to constitute an effective team. For them, teams mean embracing diversity. The greater the diversity, the better the team. Teams for BYTs are not necessarily grouped by a similarity of belief as they are for Boomers. As was the situation with how respect was viewed, this is yet another generational paradox that can blight the work environment if not understood. As with all paradox there is no right or wrong in the respective approaches, they are simply different. Boomers will have to re-define their philosophy and approach to team building much like Tiger Woods re-invented his golf swing. It may take some time and will certainly mean a lot of sweat, but I for one am optimistic that Boomers can achieve this.

6. Abandon your belief that these BYTs will grow up to be like you. Two words: They won’t! The gapping chasm between the worldview and approach between Boomers and BYTs is not a case of some sort of delayed maturation. It is based on an entirely different value base which in turn shapes behaviour. Generation Theory reveals that each generation acquires a value set shaped by worldwide events that take place during their formative years. Understanding that the BYTs strange (well at least if you are a Boomer that is) behaviour is based on a value set, is to recognize that it is not likely to change with the passing of years. The sooner you understand that the easier it will be to understand what adjustments are required to both the environment and to your style as a leader. Savvy leaders understand that to bring out the best in their people it is them and not the people, whichneed to make the adjustment. The savvy leader can identify with the chameleon in this regard and it is a far cry from the leadership terrain of yesteryear.

7. Don’t expect them to work for you. In short, BYTs work for themselves. Selfish maybe, if viewed against the tradition understanding of loyalty. But they know what they want and are honest enough to admit it and live it.They will do whatever it takes to further their career and one line of work for a lifetime is certainly not part of their agenda. Loyalty as it has come to be understood needs reworking when it comes to the BYT. Ensuring that the work environment creates opportunity for meaning and is infused by the double F ingredients (Fun and Flexibility) will go a long way in prolonging the retention of BYT. Without these key essentials it is a lost cause. BYT want to work for a cause. They want to believe that what they do can make a difference. It is no accident that the survey by Fortune magazine of the top 10 companies to work for in Europe shared a common feature: they all had succeeded in fusing who they were and what they did with a meaningful social responsibility identity. Companies that succeed in this will become employers of choice for the BYT. This is a lesson Nike has seemingly woken-up too having for years seemingly applied their just do it mentality to the abusive manufacturing practices in the production of their goods. They had thought that such incongruity would fly beneath the radar of the BYTs and especially that of the next generation (Generation Y). It didn’t. And to have continued to ignore it, potentially rendered the brand vulnerable to a new breed of consumer who impose a new set of criteria regardless of who you are.

Of course there is more to be said on the subject of leading this new generation. What is certain though is that leaders everywhere cannot effort to ignore the reality that they need to adjust and adapt. That is always easier to say / write than implement. Let me end with this picture when it comes to the need to change. Imagine you, the leader, performing a dance on a stage with a Western (as in the old wild west) backdrop. The dance fittingly is a square dance (or some appropriate dance given that setting). However in the middle of the dance the backdrop lifts and is replaced by a futuristic Star Wars type setting. Suddenly the dance no longer fits. The unaware dancer continues to dance as well as ever but it now becomes inappropriate, out of place and perhaps even comical.

The backdrop has changed and Leaders will need to learn a new dance.

So, shall we dance…go on, you lead.

At a simplistic level, it’s possible to make generalizations about people. The simplest one is one we all know: men and women! Men are from Mars, women are from Venus. Defend the Caveman, or have Vagina Monologues. Although generalizations, all of these books and shows strike a chord with us, because we see patterns of behaviour, and underlying attitudes that make sense of our own experiences with men and women. Similarly, it’s possible to show that today’s work force is made up of four distinct generations – the Silent generation (born 1930s and 40s), the Boomers (born 1950s and 60s), the Xers (born 1970s to mid 1980s), and the Millennial generation (born mid 1980s to present). Your problem is that you’ve got members of each one in your next training session.

Generational theory is a relatively new science, looking at the influences on people of the era in which they grew up. Much academic work has been completed around the world, on every continent. In South Africa, academic studies, and field research are confirming that generational issues are valid here as well. But not too many people have started to unpack the implications of generational theory for various aspects of life.

TomorrowToday.biz is one of the world’s leading consultancies using generational theory and applying it to organisations. In this email we start a series of articles that will attempt to unpack some of these applications. Much more detail can be found at http://www.tomorrowtoday.biz/mindthegap

The challenge for trainers and teachers (and in fact, presenters and facilitators, too) comes from a clash of the generations: a collision of values, expectations, ambitions and attitudes. At the start of the 21st century, it’s increasingly likely that participants in a training course are a more age-diverse group than ever before. The traditional hierarchies that once kept generations together and isolated one age group from another no longer exist. Talent and merit are quickly overtaking length of service and experience as the deciding factor in advancement. The problem for trainers is that each generation has a unique perspective on the world, and in particular has unique preferences for acquiring, digesting, organising, and applying information and skills. Understanding these generational differences is vital to those who must try to impart the values, culture, knowledge and skills upon which the success of a business depends.

A brief summary of the four generations in the workplace at the moment:

Silent Generation were born before and during the Great Depression and World War II. They are conservative, hard-working and structured, preferring rules, order and formal hierarchies. They are founts of great wisdom, having lived through some of humanity’s most profound change-moments in the last 8 decades.

Baby Boomers are the postwar generation, the drugs, sex, rock ‘n’ roll set who grew up during a time of grand visions. They invented “Thank God, it’s Monday!� and the 60-hour (plus) workweek. Boomers are passionately concerned about participation in the workplace, motivated by vision and strategy, and care about creating a fair and level playing field for all.

Generation Xers grew up as “latchkey kidsâ€? during the era of crises (from Watergate to June 16, 1976; from the energy crisis to the collapse of communism). They need options and flexibility; they dislike close supervision, preferring freedom and an outputs-driven system. They love change so much they actually need it. Xers strive for balance in their lives – They work to have a life; they don’t live to work.

Millennial kids are the upcoming optimists, willing to co-operate, work and learn. They value diversity – often not even noticing it. They are confident – almost arrogantly so. They seem destined to become “good scouts.� Bill Strauss and Neil Howe, authors of Generations, predict they will inherit the mantle of patriotism and self-sacrifice personified by the GI generation (the generation who came before the Silents, represented by such people as Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Walter Cronkite and others).

Dealing with this diversity of ages, values and worldviews can be a difficult job. But knowing how members of each generation prefer information to be organised, the type of teacher/trainer that appeals to each, which activities they respond to, and learning formats to which they gravitate will give you an advantage as a multi-generational presenter, trainer, teacher and facilitator.

Silent Generation

This generation prefers a learning environment that is structured and risk-free. The Silents tend to enjoy conformity, appreciate consistency, logic and discipline, and prefer content to be anchored in precedent or related to a tried-and-trusted method. Its not surprising then, that they prefer a traditional setting, with a classroom-style layout. They prefer trainers with a conservative style, especially those who establish ground rules early (and then stick to them).

They tend to dislike informality and too much familiarity. They certainly do not like overly casual dress and speech. Do not use slang, and steer clear of anything that may be considered rude or offensive (such as risqué jokes, swearing and even bad use of grammar). Many Silents are turned off by personal anecdotes, examples and stories, preferring more “left-brained,� logical material. Don’t rush things – they prefer to take all training slightly slower than some of their wired young colleagues. They prefer to an outline up front – and they will not appreciate the trainer deviating from this plan.

The ideal trainer is a knowledgeable expert. Silents believe in positional authority, and will be respectful of their trainer. Younger trainers may have to quickly establish credibility, either by including a detailed CV in the course notes, or by an early introduction that includes their qualifications for the particular session. Trainers can also establish rapport by acknowledging the participant’s background and experience, and by listening carefully and respectfully when they talk.

Silents do not like to be put on the spot with questions or group interaction – especially in a mixed age group when there are lots of younger participants. They are the least likely of all participants to interrupt or confront the trainer if they disagree. As a result, trainers may not know whether there is actual buy-in to the session until the end-of-session evaluation forms are collected. Informal feedback can be obtained during breaks in the training.

Silents are motivated to learn when training is tied to the overall good of the company. Their preferred learning style is linear, progressive, factual, information-rich, goal-directed, stable, orderly, and risk-free. Training activities that appear to work best are the classical, straightforward presentation of information. Silents prefer to build their skills privately, rather than in a group context. If budget allows, one-on-one skills training (especially technology-related training) is ideal – and much more effective.

Training materials for Silents should be in summary form (Reader’s Digest type formats). Avoid small font sizes and “funky� font styles, and ensure grammar and spelling are perfect. Do not expect them to access the Internet to download course notes – they may be capable of doing so, but still prefer to get paper in their hands.

Boomers

The preferred learning environment of the Baby Boomer is interactive and nonauthoritarian. Although they like things to follow a predictable, linear direction, they also respond well to brainstorming, “lateral thinking�, “how to� sessions (they support the world’s massive self-help, motivational industry), interactive (allowing for participant input and team collaboration), competitive, and motivational. They are not intimidated by physical contact and interaction, and excel in small team work. They can respond well to the traditional classroom as long as there are opportunities for interaction, networking and teamwork.

The ideal trainer is a knowledgeable friend, with good facilitation skills. Boomers respond best to trainers who are perceived as an equal, collegiate, vulnerable, personal, yet have recognised qualifications in the subject. Many of them have authority issues, and they resent power plays. Trainers who give personal examples and share their own vulnerability will be well accepted. They are motivated to learn if they believe the knowledge and skills they are acquiring will give them new ways to excel at work.

According to a study conducted by The Boomer Institute in Cleveland, Boomers’ need to prove their worthiness has created a work ethic that can be called dedicated and driven. They are dedicated learners as well: Boomers tend to be optimistic, self-help driven, motivated, and are fascinated by the role of spirit in their lives, even their professional lives. Boomers challenge everything and try to change things to be the way they “should� be. It’s good, therefore, to focus on personal challenges. Boomers want to solve problems and turn things around.

Any interactive training activities are effective with Boomers, but most hate role-play. Boomers have a tendency to intellectualise, and often remain unaware that they’ve not translated knowledge into skills. They also focus more on strategic thinking and vision, than short term implementation and action. Practicing skills will be critical, though they don’t like to be shown up publicly. Watch for the “know it all� Boomer with a chip on the shoulder. He may know a lot, but its often only theoretical, and not being applied.

Training materials that suit Boomers are structured to ensure that information is readily accessible. A hyperlinked website is a perfect example: there’s an overview of information in a friendly, easy-to-scan format, and if interested, more detailed information is easily accessible. Most international news magazines are structured like this as well. The look and feel of the material must be professional and slick.

Generation X

Xers are not nearly as attracted to classroom interaction as the generations before them. They have grown up increasingly frustrated at how out-of-date traditional schooling is with the real world. Its not surprising then, that their preferred learning environment is self-directed, and focused at lifelong learning. They prefer interactive, active, multi-tasking, non-linear, multi-media (consider using CDs, videos and computer-based training, CBT), multi-style, and fun-filled learning, and are motivated especially when this is related to personal skills development and increasing personal marketability. They do not have an eye on a certification, but rather on real-life skills.

The ideal trainer is a guide. Irrespective of age or experience, a trainer who is seen to be proficient in the subject, regardless of qualifications, and who gets right into the material to demonstrate their expertise will elicit the best response from Xers. They will not respect the trainer by default – respect will have to be earned.

They are highly motivated learners who ask a lot of questions, and want interaction. If they are interested they will do additional research – provide information to assist them in that process, and leave it up to them to do it. Give them plenty of space. There may be a need to help them, but err on the side of freedom: The teacher must set them on a course and then leave them generally alone to see where it will take them, giving them opportunity to sample and learn by doing. They are easily bored, and require regular changes in pace, process and style. Chop and change – surprise them regularly.

You can’t put enough role-play into training programs geared to Xers. They want to get involved with what they’re learning, experiment with it and get feedback. If theory is required, try and edutain (entertain with knowledge), and keep it as brief as possible. Then get back to interactive learning. They aren’t worried about putting their reputations on the line, and they’ll jump in and try something even at the cost of looking clumsy in front of others.

Xers respond best to training materials with fewer words than those designed for older generations. They don’t read as much as their older—or younger—colleagues, and are attracted to pages that provide lots of visual stimulation—headlines, subheads, quotes, graphics and lists. Take a look at magazines like Spin and Fast Company to see what we mean.

Millennial Generation

The Millennials are a powerful generation, who have a holistic perspective, anticipating needed change, and with the flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances. They are difficult to intimidate, and free of fear. Failure doesn’t frighten them. In a recent study by Northwestern Mutual Life and the Harris organization of the attitudes and behaviors of students, respondents felt the most affinity to their World War II-era grandparents and great-grandparents. They subscribe to a stricter moral code, care about manners, and believe in civic action. Neil Howe suggests these new workers will need more supervision and structure than their Xer predecessors. “The younger new entrants to the workplace will be looking for more attention and structure from the authority figure,� he says. Their preferred learning environment combines personal challenge, teamwork and technology. In a training room with lots of Millennials, give everyone a task. When a few have completed it, encourage them to walk around the room and help others.

The ideal trainer is an experienced mentor. They appreciate a trainer who is able to give attention and structure to the material. They respond well to authority figures, and respect qualifications and expertise. Be non-linear and use extensive multi-media. Use many different techniques to get a point across. Let them know the practical benefit of what they are learning – do this at the start.

Millennials are motivated to learn skills and information that will help make their working lives less stressful, and will move them closer to achieving personal potential and passions in the workplace. They would enjoy training courses (or at least application of sections of courses) that go beyond simple job functionality (in fact, more and more companies will be expected to provide such courses as: good parenting, marriage skills, personal financial management, health and wellness, and so on). They are more economically motivated than Xers, and training motivation can be linked to this. They are also attracted to learning that doesn’t just teach content, but also teaches process as well – so that they can continue learning and developing well after the course is over.

Like Xers, Millennials prefer training activities that are entertaining in themselves. Training materials that suit them are lively and varied. Printed materials should have the same multiple focal points as the materials targeted at Xers – with one exception. Millennials are readers, so include reprints of articles and written backup information, and lots of links to webpages.

All Together Now…

What if you’ve got members of all four of these generations in one training course? There isn’t a simple, one-size-fits-all solution here, but the best advice we can offer is to learn as much as you can about each participant (or at least each participating generation), and work to respond to their specific preferences. This will take some creative thought and programming. Think options, options, options. You also need to ask yourself about the various dynamics you can create – putting the generations into multi-generational, layered small groups will produce tension, but this may be creatively used. Putting them into homogenous groups will tend to reinforce generational stereotypical thinking, but this may assist you in meeting each participant’s learning needs.

It’s certainly helpful to know the sociology of each of the four generations. That way, you can acknowledge and use their icons, language and values. Also make a concerted effort to use examples that will appeal to a variety of generations.

Assume the best about people. Successful trainers treat everyone as if they have great things to offer and are motivated to do their best. Use the generational strengths. Design methods to overcome the weaknesses. Have fun!

References

Generations @ Work, by Ron Zemke, Claire Raines, Bob Filipczak.
Any of the books by Neil Howe and William Strauss.
Mind Over Money, by Graeme Codrington, Louis Fourie and Sue Grant-Marshall.
Mind the Gap, by Graeme Codrington, Sue Grant-Marshall
Generations website, by Graeme Codrington: http://www.tomorrowtoday.biz/mindthegap
Other books on generations listed here

As I sat there scratching my head, for how can you be alive and not be found on Google.com, I realised that a new criteria for existence has been born, and I had just tripped over it. A credit history is still mighty important but if you have no web history can you really exist?I was 23 years old, had just begun my first real job, and was on my way to sign up for my first mobile phone contract. This was back in 1993, mobile phones were just being born in South Africa, and if you can remember back then you’ll appreciate my excitement at having just been given a Hagenuk (aka, the original brick).I proudly strolled up to the person in the mobile phone shop, with ID documents, proof of salary, proof of residence, copy of bank statement, everything but a blood sample, ready to sign up. When I was asked if I had any accounts or credit with any other companies or stores, I confidently answered in the negative. This had been something I was very proud of at the age of 23 – I’d never had to borrow money. Or should I say, I’d never purchased anything I couldn’t pay for with cash.

You can imagine my shock and horror when I was told that without a credit history (rating), I couldn’t be approved and hence given a mobile phone contract. This was a new lesson for me. So out I went and opened 5 or 6 accounts at different stores, most of which I had never, and would probably never purchase anything from.

This is a lesson we all know, or as in my case learn very quickly in your late teens and early twenties; you gotta have credit to get credit. While there are a truck load of cynical views and conspiracy theories (some of which I agree with), regarding the pressure to have a credit history, I’m not going to use this space to discuss them. Rather, I’d like to suggest a new ‘credit rating’ for the information age. It shares some of the features of the old system, but has the same consequence… ‘if you’re not on the list, you can’t go to the party!’

If I may, I’d like to introduce it by way of a true story (or as close to the truth as I can get without endangering your and my life)…

Last week I was approached by someone to get involved in a joint venture. There was almost no risk to me other than time, and the upside if it came off seemed fairly attractive. The only problem was that I didn’t know the person very well, and most of our correspondence had been via e-mail, an accepted standard in today’s business world.

As I sat one afternoon, thinking through this venture I noticed that this potential new partner was using a ‘free’ e-mail address. One of the many available on the internet, most often used by students, travellers and people wanting to keep their details unknown and anonymous.

“Aha�, I thought to myself, as I fired up my frustratingly slow internet connection and browsed on over to Google.com (For those of you not completely familiar with Google.com, it is one of cyberspace’s biggest search engines, found at http://www.google.com). I crisply punched in my partner-to-be’s name, and found nothing. I tried their company name, still nothing. I even tried their e-mail address, still nothing.

As I sat their scratching my head, for how can you be alive and not be found on Google.com, I realised that a new criteria for existence has been born, and I had just tripped over it. A credit history is still mighty important but if you have no web history can you really exist?

Based on this new criteria I know I’m alive because when I go to Google.com and type in my name “Barrie Bramley� (the inverted commas are important), there are 84 matches, at last count, and they all have something to do with me. You can track my progress from around 1993 (the same year I got a mobile phone – mmhhh?) You can track my work history, my family history, and know that I have a life.

I’m not suggesting that we throw all previous methods and measures out and replace them with the Google.com test. However, I would like to suggest that as ‘on the edge’ as my point may sound, it is conceivable that companies and people, in the near future, will begin to make use of the Internet as a reference tool more and more.

Your existence will be confirmed by your presence on the great search engines of Cyber Space. It’s both a chilling and comforting idea. On the one hand all sorts of people, some of whom I will not know, will be able to ‘look me up’. They’ll have access to all kinds of information about me that I don’t necessarily want them to know. On the other hand I will have the ability to ‘look them up’ as well. The internet offers me, Joe public, access to a giant database from which I can make informed decisions about people’s existence based on their history recorded in Cyber Space. That’s real history by the way, not the virtual stuff we’ve become accustomed to talking about when we refer to the Internet.

Sure there are all kinds of flaws and loopholes that can be abused and misused. There’s nothing new about that. Things are changing, and my choices are to either embrace the new opportunities afforded by the change or, run and hide. I was never much of a runner.

Oh and just before you switch off and go home tonight, send me your name. I might just find some time to see if you’re alive.