Millennial Musings

Recently, I was given the advice that I needed to become very familiar with the physical library system in preparation for research and writing a thesis.  I responded that this was unnecessary, because there were such good search engines and online library databases.  That even if I were to use a physical text, I would find it online first.  I was admonished that ‘not everything you need is online.’

Yes, I know this is technically true – not all research, sources, and materials are available online.  Just like not all things are dishwasher safe.  I just don’t own any of those things.  For me, being dishwasher safe is the first trait I look for in kitchen ware.  For any sort of secondary research, the first thing I look for, is an electronic copy.  So if it’s not online, I’m not using it.

Here’s why this frustrated me:

The exchange demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of what it means to be a digital native (which, as a Millennial, I am).  For those who are not digital natives, technology and the internet are very powerful tools.  They can be used for everything from communication with family, to entertainment, to finding how to fix a garage door properly.  But, at the end of the day, it is a means to an end.  The internet and technology are simply options among many approaches.  They may be the most powerful tools in the toolbox, but they are still only part of a set.

For digital natives, the internet IS the toolbox.  Even if the ultimately used tool is offline, the internet is the first touch-point.  So a tool not referenced on the internet is out of the toolbox, and therefore not on our radar.  The University Libraries still comes across my mind as one of the first places to search for scholarly articles.  But I would never go to the physical building to begin the search.  I would use the online databases to create a list of what I need, then go check them out all at once.

The misconception of what it means to be a digital native is still widespread, but I believe having a clear understanding can help all generations who touch the internet.  For Boomers and X-Gens, it is a powerful tool with great potential.  For Millennials and the AOs (Always On – the generation following Millennials), tools not on the internet do not exist in our bubble.

This is something that has come up in several of my courses recently: how do advertisers best reach Millennials?  The answer is very simple, but not particularly easy for companies to pull off: be authentic.  But what does this even mean?

Millennials, like everyone in 2015, are used to being bombarded from all sides by various advertisements.

-Try us now!  Switch to our product!  We promise to care about you, really we do!-

But as the first generation of ‘digital natives’, we’re also used to what was once an advertisement-free medium.  The same has been true for all Social Media networks: over the years, social media channels have included increasing amounts of advertisement.  now, don’t get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with this.  Social Media platforms, like all businesses, need to make a profit.  And I don’t even really have a problem with the advertisement itself….the format is more significant.

Millennials are used to the promotions, so we tend to glance past them, or grumble as they interfere with what used to be ‘virgin’ space (think YouTube pre-video ads that take ages to buffer).  Such interference can cause negative reactions, hurting a brand rather than helping it.

Some companies have turned towards making their content more organic.  This can be achieved through a variety of ways, but ultimately results in the final promotion being less polished than something which would appear in a magazine or on TV.  But that doesn’t really help matters, because Millennials can see through that as well.

What does work, is authentic advertising.  Millennials are a very integrative group – we try to blend together all parts of our lives.  So, the best method is to integrate advertising into actions that Millennials already take.  But what does that look like?  I think Bud Lite is doing a fantastic job of this on Tinder.  Tinder is a location-based dating app which has growing popularity among Millennials.  It features pictures of singles around you, and the option to swipe left or right on the image: left to reject, right if interested.  Bud Lite has begun including promotions in the middle of Tinder matches.  Such a placement may show college students partying with the caption (and large arrow) ‘Swipe right to enter the xxxx sweepstakes!’  This is brilliant, and highly effective.  It doe not feel intrusive, and also appeals to the swiper’s self-interest.  There’s nothing about this ad that is distracting or inhibiting (the polar opposite of on-page pop-up ads).

Millennials aren’t looking for companies to pretend to be something they’re not – we’re perfectly ok with the profit motive.  But what we are looking for is an advertisement to do what the product ultimately should: fit within and enhance our lives.

Attitudes toward time can often be at the root of inter-generational disputes.  Baby Boomers saw the advent of office and knowledge-worker jobs.  With this, came the advent of the ‘9 to 5’ working schedule.  Having such a schedule not only gave weekend freedom and stability, but also left workers to enjoy their evening at home.  Such a job was highly sought-after, and is still often advertised in job postings.

But for Millennials, this comes across as restrictive, rather than liberating.  Millennials are used to 24/7 connection to and interaction with their peers, and tend to have a desire of integrating work into their personal life.  This causes great willingness to work at odd hours, and a preference to engage in smaller chunks of time, rather than a full 8-hour day at a time.

But combining these two can be difficult, and will lead to one group feeling marginalized at the expense of the others.  A zero-cost solution to this is to institute ‘common hours’ in the office.  These hours are a subset of the full workday, and are times during which all employees would be expected to be in the office.  Additionally, all meetings would be had during this time.  My suggestion would be 10am – 3pm (including an hour for work).  This would allow each group to work at a time closer to their preference, while increasing productivity due to meetings being limited to a subset of the working day.

This is not a post about Millennials.  Except that it’s about me, and I’m a Millennial, so there’s that I suppose.  Rather, it’s about changes in identity.

I grew up with no affiliation to University of Tennessee – my father went to Clemson, and my mother went to ETSU.  I went to ETSU for undergrad, and developed an identity deeply connected to the University.  This was further enforced when I stayed in the same city upon graduation for my career.

But a month ago I moved to Knoxville for a Grad program at UT, and it’s amazing how quickly I began identifying with the University.  On Fridays, many student and faculty wear orange (UT’s primary color) as a show of school pride.  I currently don’t own anything orange, because it’s a very unique color that isn’t really found in wardrobes elsewhere.  But I found myself this morning realizing, as I walked past a mirror in my house, that I was wearing the color of the team we’re playing in tomorrow’s football game.  Aghast at the transgression, I ran back to my room and changed.  The whole event was very odd for me, because it was almost on a subconscious level that I was even aware of who we’re playing, and their colors, and tied that to my clothing choices for the day.

Boredom.  It’s something we all have experienced at one point or another in our lives.  Maybe it’s waiting to get on a plane, listening through a very long after-lunch lecture, or a full day of meetings – this is just a part of life.  But not understanding how boredom impacts Millennials can be dangerous for Boomer management.

The Millennials were the first generation to come into an era of never-ending stimulation.  We naturally multi-task, and switch from one activity to another very quickly.  Some of this has to do with Social Media and the influx of a smartphone culture – if there’s a down moment, pull out the phone and check Facebook.  But this also has roots in overarching societal trends around education.  In an era where college-bound students are expected to have good grades, study for exams, be involved in extra-curricular activities, be athletic, stay in shape, have a personal life, volunteer, and fit in 2-4 hobbies, it’s no wonder that Millennials do not have much patience for having their time wasted.  Which is different than choosing to waste their own time.

What I am talking about is a phenomena I have discovered in every single job I have held, from age 16 when I began working part-time, through student jobs, internships, and even into a fortune 500 company.  Employers struggle to keep their Millennials busy.  Millennials heavily value their time (and particularly the ability to control their own schedules), so there is little more egregious an offense than telling a high-performing Millennial that they have to be in the office for a set period of time, whether there is work to be done or not.  Boomers are more used to an 8-hour day taken at a moderate pace.  Millennials would rather buckle down and get it down is 6 hours, then have the remaining 2 for activities of their own choosing.

And the solution is not ‘busywork’, although that is preferable to nothing.  In a 2011 study (Levit & Licina), Millennials were asked “What are the most important factors which define career success for Millennials?”.  ‘Meaningful work’, ‘Sense of accomplishment’, and ‘Challenging work’ represents 64% of respondent’s #1 factor.  When the same question was asked of Hiring Managers, the response was down to 30%.  Millennials are very willing to work hard, and naturally enjoy juggling various projects and activities.  However, when not challenged or given work to do, Millennials tend to ‘check out’ and begin looking elsewhere.  For example…”in both the the UK (34%) and the US (37%), the number 1 reason Millennials provided for switching jobs was that they ‘just needed a change’.” (Mr. Youth and Intrepid, 2010).  This is exactly what I did.  My move went from a Fortune 500 to a Master’s program rather than from job to job, but the reasoning behind it was identical.  Spending most days bored and under-utilized was taking its toll, so I looked for an ‘elsewhere’ that would be challenging.

All in all, Managers, don’t be afraid to fully utilize your Millennial talent.  Or even give an overload of projects, so long as the employee knows that they are not all expected to be accomplished at once.  And don’t worry, Millennials will let you know if it’s too much!  Doing so will not only better engage emerging talent, but will also help in Millennial retention.

Also, because fairness matters, here is a blog post taking an opposing view to mine: http://calnewport.com/blog/2009/02/04/have-we-lost-our-tolerance-for-a-little-boredom/

Levit, A., & Licina, S. (2011). How the Recession Shaped Millennial and Hiring Manager Attitudes about Millennials’ Future Careers. 4; 12. Retrieved from http://newsroom.devry.edu/images/20004/Future%20of%20Millennial%20Careers%20Report.pdf

Mr. Youth and Intrepid. (2010). Millennial Inc.: What Your Company Will Look Like When Millennials Call the Shots. Retrieved from http://www.millennialinc.com

This post is about government, not politics.

I saw an article today, which has the link posted blow.  I want to preface this post by saying that it is not (directly) about the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling which allows for same-sex marriage throughout the U.S.  Rather, it is about the fact that they ruled, and what that means for Americans.  In the article below, (and I am heavily paraphrasing – please read the full article for yourself!) Republican primary candidate Rick Santorum weighed in on Kim Davis, the Kentucky Clerk who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Santorum is quoted as saying, “You know Martin Luther King went to jail because he didn’t follow the law. There’s a long precedent in America from people saying, ‘you know the law has to change to accommodate what is the right thing to do, in their own moral judgment.’”  He goes on to say he is proud of Kim Davis.

And he is dead-on in his quote.  We do have a long history of private citizens peacefully and passively protesting what they believed to be an unjust law.  In my opinion, this is one of the most fantastic aspects of the United States, that an individual does not have to ‘toe the line’ to be a citizen.  What he misses, though, is that Kim Davis is an elected official.  We also have a storied past of government representatives going against or ignoring laws – Watergate, NSA surveillance, nullification of laws – and of those representatives being fined, impeached, or going to prison.

A Presidential hopeful who does not see the distinction between a private citizen’s beliefs/actions and a government representative’s actions makes me nervous about loyalty to democracy.  Certainly, democracy has its issues.  Winston Churchill is credited with saying “…that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” (Churchill by Himself, p 574).  However, we have a certain system of laws, and democracy is only effective if those in the minority respect the majority rule.  Whether we like what the democratic system puts out or not, we have to live with and abide by it.  Reminds me of that family member everyone has who makes you just a little uncomfortable, but they’re still part of the family whether you like it or not.  Kim Davis’ actions were plainly illegal, but the heat of the topic makes them seem blurry.  Let me set an alternate picture:

A man named Rob works for the Department of Motor Vehicles, and has for most of his career.  Everything is routine, until Rob’s own daughter turn 16.  At this point, Rob becomes nervous about his teenage daughter driving (as most parents tend to be around that time), so he decides that he won’t issue her a driver’s license for that county.  When challenged by his daughter that he is being unfair, Rob is backed into a corner and decides that his belief is no one should be allowed until they are 18.  As such, he no longer issues driver’s licenses to those who come of legal age to obtain one.

In the situation above, parents and teenagers alike would be up in arms, and Rob would be either fired or taken to court.  If taken to court, a judge would rule that Rob’s actions were illegal, and he would punished appropriately, and someone who was willing to follow the law would be put in Rob’s place.  No one would be coming to Rob’s aid here, except maybe his family and a few parents with 16-year old children of their own.  This would make the paper, but would be a non-issue.  If a Presidential hopeful came out in support of Rob’s actions, said hopeful would have ruined their chances at coming remotely close to election.

History shows us that politicians who subvert the law due to personal beliefs/opinions become corrupt,  And given enough power and enough time, the rule of law becomes meaningless; instead, the country is run off of one individual’s belief system.  Which doesn’t sound a whole lot like democracy to me…

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/rick-santorum-invoking-mlks-time-in-jail-says-hes-proud-of-k#.xxvorYlDE

For one of my graduate courses, we were posed the question, “Why is theory important?”  This is meant to be in the context of Communications, but came to me as an overarching question for how I approach the world.

Both of my parents are highly intelligent, so much of my childhood was spent being explained to why something mattered or was important, rather than just to do it.  For example, my mother rarely ever gave an edict without explanation, expecting swift and immediate follow-through.  But my siblings and I were taught that, should we ever receive explicit instructions without explanation, there wasn’t time to explain for our own safety.  This set me on a path from an early age to always be thinking about the reasons behind action, particularly when not explained.

For me, individual actions or happenings are meaningless without a paradigm in which to exist, and I don’t believe that I am alone here.  Millennials as a whole are more interested in the ‘Why’ than the ‘What’, particularly in the workplace.  Much of what constitutes the ‘norm’ in Corporate America is a hold-over from a time when such things were necessary.  Think of the standard 8-5 work day.  As little as 10 years ago, having everyone in the office at the same time was absolutely vital to the flow of business.  Information needed to be shared, brainstorming sessions hosted, decisions made/communicated, and all of it in a timely manner.  Now, with high-tech networking, video conferencing, and an ever-expanding culture of 24/7 connection, a common physical location seems restrictive rather than unifying.

The key is explaining the why, and understanding the theory behind actions.  From my professional past, I remember being very frustrated that the Corporate Pricing Town Hall meetings were at 8am.  I am not a morning person, and often chose alternate work hours when possible, as did many in my organization.  It seemed needlessly inefficient to get everyone in one room together so early in the morning, when having the meeting after lunch would have accommodated everyone.  But the real reason for the morning meetings was out of respect to our international counterparts, so they had the option of calling in to the meeting.  8am Eastern Time was the most convenient time for our global offices, allowing everyone to call in at reasonable hours should they desire.  Even though very few chose to do so, we did not want to forcibly exclude any colleagues.  After understanding the inclusion paradigm, my bitterness at 8am meetings was at least reduced (so long as there was coffee!).

Theory has always been a vital part of our interactions with others and the world around us.  The key moving forward is to clearly define what that operational theory is, and to clearly communicate the theory up front and regularly thereafter.  Doing so will not only ensure that all of our actions are consistent, but will also help to engage the newest generational addition to the work-force: a zero-cost opportunity for reaching Millennials.

I began researching inter-generational relations in the summer of 2012.  A project was assigned as part of my summer internship at a Fortune 500.  My Manager was trying to build the framework for a post-graduate business co-op program.  As we benchmarked best-practices from other companies, the emphasis on Millennials in the workplace became very obvious.  Firms across the world struggle to seamlessly integrate the new generation into an over-archingly Baby Boomer-influenced culture.  This led to my undergraduate thesis, Recruiting and Retaining the Millennials: Managing for Capitalization Rather Than Conflict, published in 2014.

Since that time, I have found myself naturally analyzing everyday situations from my research background on Millennials.  It occurs to me that so much of what causes conflict can be traced to generational communication and preference differences, particularly in the workplace.  The same work style which was coveted by prior generations (the 9 to 5 work day) is now seen as overly stifling.  Whereas the all-hours communication style of Millennials comes across as either pushy or needy, depending upon the framing.

So that’s what this blog is about – exploring life through a Millennial lens, and tying day-to-day experience with research, in hopes of greater understanding.  I welcome comments, challenges, and alternate research, as the goal here is for greater understanding!