dey gru ^ txtN -- w@ wl biznessz nd 2 do?

Translation: "they grew up texting -- what will businesses need to do?"


Cross-posted @ Generational Impact blog

(http://generational-impact.blogspot.com)

Tampa Bay Rays offer perspective on building multi-generational workplace

Key question: Do you make younger workers adapt to your culture or are you willing to adapt your culture to younger workers?

Whether small or large, most U.S. businesses are dealing with differing generational expectations, attitudes and values brought into the workplace by their employees. These differences are causing misunderstanding and strife between employees, as well as employees chafing at corporate culture and policies. The cause of such misunderstanding and irritation is that the generations currently comprising the vast majority of the U.S. workforce –from youngest to oldest: Millennials, Generation X, Baby Boomers and the Silent Generation – are retaining more of their generational “personalities” than previous cohorts.

The three teams remaining in the Major League baseball playoffs (Philadelphia Phillies, Tampa Bay Rays and Boston Red Sox -- the Los Angeles Dodgers have been eliminated) offer varying approaches to building multi-generational workplaces. Consider that:

• Players are Millennials, Gen Xers and even a Baby Boomers (Phillies pitcher Jamie Moyer).
• Middle management tends to be Xers and Boomers.
• Top management and ownership includes Xers and Boomers.

Try to change workers
or change some for workers
While the Phillies and Red Sox have taken a more traditional approach that integrates their younger players into their culture, the Rays have made more adaptations to their organizational culture to better reach, involve and maximize the performance of their younger workers.

Some examples of how the Tampa Bay Rays have adapted their organizational climate to maximize younger workers include:

• Hiring a manager who is open to the differing style of younger players. Whether their music, haircuts, or understanding that younger players want some work-life balance, Rays manager Joe Maddon recognized that such work style differences are not bad... just different from what other generations of players did.
• The Rays showed significant trust the organization's younger players. Management was criticized in many quarters for not acquiring more of a "veteran presence" late in this season as a precaution if their young team wilted under the pressure of making the playoffs.
• Over the last several years, the organization made significant investments in younger workers. Early this season, Rays management made a very unusual decision to sign a player who had been in the major leagues for only one week to the longest contract in team's history -- 9 years with six of those guaranteed! It should be noted that the player, third baseman Evan Longoria, was bound to the club for many years at a lower salary due to the rules agreed upon by the players union and Major League Baseball.
• In addition, the ownership showed trust in the team's president and general manager -- both in their early 30s -- in making such key decisions.

No matter the outcome of the playoffs and World Series, the Tampa Bay Rays have shown organizations can benefit from examining their cultures, practices and climate and understanding that a "that's the way we've always done it" philosophy might not be the right fit for today's workers or the business environment it finds itself in today.

Closed for training... differing perspectives on Starbucks

Starbucks decision to close over 7000 company-owned USA locations for several hours on the evening of February 26th in order to implement training in customer service and the making of their varied coffee drinks has caught the eye of new outlets... and understandably so. Starbucks reports that some 135,000 baristas were on the receiving end of the training effort.

Two viewpoints

1) The "How could Starbucks afford to do it?" perspective
.....Those with this point-of-view focus on a range of variables including the:

• lost sales during the closure
• "unproductive wages" (just consider the 400,000+ hours of barista training)
• opportunities for competitors to access Starbucks' customers (for example, Dunkin' Donuts offered heavily discounted lattes, espressos and cappuccinos during this Starbucks evening training)
• attention on negative issues at Starbucks given through media coverage of the training event

2) The "How could Starbucks NOT afford to do it?"
.......perspective
.. ..Those with this viewpoint -- and it seems to be a somewhat lonely place judging from what is currently read or heard -- wonder, even considering the possible negatives listed in #1 above, why wouldn't an organization be willing to take unconventional measures to refocus on its customers, if such methods were deemed productive?

Comparing the two sides
While those in the "how could they" camp focus on short-term negative outcomes that might result from this event, they seem to not consider the longer term negatives if Starbucks does not do something significant to counter some disturbing trends impacting their customers. One question begging to be asked is: "How much would continuing such current practices impact their profits if left unchanged". Two such practices that Starbucks reportedly focused on Tuesday night were in the areas of: (A) coffee drinks that are not prepared up to "Starbucks standards" and (B) not offering the desired consistent customer service that was a hallmark of the chain in earlier years but had been slumping recently.

Lift your cup high
Although Tuesday's closure of their locations surely had some short term negative consequences, let's hope that Starbucks customers lift their venti lattes (or espressos or macchiatos or whatever) high to toast the Starbucks management for their willingness to take a bold (and expensive) step to get the shops back to where they felt they needed to be. It will be interesting if Starbucks' customers taste and experience a difference (and for how long).