Leading amidst the clash of generations

“I am subject to organizational gibberish where communication has become a strategic hazard,“ said a leader under extreme duress. With his hands clasped around his head, he looked hapless. Such comments in coaching sessions of top management are now not uncommon. Sometimes they complain that “half my time is wasted in trying to create an understanding between two generations who are speaking but not communicating.” Other incidents involve senior leaders aghast at the “non-serious” attitude of the junior lot.

And if you think the other side is indifferent or content, you will be mistaken. The younger generation finds the traditional rulebook of leadership obsolete and regressive. They express it through their body language and engagement. One member of the so-called “dreaded” Generation Z said, “These babas (oldies) are only interested in trying to prove how much they know and how little we know.” This has created rifts and chasms that have the potential to make organizations almost dysfunctional.

Seventy percent of work is about communication. 50 to 70 percent of work stress is related to miscommunication due to a damaging lack of understanding. This is costly. Every strategy, every policy, every action, every reaction depends on the way it is communicated and the way it is understood. The best of strategies can backfire if the communicator and receiver are facing interpersonal conflict and communication distortion.

When role definition, purpose, processes and policies all demand a high degree of clarity and alignment, clashing paradigms become the biggest hindrance to effective execution. The biggest paradigm clash is that Gen Z favours digital communication versus the face-to-face preference of Generation X and baby boomers. Another paradigm conflict is hierarchy versus informal structures. The older generations have seniority in their DNA, while Gen Z rebels against the idea of traditional structures. Feedback in the earlier generations came at times of appraisals, whereas Gen Z feels very upset when not taken into “confidence” about their performance as it happens.

These paradigm clashes make it very difficult to get people to work together seamlessly. As a leader, these are realities you need to manage. While most leaders find it a headache, great leaders capitalize on this diversity. They have the ability to convert the disadvantage into an advantage.

Paradigm shift #1: learning to learn

The leader needs to create a culture where learning about other people becomes a value and a practice. Every senior person needs to go through a “multigenerational learning program.” This program should be run by senior and junior facilitators. The junior facilitators should be members of Gen Z and millennials who represent the paradigms of the newer lot. This program should highlight the differing mindsets that create clashes between generations. Facilitators representing the two generations need to lead and develop scenarios drawn straight from clash cases in the organization. Role models who are popular as leaders and who have bridged the gap should also be part of the program — they can share how they reduced conflict and won over these generations. Similarly, members of these generations who have adjusted successfully with senior team members can share the key approaches that helped reduce the gap. This is a must-do program for everybody, and the leader should be the first to attend it. The program ends with commitments that will be followed up and become part of appraisal assessment.

Paradigm shift #2: learning the language

Gen Z speaks in another language. They write in abbreviations, and their digital lingo is gibberish to the senior generations. Since a lot of communication happens on WhatsApp and other platforms, it is important to decipher it. I have often quoted my own mistake of misunderstanding my daughter’s messages — reading “LoL” as “lots of love” when it actually meant “laughing out loud.” “FR” does not stand for friend but “for real.” “Busy m” means “I am busy now.” “IDK” is not about identity but “I don’t know,” and so on.

These terms were once looked at with contempt by Generation X and older cohorts; a person using such lingo was considered illiterate or rude. Unfortunately, this impression still prevails among seniors, putting the relationship with the younger generation at a disadvantage from the start. On the other hand, Gen Z scoffs at the fear seniors have of technology, finding their inability to adjust to the digital world a ridiculous factor. Gen Z uses social media platforms extensively, with YouTube, Instagram and TikTok being the leading forums.

Leaders need to take a flexible approach here, using reverse mentoring: ask younger members to help senior members develop relevant social media expertise. Senior leaders often have an ego problem about being taught by young people, so the leader needs to set the tone by appointing a mentor for himself. The leader needs to talk openly about how he learned new forms of digital utilization from a younger colleague, and check in with his team on whether pairing a youngster with a senior member to brush up their digital know-how is actually improving things. This will improve accountability.

Paradigm shift #3: learning the style

Learning the styles is important. Older people are more familiar with formal interaction, while youngsters are more comfortable with informal structures. Make small adjustments; let a certain amount of flexibility crop in. The leader needs to set up a meeting-management SOP in which involvement of all members is mandatory. The younger generation complains about the lecturing style of the baby boomers, and the baby boomers complain about the outspokenness of Gen Z. With a meeting protocol of going round the whole table to let each person speak, and where anybody can be asked to repeat what was said, a culture of listening and equal involvement can be built.

Leadership in these times, where four generations — Generation X, baby boomers, millennials and Gen Z — are working together, has to be agile and inspiring. None of these generations is going to be forced to change. It is only with a co-creating style of leadership that these generations will sit at the same table. It is only with a more inclusive approach that the distance between them will be reduced. And it is only when a leader focuses on each generation’s strengths that the clash of the generations will become a synergy that creates more than the sum of its parts.

The writer is a columnist, consultant, coach, and analyst, and can be reached at andleeb.abbas1@gmail.com