Ever wonder why some team members resist change while others embrace and demand it?
At Magnet Culture, we’ve discovered that many people’s relationships with technology as children often equate to their comfort level with change as adults. Take listening to music, for example. While Boomers had record players throughout their childhood and early adulthood, I was forced to constantly adapt from cassettes to CDs to streaming on Napster to iPods all between the mid-1980s to the early 2000s during my formative years as a Millennial. This uniquely rapid pace of change throughout our childhood brought an expectation of constant change into the workplace.
Those who experienced less change during their formative years are more likely to have a more traditional mindset in the workplace and may think, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” They lament that as soon as they understand a new technology, it’s suddenly replaced with another newer, supposedly “improved” system – one they have to learn all over again. Those with a new mindset were raised hearing, “out with the old and in with the new,” and likely think differently saying, “AI can do that now!”
GenZ, which we call the On-Demand Generation, grew up in a world with near-instant access to information, free two-day (or less) shipping, and many more “luxuries” not available for previous generations. On top of that, most of GenZ will now only know a work world with AI, which is unfathomable to many seasoned workers. They are used to frequent, fast changes in their lives, so they expect the same approach on the job and are disappointed in organizations that are not keeping up.
I hear from some GenZers that when they started applying for jobs, they assumed their Millennial peers had “taken care of” all the old-school policies and practices that felt outdated. One of my GenZ friends was shocked to find an employer didn’t allow visible tattoos because they were deemed “unprofessional.” Another employer had software so old that the company who created it no longer supported or updated it. “Why do we still use it?” she asked.
When organizations push back on employee-requested changes, it appears as though leaders are not willing to progress. It’s important, in these instances, to explain why the organization has decided not to move forward in this particular area, assuming that’s been intentional. For example, is it because you are allocating resources to another area, or are there additional impacts to making the requested change?
Due to technological advancements such as AI, the divide will be more visible between those who embrace change and those who don’t moving forward. Are you holding on to “the way it’s always been done,” or are you proactively listening for opportunities to better meet the demands of today’s ever-changing work world?
