Originally published in The Legal Intelligencer/law.com
Smart Strategy
Discussions of generational differences are not new to law firm leaders. For over a decade, starting when the first millennials graduated law school, efforts to seamlessly integrate—or, perhaps in some cases, strong-arm—new hires into the law firm business model have been a source of focus; and, for many, consternation. Distinct contrasts in ways of working, personal motivators and prevailing attitudes have left many leaders frustrated and disillusioned.
Responses on social media to Paul Hastings’ training slide, ranging from applause to sharp criticism, evidence exactly how disparate people’s outlooks are when it comes to workplace standards.
Today, the oldest millennials are just over 40 years old. The newest hires, Gen Z, bring an entirely new set of preferences and constraints to the table. In an era where the power dynamics in the legal industry are shifting decidedly to talent, a firm’s ability to tap into generational differences to invigorate, attract and retain talent is a competitive advantage. It can also alleviate the palpable tension over behavior-expectation gaps across generations. Yet when it comes to understanding generational differences, superficial explanations and monikers such as “slackers” (Gen X) and “Gen Me” (millennials) tend to garner more airplay than real facts or solutions. Stereotypes persist and the very differences in communication styles preferred by generations prevent many from engaging in the learning and dialogue needed to overcome, accept and, yes, even celebrate and benefit from what makes each generation unique.
Using Generations to Enhance Engagement
To bridge this gap, savvy law firm leaders will elevate generational understanding to a strategic level. Then they will incorporate these principles into how their firms operate. Multiple studies report culture, flexibility, feeling valued and developmental opportunities contribute to why lawyers stay—or leave. They point to feelings of isolation and disconnectedness as plaguing the industry. Some attribute these sentiments to the hybrid work model, however, physical distance alone is not the driving issue. The core elements of culture and motivation—psychological safety, belonging, common purpose, ability to achieve and grow personally—are attainable without sitting in the same office. The fundamental question is what is the connective tissue— the proverbial glue—that enhances a person’s loyalty and spurs engagement and connection.
How Can Law Firms Overcome Disconnection and Re-engage Talent?
The answer, like most, is nuanced and varied. People are individuals and personal motivators may be as diverse as they are. However, an exploration of generational loyalties—where each generation draws its feeling of connection and meaning—is a helpful start to unraveling the problem. The below chart illustrates a few basic facts about each generation—birth years, current age range, preferred characteristics of a work environment—alongside approach to work, leadership styles and loyalties.
Generational Differences Chart. Credit: The Tilt Institute
For the purposes of understanding engagement, loyalties offer a window into what matters most at a generational level. Drawing on these insights, firm leaders can make strategic and tactical decisions using the make-up of the firm, practices and teams as guides. They can offer a suite of approaches or solutions tailored to specific segments (e.g., create an experiential junior associate training program aligned with the needs and preferences of Gen Z, ripe with specific behavioral examples and collaborative project work).
Baby Boomers demonstrate loyalty to the team—they have a sense of camaraderie and will be motivated by collective action and decisions with those around them. Interestingly, this loyalty is most closely aligned with that of millennials who are most loyal to peers and value fairness, inclusivity and equal treatment. Where this common ground—a valuable connection point— may be challenged is in how each generation perceives authority—whereas Baby Boomers respect authority inherently, authority for millennials must be earned. Any efforts to combine the generations to achieve a common goal will benefit from avoiding hierarchical frameworks. Gen X, on the other hand, operates largely independently. They tend to show loyalty to managers and emphasize results (perhaps, at times, over relationships). The current tension we see in law firms, though often assigned to a Boomer/millennial dichotomy, may well, in fact, stem just as much from the inherent contrast between Gen X’s entrepreneurial, individualized style and their adjacent generations’ preference for consensus and collective action. Deep relationships between Gen X and their mentors can help create stickiness—a similarity Gen X shares with the newest generation to the workforce, Gen Z, though for different reasons. Gen Z is purpose-driven and meaning-oriented. Their loyalty is to the experience—how they feel in an environment and how it contributes to their growth. With Gen X as the most likely leaders and managers for this generation, their laissez-faire, hands-off style is directly at odds with what Gen Z seeks—clear decisions and vivid examples of exactly what is expected and how to be successful.
Engagement, then, across the generations demands approaching each group differently and with a set of enticements most aligned with what motivates each best. Committee involvement may excite a Baby Boomer and millennial but make a Gen X partner recoil. Thoughtful approaches about when and how to deploy firm investments in the right activities can help propel engagement forward.
Boomers
Do: create dedicated teams to build consensus around critical issues; allow them to spearhead messaging and outreach; use titles freely and widely; recognize as mentors and teachers.
Caution: provide clear deadlines to prevent consensus-building from slowing decision points; remind authority is not assumed by title or role.
Gen X
Do: give them discrete, independent tasks; assign them responsibility for fun activities; accept volunteers; support strong one-on-one relationships with mentors and leaders.
Caution: do not force or overly burden with teams and meetings; limit scheduled activities and mandates; advise caution when handling sensitive people issues.
Millennials
Do: give regular, continuous feedback (tell leaders to aim for one meeting per week—frequency trumps amount); provide collaborative activities with peers; entrust with devising creative solutions; allow space for sharing opinions and perspectives.
Caution: avoid burdensome, unnecessary hierarchy; replace individual competition with team or group competition; be clear about what is and is not flexible or open for improvement; encourage note-taking as a signal for other generations.
Gen Z
Do: cultivate experiences—learning, travel, social; provide invested mentors and advocates; accept multi-tasking as a work style; emphasize discrete projects; link work to the greater good (clients, people, world).
Caution: avoid ambiguity in who is responsible or what needs to get done; limit amorphous assignments or theoretical, contemplative tasks; beware translating intensity or passion as a sign of conflict.
What Leaders Can Do
Generational influences impact talent dynamics irrespective of whether law firms acknowledge or manage them. They can create tension, surface conflict and be the source of many an offhand comment or joke. They also offer great potential. Tapping into the strengths, tendencies and preferences at a generational level, just as one may do at an individual level, has the power to energize and galvanize. Strategically combining diverse talents is proven to yield better results.
Case in point: Millennials and Gen Z like to talk it out—let them. Create forums for associates and newer partners to hash out a (well-defined) critical challenge (e.g., how to best leverage tech and people in the IP practice; how to enforce timely time entry). Ask them to bring specific feedback and targeted recommendations to a small, dedicated group of (effective) leaders equipped with the skills and strengths to effectively listen, embrace, empower and influence change. These types of cross-generational partnerships to spur change are incredibly effective, when executed well and with intention.
Thoughtful, systematic approaches to design and structure of firm professional development, leadership selection, feedback processes, strategic planning, implementation and more can capitalize on generational differences to gain momentum. For smaller multi-generational teams, where distinct forums may not be possible, even just acknowledging generational differences can bridge gaps and energize members. The most savvy firms will tap into generational loyalty-drivers to enhance engagement and enthusiasm now and for years to come.