|
|
Pez,
Rickie Tickie Stickies, Pet Rocks and MySpace.com
* V. Michelle Obradovic, Esq.
From the International Chamber of Commerce, our multi-national group could look
across the Seine to see the Eiffel Tower. The City of Lights was mesmerizing.
The food was fine – somewhat small portions - but that turned out to be a
good thing. Actually, lots of things were small; cars, elevators, coffee cups
- not purses and not scarves though; they were huge and Italian made -
Brilliant! Despite the potential for fabulous distraction, the communication
obstacles we were negotiating at the ICC left little time for anything else.
It was a competitive environment, but to be successful, we knew we would have
to quickly form productive relationships. We had to be careful with each
other in the beginning; assume good intentions; listen closely; pay attention
to our words and watch for signs of understanding. We could not allow differing
views to frustrate our purpose or allow misunderstandings to escalate into
skirmishes and potential mutual annihilation. The risk of failure was too
great. The more frequently we were successful in our interactions, the
greater the level of trust between us and the more progress we made. Those
who arrived treating everyone else as adversaries or who were willing to use
any means to gain an advantage were quickly shut out. Those who at first
seemed genuine, but proved hostile, were rusticated, neutralized and given
the stink eye.
Reflecting on the experience, it puts me in mind of another variety of
cultural conflict that is becoming more prevalent in mediation; generational
workplace conflict. Almost like people from different countries, an executive
who remembers WWII and values humility and sacrifice is likely to have a
vastly different ideology from a colleague who is exceptionally well
educated, expects a work/life balance and never knew a world without MTV.
Although cultural conflicts may not be at the top of everyone’s list of fires
to put out, when people don’t communicate well, it’s hard for the work to get
done, which impacts profitability. Today, that already challenging task of
leading and motivating people with different expectations and backgrounds may
be even more difficult because our U.S. workforce is comprised of four
generations of people – Millennials, Gen X, Boomers and the Greatest
Generation. It’s about to get worse. Demographers working with data from the
2000 Census and 2004 Current Population Survey tell us that the majority of
the remaining WWII workforce will likely be retired within three years; some
of the 70 million Boomers are also considering retirement; but there are only
about 45 million Gen X. Sixty million or so Millennials won’t peak until
around 2011. The U.S. workforce will be very different tomorrow. For those
already facing this issue, it may be helpful to think of cross-generational
communication as an adventure to a strange and foreign land - it helps to
have an appreciation of the culture and a basic understanding of the language
before you go.
For example:
- Millennials ages 10 to 24, 1982-1996, are shaped by
the Internet, instant messaging, reality TV, microwave meals, complex
schedules, Columbine, 9/11 and the Gulf War. Millennials are social,
prefer collective decisions, are achievement oriented, vocal and street
smart. They are tenacious, future oriented and generally optimistic.
- Gen X ages 25 to 45, 1981-1961, are shaped by
latchkey and blended parenting, Atari, Three Mile Island, the Iranian
Hostages, Reganomics, the Challenger disaster. Gen X is self-reliant,
techno-literate and concerned for global issues. They want to give and
get instant feedback and don’t focus on rules, but on getting the job
done.
- Boomers ages 46-63, 1960-1943, are shaped by TV,
Vietnam, Woodstock, the Civil Rights Movement, the Cold War, Women’s
Lib, prosperity, the growth of suburbia and having their children in the
spotlight. Boomers have a love/hate relationship with authority and are
driven to work hard and play harder.
- The WWII group, ages 64-81, 1942-1925, are shaped by
production oriented families, patriotic ideals, the Great Depression,
the New Deal, the Korean War and the golden age of radio. They value
honor, duty, restraint, respect for authority, and have an appreciation
of history more so than valuing visioning and innovation.
Two related concepts are
often at the heart of the generational conflict issue; trust and risk. Trust
generally comes in two forms: competency based trust and trust in another’s
motives. Motives based trust is what most people think of because it is the
basis of our personal relationships. It is a belief that another’s intentions
and values are closely aligned with one’s own, and it may be the result of
intuition and subjective interpretation of another’s behavior. Competency
based trust is confidence in another’s abilities. The difficulty here is that
it is hard for most of us to accurately assess the full range of a
colleague’s knowledge, skills and abilities because we have imperfect
information. In either motives based trust or competency based trust,
uncertainty is the big barrier. The more your professional reputation and
income depends upon someone else’s performance, the less likely it is that you
will be willing to relinquish control of a critical task to them, especially
if you have no clue what makes them tick or their aptitude for the task. You
may have to share responsibility, but it does not necessarily mean that you
trust that person to get the job done and to protect your interests.
There are several ways to manage this
situation: First, incentives can be created to bring interests into
alignment, such as public acknowledgment of another’s responsibility for a
project or putting a reward into place for successful completion. For long
term relationships, unity can be created by giving equity in the business
with the opportunity to increase that share should the relationship and
performance develop as expected. The following systems based solutions can
also help: Good hiring practices – assures that employees can manage tasks
assigned to them, even if their approach is different from what another might
choose. Good training practices – assures that employees will gain the skills
necessary to perform in an area as the need arises. Good assessment practices
– assures impartial evaluation of whether objectives have been set
appropriately, and met, as well as providing a method of positive
reinforcement and constructive feedback. These approaches reduce uncertainty
for everyone and make both motives based trust and competency based trust
easier to achieve. In such an environment, it is less likely that
unproductive cross-generational conflicts will occur.
Adios, Au Revior, auf Wiedersehen, Goodnight!
*V. Michelle Obradovic, Esq.
lives in Birmingham, Alabama. She is a former litigator and trial attorney
and is and owner of Wise
Resolution, LLC. Her general mediation practice also includes complex
litigation, mass torts and class actions. She is an Associate Adjunct
Professor at Samford University, Cumberland School of Law.
|
