One of the things I missed during my month of sickness was the publication of a series of five articles from IT World Canada about a new report called Freedom to Compute: The Empowerment of Generation Y. The articles’ author, Shane Schick, interviewed me via phone for portions of the articles, and I think he did a bang-up job of putting everything together.¹ They’re well-worth reading:

• Why Gen Y workers bypass IT usage policies
• How Gen Y workers turn CIOs into IT watchdogs
• Gen Y workers: We know all about this IT stuff
• CIOs: Learn the wireless workaholic ways of Gen Y
• One in five choose relaxed IT policies over money

Shane also followed up with a really good blog post about the series. He asks:

Much in the way we try to encourage bookworms to take up sports, and get the jocks singing and dancing in high school musicals, wouldn’t employers prefer a Gen Y that was a little more well-rounded in their approach to work and IT? There could be young employees who tap into social networking services, but who also keep a log of what they’re doing for potential audit purposes. There are those who use mobile computing devices, but who also demonstrate leadership in backing up data and ensuring antivirus software is updated. Imagine a Gen Yer who not only thinks they’re computer-proficient but can identify areas about technology they still need to develop.

To which I responded:

I really like your last point, and I think it’s an important one. Am I, as a 25-year-old guy in the business world, fully developed? As much as it’s tempting to throw to the ego and say ‘Hell yeah; I’m the best at everything there is!’ I’ve been smacked down enough times in my three years on the job that I know that I still have a lot of things left to learn and a lot of skills to acquire.

It’s a bit of a cop-out answer: but the solution here really is a matter of balance. Gen Y will try to convince managers to throw out all their policies and just go with the groove. The other side will just tell Gen Y to shut-up and be thankful they even HAVE a job. There’s a ton of value in the middle: in questioning long-standing probably nonsensical policies, in exploring new technologies and ways of working (’going with the groove’), and, then, synthesizing all of that into something that can work, and make money, and be tracked, and shared vertically.

I’m biased, sure. And I have a strong voice. But I think strong, sensible voices in organizations are always valuable, even when they’re wrong. Or thought wrong.

Lots of interesting stuff here — and much of it very positive. There wasn’t even any real, solid examples of someone saying “Let’s ban all fun websites from work!!! For productivity!!” Granted, I think that might be because IT companies are a few steps ahead of other sectors when it comes to understanding these kinds of things, but it’s good to know that the leaders in the race are running in the right direction.

1. He even spelled my last name in a couple of totally awesome ways — it has too many l’s and t’s as it is. [↩]

Jonathan M Gitlin at Ars Technica has a good bit about the supposed evils of multitasking on your computer at work:

The complaints against multitasking are the usual; you’re not as focused as you could be if you were just doing one thing at once, switching focus repeatedly actually makes you less productive as each time your brain takes a few moments to reprioritize tasks and so on.

I’m the first to admit that there’s a lot be said for shutting down everything else and focusing on a single task when you just need to power through and get something done, but these days talk of ‘multitasking’ seems to take the form of huffy managers cruising through the office, looking over shoulders and trying to catch a glimpse of someone looking at something “non-work-related”.

This, quite frankly, is a lame thing to do.

Gitlin again:

Employers seek ever-greater productivity from their workers, which means getting more work from them for the same amount of pay. Faced with that situation, it’s hardly surprising the cube-dweller responds by spending 15 minutes an hour looking at LOLCATs. Besides, I’m just old enough to remember the days before you used to be able to multitask; people used to sit at their desks reading the newspaper instead.

Technology has definitely exasperated this issue. It seems entirely acceptable for an employee to spend 10 minutes chatting with co-workers about the movie they saw on the weekend or 5 minutes on a personal phone call, but apparently just a glimpse at Facebook is an instant productivity killer. The message, I guess — and this is coming from those generally clueless about everything online — is that you can’t be working if you’re also on some website.

The real issue I have with this is one of trust. By constantly monitoring your employees’ screens, by installing filters and blocks, by blanket policies forbidding access at work, you’re essentially saying to your employees that you can’t trust them. “Why would you do this stupid work I’ve assigned you when you have fun internet things to look at?”

Could spending a lot of time on Facebook at work cause an employee to miss deadlines or produce sub-quality work? Absolutely. And those employees should face hell because of that. But you’re always smarter to criticize and (if necessary) discipline based on outputs, not process. The process is entirely subjective and unique to each person, whereas the outputs can be objective.

If the work is getting done, does it really matter if the worker is ‘multitasking’ all day, bouncing between windows and tasks like — as Gitlin puts it — a crack-smoking housefly?

Technology has led to a diversification of work styles.¹ There is no ‘right’ way to get things done in the computer age. Trying to establish one-size-fits-all processes, policies or rules — even for something as seemingly frivolous as ‘banning Facebook’ — is a losing battle.

Thanks to Ari Najarian for pointing me to the article.

Photo by Vedlia. Licensed under Creative Commons

1. I’m thinking of things like keyboard users vs. mouse; command line versus GUI; maximized versus juggled windows; open source versus Microsoft, etc etc. [↩]

I don’t really know much about author Mark Bauerlein or his book The Dumbest Generation: How The Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future but my initial impression is not a good one.

Bauerlein recently contributed a Boston Globe piece on 8 reasons why this is the dumbest generation that achieves the rare double-feat of being both incredibly out-of-touch and remarkably ironic — it’s a piece that hopes to demonstrate how dumb, vacant and empty-headed Generation Y (and Gen Z, or Generation TBD, or whatever) is made up entirely of stock photos and three-sentence descriptors.

In any case, I think it’s supposed to be pithy and somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but even allowing for that it’s mostly stupid. So, in response, here are eight reasons why this is the smartest generation, presented without stock-photos and not split up across nine different pages.

They’re more politically & socially involved than ever before

Bauerlein writes that this generation is “encased in more immediate realities that shut out conditions beyond — friends, work, clothes, cars, pop music, sitcoms, Facebook.” This immediately brings to light the biggest problem with his arguments: while he claims to be criticizing this generation, he’s really just criticizing teenagers. Do teenagers tend to be egotistical and caught up in the goings-on of their own lives to the point of melodrama? They sure do. Is this a new phenomenon? Not at all.

Hell, the fact that Bauerlein thinks this generation is preoccupied by sitcoms shows how out-of-touch he is.

The big point is this, though: our generation is more politically involved and socially-conscious than ever before. Check out these stats from a USA Today article:

61% of 13- to 25-year-olds feel personally responsible for making a difference in the world, suggests a survey of 1,800 young people to be released today. It says 81% have volunteered in the past year; 69% consider a company’s social and environmental commitment when deciding where to shop, and 83% will trust a company more if it is socially/environmentally responsible. The online study — by two Boston-based companies, Cone Inc. and AMP Insights — suggests these millennials are “the most socially conscious consumers to date.”

They spend way less time watching TV and more time reading

Bauerlein trots out the old “Kids don’t READ any more!” argument, referring specifically to books. And, sure, books don’t sell great — they’re on the decline. But that doesn’t mean Gen Y doesn’t read. In fact, whereas the boomers and Gen X tended to employ television as their major source of media, Gen Y is turning to the internet. And even with advances in video & audio online, you know how the vast majority of the internet is experienced? By reading.

From an article in World News Australia:

The survey, commissioned by social networking website MySpace and conducted by UK-based analyst The Future Laboratory, found a quarter of 18 to 24-year-olds had reduced their television watching in favour of social networking on the web.

They have massive networks to call upon

Bauerlein brings up the abundance of typos, abbreviations and misspellings in IM and Texting communication as a point to prove this is a ‘dumb generation’. I don’t much like that kind of typing either, but it’s hardly a sign of ‘dumbness’. In fact, most of these short-forms emerge because Gen Y is trying to cultivate an absolutely astronomical number of friendships and relationships.

The networking we’re seeing with young people today is unprecedented and of incredible value to business. Whereas in the past people didn’t start building their networks until they were in their late teens or early twenties, this generation is establishing these connections at 12 years old.

They have a worldwide platform for expressing themselves creatively

Bauerlein makes the ridiculous argument that “On MySpace, if you write clearly and compose coherent paragraphs with informed observations on history and current events, ‘buddies’ will make fun of you.” I’m really not sure where he’s getting this, unless he’s hanging out in some really stupid corners of the internet.

One of the benefits to social networks, blogs and other online platforms is that young people can and do share their thoughts and ideas on everything from TV to video games to politics. The opportunity to make yourself visible at a young age leads to career and portfolio opportunities that were roadblocked before. Just look at the legion of bloggers who have found book deals.

They seek entertainment that’s active, not passive

Bauerlein points to the blockbuster sales of Grand Theft Auto 4 as a reason for this generation’s ‘dumbness’, but he doesn’t offer much in the way of argument. I’d make the argument that Gen Y’s appetite for video games as opposed to television or movies is a sign of intelligence, not anti-intellectualism.

Gen Y demands interactivity with their media. TV shows like Lost have derived popularity from the fact that fans love to come online and talk about them — develop theories and look for clues. Even American Idol, a show that takes a lot of crap for lacking substance, succeeds with youth because they feel like they can be a part of it.

Involvement, in a lot of respects, IS intelligence. There’s a lot more to be derived from playing Grand Theft Auto 4 than, say, watching an episode of Miami Vice.

They have quick access to an astounding amount of information

Bauerlein, again, makes a confusing argument: “Digital natives, however, go to the Internet not to store knowledge in their minds, but to retrieve material and pass it along. The Internet is just a delivery system.”

I don’t really know what he’s getting at, but that may be because I’m not storing enough knowledge in my mind. I just keep giving all my knowledge away to my online buddies!

One of my favourite archetypical Gen Y traits is their ability to quickly settle an argument. A group of people will be sitting around a table wondering, say, who Bob Dole’s Vice Presidential candidate was and suddenly, within seconds, someone will have pulled the answer from their laptop or cellphone. This tends to mystify the hell out of a lot of baby boomers.

If Gen Y memorizes less information, it’s because we know how to wield the enormous repository of information that is the internet.

They’re forcing huge changes in education

Education is a topic I’m passionate about, and there’s no doubt that a lot needs to change in the way teachers approach their Gen Y, and younger, students, but Bauerlein’s argument that we’re in an “era of child-centered classrooms and self-esteem grading” is just tired. Especially since nobody is really able to prove that today’s students are really lacking in the smarts department globally:

According to Reena Nadler, program director of LifeCourse Associates, a marketing and human resources consultancy in Great Falls, Virginia, founded by generational experts Neil Howe and William Strauss, the millennial generation is turning the clichés on their heads. “Student achievement is rising,” says Nadler, a millennial herself. Today’s youth dedicate more hours to their studies and extracurricular activities than previous generations did.

I think there’s very real issues that arise when the students are digital natives and the teachers barely know how to turn a computer on, and we’re seeing the fruits of that, but that doesn’t imply there’s anything inherently wrong with this generation. That they’re forcing change in the way education happens is actually a testament to their abilities.

Because we’re young

It looks like Bauerlein just plain runs out of arguments with his eighth point. He probably should have just gone with seven reasons. Seven is lucky. His eighth argument is simply “because they’re young.” And young people are… stupid.

He’s sort of right, actually. Young people lack experience and, indeed, tend to be egocentric and melodramatic and prone to screwing up (all part of learning). But youth also brings with it, by its very nature, an incredibly wellspring of potential, which is what a lot of companies are just starting to realize:

“We have the best qualified generation since history,” says Patricia Vendramin, a sociologist at the Work & Technology Research Centre of the Fondation Travail-Université in Namur, Belgium. Millennials get work experience early, they’re flexible, they’re willing to relocate, and they’re open-minded, she adds. Also, “they are very skilled at using technology” and they’re true team players, Redmond says.

So much left to say

It’s unfortunate that authors like Bauerlein are able to draw booksales by treading on the same old “kids are stupid” ground so many others have walked for decades. I bet when he was younger there were older people saying he was dumb, too. You would think that experience would have taught him better than trotting out this the-kids-aren’t-alright nonsense. But, then, maybe those calling him dumb back then just happened to be right.

Thanks to the Brazeen Careerist Forum for the link to this article.

I’ve been reading a fair bit recently about privacy on Facebook. This has always been a hot topic, whether it’s because campus security at certain high-minded universities have used the service to keep tabs on student parties (and bust the rowdy-looking ones preemptively) or because employers are, more and more, checking out potential employee’s profiles before making job offers.

Some people find these kinds of things vaguely unsettling in a “Big Brother” sort of way. Local T.O blog Torontoist recently weighed in, after a pseudo-scandal where a university student was brought up on charges of cheating because he was running a study group through facebook:

As we’ve seen demonstrated, the whole frenzy isn’t about fairness. It’s that the rules have changed; Facebook is no longer the domain of the student alone, and students have good reason to be wary of newly watchful universities. With the medium’s shift away from “hot” or “cool” to a lukewarm blend of both, people like Chris Avenir [the student who got in trouble] or anyone else in the business of operating under the radar—for whatever reason—should probably think twice before all but advertising their activities.

“Be careful” seems to be the standard advice when it comes to social networking sites like Facebook and more ‘legitimate’ enterprises like getting a job. I’m not so sure it’s the right advice.

Being careful versus being smart

‘Be careful’ doesn’t quite make sense, especially if that advice comes with recommendations to use Facebook’s own privacy controls, because here’s the thing: privacy is dying. It implies that people have an expectation — maybe even a right — to not have people they don’t know check out their Facebook profile. But all the ideas behind social networking (communication, interaction, expansion of network, new friends, sharing) are contrary to any ideals of privacy. You cannot have both and, as a society, we’ve chosen: we like social networking.

It’s not about being careful. It’s about being smart. You should ABSOLUTELY have a Facebook account¹, and a LinkedIn account, and any sort of account that connects you with people in the industry you want to involve yourself in. These online platforms are rapidly becoming the online gateway to people and, in fact, for making introductions and strengthening connections they beat the snot out of old-fashioned conferences and trade show meet and greets.

With your accounts, you should operate under the assumption that everything you post is potentially viewable by anyone. Your boss, your parents, your teacher, and any and all deities you choose to associate yourself with — they can see it all: your party pictures, your favourite films, that quiz you filled out that told you that, out of all The Office characters, you’re most like Stanley — everything.

But that shouldn’t be seen as a bad thing, nor should you censor yourself significantly online. In fact, I’d urge people to be as honest as they can with their profiles: present your likes, dislikes, opinions, goals, your humour (hugely important). Use the online space to show the world who you are.

Concerns about privacy in the sense that maybe a potential employer will see it, and be offended and not hire you or whatever, are entirely outdated and almost insulting. You need to ask yourself if you’d ever really want to start a career with someone who just can’t handle the fact that you like to drink alcohol on weekends. Or if someone who can’t handle the fact that you occasionally use a certain f-word is really the kind of person you see yourself spending 40 hours a week with.

Selling You

It’s best to think of your online profiles as analogous to the clothes you wear everyday. Sure, you could wear a suit every day and look very presentable in the eyes of a bunch of stuffy older people, but you’ll get really uncomfortable before long (and the summers will be a chore). Or you could go all-out and wear a leather vest and 1993 grunge-era Levis, but people are going to judge you for that too. Best to split the difference, and wear something casual but presentable and at the same time uniquely you — something appropriate for both work and play.

A tortured analogy, maybe, but here we are, and the bottom line is this: your Facebook account is out there, and, just like with the clothes on your back, the only way to avoid being seen is to not show up at all. Generation Y should leverage social media as a way to find opportunities, welcome interactions from all people, but never censor their own true selves in the process.

Privacy is overrated anyway.

Photo by robleto. Licensed under Creative Commons.

1. I should say that, yes, I have some concerns about the long-term viability of Facebook. I like to ask people if they really think they’ll be using Facebook in five years. Odds are, we won’t be. But there will probably be something else that takes its place. [↩]

John Gruber linked to this interview with David Allen a while back. I’m just getting to reading it now. Allen is the mind behind GTD (or “Getting Things Done”), which is something I don’t know much about. (I’m interested, though. I plan to pick up the book.)

Anyway, in the interview Allen says this:

One of the problems that’s endemic with the younger generation people who have grown up with computers and with email they make the assumption that email is a fine medium for communicating anything and everything.

Which, for some reason, provoked a really strong emotional reaction in me as I read it. “He’s wrong!” I thought, imaginary daggers in my eyes. “He’s wrong wrong wrong.”

Thankfully, commenter Joost laid it down before I had to:

Please. One of the problems that’s endemic with the older generation is that they make the assumption that email is only appropriate for communicating a small narrowly defined subset of human communication.

Why do we have e-mail?

When I first started work, I’d write long, detail-heavy e-mails to my co-workers. My rationale was that it was better to cover all the bases all at once than risk the finer points being missed. My e-mails were (at least in my opinion) well-written, friendly and easy to understand.

Unfortunately, nobody read them.

A lot of my issue was just that I overestimated the amount of time people have for reading e-mail. A lot of older people regard it primarily as a nuisance, and like to spend as little time reading (skimming, really) e-mail as possible. And that’s okay. That much makes sense to me.

What NEVER made sense to me was the people who picked up the phone or waited until they saw me to communicate a message. Or, instead of sending a response, booked a meeting to discuss what I had e-mailed. If that’s how work is going to get done, I thought, why even HAVE e-mail?

Trusting technology

One of the really impressive things Generation Y does is communicate widespread messages effortlessly. If you’ve ever watched an event come together on facebook (or through another evite app) you know what I’m talking about. It’s simple: five minutes of work and a few clicks can result in a packed house the next night.

We trust that the app — the technology — is going to work. It’s going to effectively communicate the message.

The older generation seems to have trouble with this.

Image by m-c. Licensed under Creative Commons