Generational Generalizations
I know I'm somewhat obsessed with generational issues, but I can't help myself.
Have you ever been to a Chinese restaurant that uses those placemats listing all the animals in the Chinese zodiac (dog, dragon, horse, rat, etc.) for each year, along with the personal characteristics of the people born that year? The notion that everybody born in a particular 365-day period shares the same personality traits has always struck me as hilarious.
Increasingly, though, the federal government seems to have adopted the Chinese animal zodiac approach to future workforce planning. As agencies become more and more obsessed with baby boomer retirements, they're becoming increasingly reliant on sweeping generalizations about the workers of the future based on when they happen to have been born. The latest example I've seen is in a new Air Force publication on future training and education efforts. It contains the following "description of generational differences:"
Baby Boomer (Group I)Wait a minute. Being born between 1955 and 1964 automatically saddles me with a bunch of negative baggage -- lack of optimism, distrust of government and general cynicism? And my little sister gets to be independent, informal and entrepreneurial on her quest for emotional security, just because she was born a few years later than me? These sort of prejudicial broad-brush statements don't strike me as being of much more use in describing people based on their age than they were in characterizing people based on their race, nationality or gender.Baby Boomer (Group II)
- Born from 1946 to 1954
- Key characteristics: experimental, individualism, free spirited, social cause oriented
Generation X
- Born from 1955 to 1964
- Key characteristics: less optimistic, distrust of government, general cynicism
- Digital Immigrants
Millenial (Generation Y)
- Born from 1965 to 1979
- Key characteristics: quest for emotional security, independent, informality, entrepreneurial
- Digital Immigrants
- Born from 1980 to 2001
- Key characteristics: quest for physical security and safety, patriotism, heightened fears, acceptance of change, technically-savvy, environmental issues
- Digital Natives
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.
"Being born between 1955 and 1964 automatically saddles me with a bunch of negative baggage -- lack of optimism, distrust of government and general cynicism? And my little sister gets to be independent, informal and entrepreneurial on her quest for emotional security, just because she was born a few years later than me?"
Now, now, you know you can't argue against astrology. Intelligent Design backers can argue against all the sciences, from geology to biology, but you can't argue against astrology, the queen of the sciences. You're born with what you're born with, so get used to it. And your sister is obviously "independent, informal, and all that other stuff."
I note that I am not in any of those categories, so I must be in that "older than dirt and know everything" group, the pre-War Corps.
Ed
Ed Drone Posted Wednesday, February 13, 2008 1:36 PMMost of the managers within SSA fall into the Baby Boomer (Group I) grouping. Many I've encountered do indeed seem to exhibit the experimental, free-spirited approach or attitude. The drugs that many of them enjoyed in their earlier years has finally caught up with them; creating countless, ineffective and clueless leaders.
Roy Posted Wednesday, February 13, 2008 6:31 PMSo Gen Y wants physical security and Gen X wants emotional security, but what do Baby Boomers crave?
Job security.
It's a shame their free spirits and distrust of government don't encourage them to relax their death grips on their cushy makework positions.
Happy Fed Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 7:55 AMIf you can remember the 60's, you weren't there.
Vern Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:21 AMLet me offer another perspective on generational generalizations: use them as generalizations instead of stereotypes. Here is how I make the distinction: generalizations are, as you say, a "broad brush stroke" as it relates to characteristics about a group of people. They can be helpful starting points for additional learning. For example, before I travel outside of the United States, I always take some time to educate myself with the cultural norms (generalizations) of the country I am going to visit. But I use this information as a starting point, I don't assume that every person I meet in that country is going to automatically fit the cultural norm. Another example is using personality profiles (like Myers-Briggs personality preference indicator) as a starting point for understanding myself and others, not as a label. Generalizations can be just as dangerous and damaging as stereotypes if they are applied absolutely without taking into account individual differences. Stereotypes on the other hand are used as absolutes. They take a characteristic and arbitrarily apply it to an entire group of people without taking into account real information. So, generational generalizations can help us begin to understand conflict that may arise between two people of different generations, generational stereotypes (i.e., assuming you have "baggage" just because of the year you were born) can create conflict. I hope this helps.
Paul Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 10:57 AMI'm a Group II with Group I key characteristics. Not sure how that happened...I'm a Rooster (Chinese Zodiac) and a Leo (astrological sign)to boot. Talk about a Mixed Breed, but then we all are.
Tamby Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:11 AMI totally understand your logic, Paul. It helps that my job and training run right along those lines, but may I offer you yet another perspective…
How many of those characteristics are negative and how many are positive? Could you give me a percentage of negative and/or positive for each group?
As the song goes “from a distance we are instruments marching in a common band.” And yet none of us fit any particular generalized pigeon hole when looked at closely.
The one thing I learned from these generalizations, is that the analyst that wrote them had suffered at the hands of or had something against someone in Group II of the baby boomers; and had absolutely nothing good to say about them.
Yes a generalization, like prejudice, often tells more about the originator than the subject.
Tip Off Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 1:18 PMBeen hooting and hollering about this for years...working libraries, seeing stuff about "serving aging baby boomers," "serving Gen Y," etc. I really hate the concept of pigeon-holing people based purely on age.
webdoyenne Posted Thursday, February 14, 2008 7:25 PMI am a goat. A Portsider. The Walrus.
If one is so sensitive about generational culture so as to be threatened by it rather than empowered by the positive affects knowledge of same might allow, me thinks if it was my guess I'd say, "Baby Boomer for a thousand Alex"
Capricorn 1 Posted Tuesday, February 19, 2008 2:56 PM