There has been significant discussion of generational change. This blog has focused on the next generation and how their perceptions and preferences may change the practice of law and the world of workers' compensation. See The Donut Hole (February 2023); The Time is Now (April 2022); Positioning Comp (April 2023); It's a Mystery (March 2024). The perception is that the next generation is different.
Differences are a natural consequence of time. This was discussed in Paradigm Shift (July 2016); The Value Exchange (October 2023); and Imaginative Engagement (February 2023). There are various examples I hear cited by lawyers, managers, and other employers. They lament differences in motivation, ambition, and work ethic. There is a perception, generally, that "these kids today" are not what we expected. Many strive not to be that old caricature on the porch screaming "Get off of my lawn!"
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) recently approached the challenges of the next generation. And, it reminded us that there have persistently been perceptions of each "next generation," youth, and the perceptions of older folks. It reminds us that there have been "transformations in culture, work, education, and scientific insight." It proceeds to take issue with our terminology, and particularly with "teenager" and categorizations generally.
The analysis includes the recency of "adolescence" and the culture of the "teenager." the author reminds that not so long ago the work experience started much earlier in life, whether in the paradigm of a family plot or farm or later in the industrial reality. Certainly, the age of child labor is not so long distant (18th and 19th Centuries). What a change has come with protective laws, and mandated schooling, and it is realistic to expect such change to impact those who live it.
The expansion of education and a growing recognition of the "rights of young people" in Western society has led to a greater role for the young in society. The needs and wants of the young have increased in importance. This has been driven by their desires and their voices, whether expressed verbally in the manner of demonstration or protest or expressed economically in their expenditures and consumption.
The author does not note that this is likely similarly expressed in a broader variety of proclivities, habits, perceptions, and desires. I suggest that the work habits and preferences being experienced as the next generation takes to the workforce fit also into this "expression" of their perceptions, beliefs, and preferences.
Business must be conscious of these changes because the young are both the next generation of producers/workers and of consumers. Business has to learn to thrive with their proclivities in both production and consumption.
The deference to youth seems to have bloomed in the post-World War II era. That is coincidentally an era of increased population, leading to the "boomer" description. The era was particularly noticeable for the efforts of business to cater and market to the young. Economic growth and focus shifted in large part to influencing and marketing to the young. They were less distracted by work, more focused on self, and represented a new marketplace for goods and services.
The author notes that the youth of that era was characterized by independence and even rebellion. There were the fast cars, the wardrobes, and the music. The BBC thoughts reminded me of the legend of a Jacksonville judge who counseled a young Elvis Presley not to swing his hips in his shows there. Yes, hip gyrations were once seen as overly suggestive and untoward. Imagine what that judge would think of the costumes and lyrics of today.
The point is that each generation has brought a modicum of rebellion and change. Experts have written books for the struggling parent. Trends have threatened youth with challenges like substance abuse, unsafe driving, drag racing, and more. Culture has addressed and struggled with growth, development, maturation, and the persistent perceptions of the older generations. And yet, the challenges persist with each new generation.
The authors note that the "teenager" experience of our youth has changed markedly in recent decades. One psychologist cited in the BBC notes that
“A 17-18-year-old in the US is now less likely have tried alcohol, have had sex, or acquired their driver's license, than teens 20 years ago."
The rebellion, I suggest, is in being different from your parents. And the suggestion of the psychologist is more simply that the next generation is simply "growing up more slowly" than some that come before them. There is less probability of dating by early teens or employment. In my generation, it was not uncommon to have a job as a teenager (I had my first at 12, and have been working since - I know "O.K. Boomer."
The authors point at the internet and technology. There are a multitude of potential comparisons regarding how others have changed our lives, but the main point is that there has been a shift in the type and path of challenges (think of the advent of cyberbullying). The hypothesis is that better living conditions, prosperity, and peace have allowed youth to mature and "transition to more adult behaviors" more patiently.
There is suggestion that the modern convenience, comfort, and progress have facilitated a delay in risk-taking, in independence. The psychologist suggests that "by many measures, adolescence now continues until around the age of 24 to 25." This is characterized as "a slower path to adulthood," and is among various "cultural perceptions of youth may need updating."
In recent years, science has also shown that adolescence doesn't finish at the end of the teenage years. By 20 years old, a young person is usually considered an adult: their body size is fully grown, they can vote, get married, and many have already entered the workplace. But the evidence suggests that, by many important measures, adolescence continues until around the age of 24 to 25. The suggestion is that the different nature of "twenty-somethings" may bear reconsideration.
While the focus of the BBC is not in this vein, perhaps that will be considered in the context of the business paradigm above. The approach to this group that is "tween" teenagers and their futures perhaps deserves focus and attention? In the world of recruiting, training, and leveraging talent, perhaps consideration of these perceptions can bring new approaches to the methods of onboarding, coordinating, and transitioning the next generation.
But, the experts say that "tween" has already been coined for the period between youth and the challenges (if any) of the teenage years. So, they propose that there be recognition of this group of twenty-somethings as "prolonged adolescence." I would suggest that no twenty-something will acquiesce in such labeling. Another suggestion is "adolthood," which some will find equally insulting (a "dolt" hood). In the end, recognition of differences is likely more important than labeling. In the end, recognition of challenge and evolution is the more meritorious point.
There is recognition in the article that some will always believe that the "next" generation is being "coddled" or that it fails to appreciate the challenges we faced and somehow overcame (Some of us look at those days of sharing a place and eating macaroni through rose-colored glasses that are blurred by the passage of years). Perhaps every generation thinks the next has it easy, is spoiled, or is unworthy. That is likely the legacy of all that come and eventually pass. What value does that judgment and criticism bring?
As I have mentioned before, the point is that it is the next generation's world in which we old folks must learn to live. We cannot force them to our worldview, but must instead learn to accept theirs. They will persist and thrive as we fade and pass. If that upsets you, just remember these know-it-alls will eventually face yet another "next generation" that will be no less their own Waterloo.