Managing generation diversity and acknowledging human capital in a workforce

By Shabiya Ali Ahlam

Q: You conducted a CIMA mastercourse on ‘Leveraging on a wider generation.’ This has both challenges as well as opportunities. What are the prevailing challenges in that area?

A: When discussing leveraging on a wider generation, we are talking about leading and managing a multi generation workforce which includes the traditional baby boomers and Generations X, Y and Z. In terms of the disparity due to the different age expiration, different value systems and different career aspirations, there is a chance of potential conflict since the ways and means of communication is different from one group to another.

When you look at people in Generation Y who are very intrigued with social media, they are used to using comprehensive electronic communication methods while the baby boomers communicate in the old traditional ways. Generation Y expects situations to happen fast and immediately and anticipate instant gratification.

What it means is that a situation arises where managers are not able to deal with the communication conflict. The challenge there is removing the communication conflict that prevails among the diverse generation workgroup.

The opportunity there is that when you are able to engage and pull through the differences well, you are able to have a cohesive and productive team working together while at the same time producing better results in the working environment. It is the role of the leader to communicate effectively to each of the groups of different ages and generation types.

Q: Can you stress more on the opportunities that lie there?

A: For example, looking at Generation Y, there lean more towards the use of latest state-of-the-art technology. On recognising this, you can leverage on their expertise and have them extremely involved in functions of the company. For instance, they can be spokespeople and brand ambassadors of companies as they can communicate the company’s value proposition effectively through social media networks.

Each company has what you call a value proposition. Basically why should someone join organisations like John Keells, MAS Holdings or Hayleys? Generation Y understands technology very well and they are able to communicate, broadcast and make known the working environment and opportunities of being with the company. This is just one advantage of having younger generations as spokespeople as they are recognised as effective communicators.

There is a concept called reverse mentoring. This is where the younger group of employees who are intimidated by technology communicates to the management of the organisation certain aspects that they find difficult to master. For example, Nestle wanted to know what the younger population’s preferences are and wanted to get a good insight into the target group’s physiology and consumer behaviour trends.

If you are trying to sell and make products that are for younger generation, you should speak to the younger generation. If you have employees who are young, they can provide insights into their generation’s preferences. An organisation can depend on that to develop strategies on marketing and in other areas when catering to that target group. In a nutshell, reverse mentoring, employee value proposition and branding are a few opportunities leveraging brings in.

The other opportunity it provides is to look at the strength of each generation. For example, as you look at Generation X, they are very intrigued on working collaboration. Interestingly, Generation Y is closer to the baby boomer generation because the parents of Generation Y are mostly from the baby boomer segment, so the opportunity is that you can form a very collaborative workplace environment with baby boomers as mentors and supervisors for Generation Y. 

The HR director or manager can actually assign the two generations to work together. It is also advantageous to the organisation to be able to provide collaborative team projects. Unfortunately, Generation X is perceived to have a ‘know it all’ attitude which is a misconception. The generation wants freedom, wants to be able to change jobs as and when they please, while for Generation Y, work has less meaning to them.

This can be explained better through an example. Companies that believe in CSR want to contribute to the society. Generation Y loves a company that has a socially responsible policy and they want to able to effectively contribute to the company. They want to be more engaged and with that, they will be more productive. But one has to be careful with Generation Y as they do not want to be told what to do: they want flexibility.

Generation X is more about following the ‘do it my way’ strategy. Generation Y looks for involvement and their relationship with their boss in more important to then when compared to Generation X which  puts more importance on financial gain and compensation.

There is are a lot of differences and a good manager should understand this diversity and take the opportunity to make matters more productive.

Q: So basically, you cannot apply one set strategy when it comes to managing generation diversity in the workforce?

A: Exactly. You need to look at what the different aspirations are in each group and then look at how you can provide a strategy to enhance the productivity of the group. Customisation is necessary and the management should look into different value systems and strengths of the generations.

Q: At the directors’ forum, the topic ‘Intellectual capital, a strategic difference’ was discussed. Tell us about the prevailing situation in South Asia in that scenario.

A: Intellectual talent is literally about the war of talent. One should be very specific on how one could win the war of talent. It’s about retaining and recruiting the right people and talent for the job to help in the execution of strategies. It is about defining recruiting, retaining and developing of talent to help you reach the set goals through proper execution. That is about control and how you are able to get the most out of it, while creating sustainable competitive advantage.

We are talking about multigenerational talent as well. Looking at different age groups in the organisation, it is important how you identify the right talent and most importantly the right potential. We are talking about future leaders. How do you develop future leaders? We should define the group of people who we can invest in over a period of time, allowing a smooth transition for them to take over the leadership position one day.

In South Asia, we have a shortage of talent and we have the older generation retiring. We have an influx of the younger generation so how can you prepare the younger crowd to swiftly take on the role of leadership? They are inexperienced, eager and excited to play the role but how can we prepare Generations X and Y to assume the role of leadership when the baby boomers retire? These are aspects that need to be looked into.

Q: Certain research studies have explored the option of recruiting known persons with known talents rather than taking in unknown people with unknown talents. This is nepotism and cronyism to some degree and is against the ethics of HR. What is your opinion on that?

A: Unfortunately it is a reality, in countries even like the US, UK and other developed nations – people tend to bring in individuals and former associates that they know and are familiar with. To me, that is not correct. To me, you should hire people with the right set of skills needed for the job waiting to be taken up. 

It should never be a policy to look for someone who you know. Logically it is correct, play it safe by recruiting who you know rather than experimenting with an unknown person. However, by doing this, you will be missing out on better talents out there. It is about being fair and following good HR practices that are healthy for an organisation. It is important to give everyone an equal opportunity and based on that, may the best talent get the job! It is the best practice to follow irrespective of age and gender.

Q: What are the challenges you think organisations face when trying to retain their ‘skilled’ employees, and does it eventually tax them?

A: It is a challenge. When you have proven yourself to have high potential and when you have a high demand in the job market, the organisation wants to keep you and competitors want to employ you. For this purpose, leaders have to understand who the people with high potential are, identify them early on and engage them.

Let them know that they are valued and acknowledge their talents while letting them know that you are interested in investing in them to enhance their talents and skills. They should be able to see a career progression. You have to make it clear that you want them. Having said that, there is the pull factor where competitors might offer opportunities with better salaries, benefits and a better position in their organisations.

It is the responsibility of business leaders to invest time to develop their star employees’ talents. This will not tax an organisation ever as when retaining high skilled and exceptional performers, due to their contribution made, the return the organisation would make is three or four times the investment.

Q: Singapore is a role model country for economies like Sri Lanka. What best practices we can bring from there to here?

A: Sri Lanka is a small nation with a small population and therefore human capital is limited and scarce. Extremely talented individuals are limited. The war for talent is not intense. If you ask me what to learn from Singapore, I would say two things: one is to have the desire to invest in and develop human capital, both from the side of the government as well as from the side of private institutions.

In Singapore, the government provides incentives to train employees. They give tax breaks and training grants. Private companies are involved in training and developing while providing opportunities for individuals to go out to learn and then they welcome them come back. Many Singaporean companies offer flexible workplace arrangements, for example they do not enforce a 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. work period. They encourage working from home and also encourage mothers on materiality leave to return to the company by giving them working flexibility. These strategies have proven to be successful and help boost the economy.

The other learning is to bring in fair employment practices and Singapore is gaining ground in this area. We have an ageing population in Singapore and we do not want to discriminate the elderly. We want to give the older population an opportunity to continue working. These practices could be considered in Sri Lanka.

Q: In Singapore, the public and private sector works hand-in-hand, but in Sri Lanka we see a notable distance between the two. How do you suggest Sri Lanka minimise this gap and help boost the economy?

A: It is a little difficult to comment on Sri Lanka. In Singapore, the government emphasises the importance of productivity and the importance of investing in people and human capital. We are small, we want to be able to invest in people’s talent and provide organisations with the means to train people and keep them employed within the country.

One good example is that the Singaporean government provides an absentee payroll for employees who go on training. When you go on training, you are actually up-scaling your productivity and skills from which the organisation is also going to benefit. For this, the government will pay your company an incentive for you being absent from work.

The Work Force Development Agency of Singapore offers such incentives to the private sector, acknowledging their contribution to the economy of the country. Sri Lanka should consider such methods as public and private partnership is very important. The Government should acknowledge the fact that the performance of all organisations contribute to the performance of the economy. The public and the private sectors should work closely for the benefit of the nation.

Q: Given that this is your first visit to Sri Lanka, what will be taking back with you to Singapore from here?

A: I think my dialogue at the sessions with managers as well as CEOs was a productive one. My observations are that people in Sri Lanka are very bright and are very eager to engage in learning. The senior leaders indeed are very experienced.

Q: Do you see yourself visiting Sri Lanka again?

A: I certainly hope so. CIMA has invited me for the conference that is scheduled to take place in July and I am thinking about it. I most likely will be coming down again, but it’s not certain.