Daily Journal – Wendy M. Behan
Remember the old adage, “Never trust anyone over the age of 30?” While that saying was especially popular in the 60s – when anyone over 30 represented “the establishment.” The proverbial generation gap is far from a thing of the past.
In fact, with the accelerated pace of change in today’s society, generational discrepancies are more prevalent now than ever. This is especially true in the legal profession, where a confluence of generations often struggles to work cohesively.
Now entering the workplace are invidiual born between 1980 and 1998, otherwise known as Generation Y or the “Millennials.” There are about 80 million of them, and they’re taking over and rapidly shaping how our society functions.
Generation X, or Gen Xers, were typically born in the 60s and 70s. Gen Xers are seen by some as the “bridge” between the Millennials and the Baby Boomers, the generation born after World War II through the 1950s. The oldest generation in today’s workforce, the Traditionalists – born between 1927 and 1945 – is still fairly prevalent in the legal professional.
Not surprisingly, with more generations than ever in a changing workplace, fundamental attitude shifts are occurring. According to a [“60 Minutes”] segment that Morley Safer reported, because they are tech savvy, Millennials often wield the upper hand. Indeed, this generation has grown up in a remarkably different technological world than previous generations. Due to texting, social media and e-mailing prevalence, Millennials generally do not put the same value on face-to-face communication as Traditionalists, Baby Boomers – or even Gen Xers.
At a recent workshop sponsored by the San Diego County Bar Association, Arin Reeves, founder of legal diversity and generational consulting firm, Nextions, spoke about generational differences in the workplace. She suggests, “changing communication, feedback, evaluation and compensation systems in order to leverage generational differences.” Understanding these differences can lead to a better workplace environment and potentially higher retention of associates, she says.
As an example, a Millennial may e-mail or blog solutions or an idea, while a Boomer will attempt to communicate via telephone or in-person meetings.
Reeves outlines an example in which a Boomer attorney asks a Millennial associate to come to his office. Rather than walk down the hall to talk in person, the Millennial may respond with an e-mail asking, “What’s up?”
“Now the partner takes that as a major sign of disrespect, but the associate doesn’t understand what’s happening because he thinks he showed responsiveness,” Reeves says. What really is a communication style issue can then become a relationship issue because the attorneys make judgments about each other — and those judgments are much harder to overcome than a simple miscommunication.
The bottom line? Today’s disparate generations simply don’t speak the same communication language.
Generational differences exist not only in communication, but also in work ethic and attitude. Also revealed in the [“60 Minutes”] segment, Millennials have been coddled by their parents to the point of being ill prepared for the rigors of the real world. Perhaps for this reason, this generation is known for adapting a more leisurely approach, and may think nothing of easing into the office mid-morning, taking a long lunch and then leaving early.
This is also largely because Millennials have a greater desire than past generations to achieve work life balance. There are countless stories of attorneys (both men and women) leaving large law firms for jobs that offer a better work life balance.
The Families and Work Institute has found that younger workers are more “dual-centric” (attaching equal importance to career and family) and less work-centric than in decades past. It doesn’t necessarily translate to fewer hours on the job, but it does often mean a more predictable workflow and greater flexibility as to where or when their work gets done.
The focus on family and life balance also contributes to high attrition levels. According to The National Association for Law Placement, large firms lose 80 percent of law school hires within five years. This costs firms somewhere between $200,000 and $500,000 to replace attorneys who don’t work out, according to Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at Hastings College of the Law.
In order to retain their associates, the law firm “establishment” must understand and learn to adapt to the new generations entering the legal profession.
According to Reeves, to do so, Baby Boomers must realize that younger generations define success differently than previous generations. Baby Boomers may be tempted to lead from the perspective by which they were led (loyalty, live to work value), Reeves says, but they need to look beyond to consider how Gen Xers and Millennials want to be led (independence over loyalty and a work to live value).
Motivators for Baby Boomers, like partnership and pay, may not necessarily incentivize Millennials. As a trade-off for a more balanced life, most studies have found that associates are willing to accept less pay. An Ontario Bar Association report found that “many young lawyers, both men and women, find that the culture in law firms is not conducive to a balanced, humane life. Young lawyers want more balance in their lives. They are not willing to sacrifice all other aspects of life – family, volunteer activities, community involvement, physical and mental health – for work.”
Even though the studies have found that both young men and women associates want a work life balance, disproportionately more women leave law firms. If this trend continues, women will never gain representation in the partnership – especially equity and managing partnership – levels.
One solution is to lengthen the partnership track at large law firms (or eliminate it completely). Another is to include the option of part-time work, during some periods, without reducing one’s chances for partnership. The typical partnership track makes it very difficult for young women especially, because the timeline for partnership often coincides with the time in many women’s lives that they are considering having children.
The key is to develop a work environment wherein results – not face time in the office – are rewarded. This may include changing the current partnership tracks or adding more staff attorney positions, which are off the partnership track. Other suggestions may be allowing more flexibility as to where and when the work gets done, so that attorneys can telecommute or work from home when necessary.
Hopefully, the Baby Boomer generation will learn that a physical presence at the office is not always paramount, and that the emphasis instead should be placed on performance. Ideally, by granting Millenials with the flexibility they seem to expect, they will in turn generate excellent work. While gaping generational gaps do exist, they can indeed be bridged.
Wendy M. Behan is a partner at San Diego-based Casey Gerry Schenk Francavilla Blatt & Penfield LLP. She is president of the Lawyers Club of San Diego, which has been advancing the status of women in the law and society since 1972.
