Does your work personality fit into the age group you are in?

If you manage people from different generations than you are in, how effective are you? What have your struggles been? How (if you have) did you overcome them.

What has been your experience?

(Many of you are just happy to see a post that isn't dog related.... You're welcome!)

If you manage people from different generations than you are in, how effective are you? What have your struggles been? How (if you have) did you overcome them. Highly effective. Learn to talk down or dumb down stuff so the older weaklings "get it" or the baggy pants pay attention.

As far as managing generations, you need to be aware that they require different types of motivation. Money is a given; but things like recognition, token promotion, little shiny stars, etc work differently on different generations.

I usually have no problem communicating with folks, regardless of generation, until they lose focus & stop listening. HOWEVER, due to the aggregate (and ever increasing) effect of both environmental and vaccine poisons pumped into folks, I find that each successive generation has more baggage to contend with & thus less able to communicate effectively. This also includes brain rewiring caused by what we view.

What you are managing a 25 year old atheist?

We're both pleased with the outcome despite my hike in unemployment insurance premiums.

God help her.

Not in a rush to find work because she is making $80 a day?

We all make decisions.

A good manager doesn't manage generations they manage people. Everyone is different and while their generation (or more accurately the time period they were raised and educated) may have some influence, there is much more that makes folks what they are. If you pay enough attention to the individual and really care to learn more about who and what they are you can be a much more effective manager than those who do not. That doesn't mean date them or anything. It doesn't mean figure them out so you can manipulate them. It means listening, observing, and respecting them enough so you don't approach them in a way that an outside observer could predict will not go well. Even if you want them to fail or leave the same approach is just as effective.

Some coaches can make the team completely adjust to the coaches style. The "tyrant" coach model. Sometimes this works, particularly with a medicre level of talent. As I think of it sometimes it is absolutely necessary. In that case it doesn't matter much who or what they are. My way or the highway. But I don't think the environments requireing this are the majority.

I like the Phil Jackson approach. Presumably a good manager will have done the first part right (hire or assemble ) if they had the chance and now have a highly talented team witht the right skill sets. Then they need to know how to get the most out of the individuals and the team. Typically this does not mean speaking too, it means speaking with.... an ongoing respectful dialog. Finding out who they really are, with little to no reliance on a generation chart listing presumed wants and needs etc. The real thing is in front of them.

Unfortunately some\most places I have worked (current one included) do not allow you to do so because they have their managers doing more doing than managing. They bog them down with task work or conferences and make it really difficult to manage. They become managers in name only.

I dunno. I admit I spent time learening about the generations and maybe as background it helps somewhat, but the key is focus on the individual.

My 2 cents.

It's different if you are arranging a team, but tougher when you are dealing with a prior manager's legacies. An ineffective manager, that hired ineffective people. You can quibble with 64 65 or 66 being the end of the Baby Boom, but the baseline concepts of how these different generations work, think and learn is more than simple labeling and stereotyping.

Agreed about being different if you inherit someone else's team. Maybe I didn't communicte that well above but I do agree with that...... I still think it's all about the individual and time spent focusing on the "generations" may be ok as background but not really for managing. It's about the individuals.

And over time you can bring your folks in to morph the team.

Just my opinion based on my experience and education. I'm also smart enough to realize managers are people too and to work with other managers or peers I have to use the same approach/skill set. It is much harder to manage them/peers (manage without authority). It is also something I am good at. I owe that to having to manage people that were at a higher level/paygrade than I for several years with no direct authority over them....long story.

To each their own. I'm just saying in my case I pay little attention to the "generation" concept or writings which is my answer to your original question.

I don't expect you to agree with it. Its a style/opinion. Just tossing it our as another view.

cheers.

PS (I've also been down the myers briggs etc. path. More focused on the individual and useful, but you still need to be very careful with it because no one is always anything. It may indicate tendancies and preferences at any given time but can too often be used as a roadmap, crutch, or excuse). *shrug* I like to think I am a good manager based on my results. Maybe not. But to me its good ol fashion know your individuals and how they interact with each other and the work. I could see the generation thing being a small part of that maybe but in the end its about the individuals.)

I do not consider people born in certain time blocks to all have personalities unique to that time period. I believe that individuals develop their own particular traits for reasons that may be partially affected by the era in which they were raised, but many many other factors contribute much more dominance in the final product (though we continue to develop every day of our lives) as people reach adulthood. The phrasing of the OP dividing by generations to me is a bit restrictive to a complete answer about management skills. But I also do agree there may be some generally shared and defined traits belonging to people of particular generations (eg depression era babies).

I am wary of pigeon-holing a new employee based on their age, just as much as by their sex, color, ethnicity, religion etc. I try to find the key to the individual's motivational engine...and typically it seems to be that my personal style is what they may respond to, I look at it as my job to make it work, or try another method until it either clicks or must end. I try to be consistent in my expectations with each person (goals may vary based on their demonstrated abilities) but I am always assessing the structure I am creating for each. That is the real key to their ability to discover success, the structure in which they operate, and that has more to do with management being willing to be flexible than having a "my way or the highway" approach...yet I am not shy about setting well defined limits. The key is to not be random or emotional when laying down the law.

Finally, I thank my workers, yes I actually do appreciate their efforts in making our depatment the best. I want them to feel that their role is important in the overall forward motion of our company, that they do contribute to the successes we have, that if all of us outperform the people in the same roles for our competitor(s) then we will be better than the other company(s). This is not coddling nor pampering, I am the boss. These methods seem to generate loyalty, very helpful when I must insist on overtime or some less than desireable project be undertaken.

People from all eras respond to praise and the feelings of value and importance, the idea of winning...the key is finding the right way to deliver that to individuals. Such is the challenge of management, much like the challenge of early chidhood educators. I treat as I wish to be treated, and i am quite fortunate to have had great parents and teachers/mentors along the way as i could easily have gone baaaad (born in 1953!!!).

Frank