A recent article in the Wall Street Journal claimed that Gen Zers – born in the late 1990s or early 2000s – pose new challenges for business leaders who should be careful how they manage them. Superiors can be direct with their Gen Z subordinates – but only after they have shown interest in their well-being.
Where does this wisdom come from? From the “locker room playbook for managing Gen Z employees.” Leadership coach Fred Johnson, who coaches executives in business and sports, is quoted as saying that managers must adjust to Gen Zers’ work habits or risk their alienation. Notwithstanding its origin in the locker room, the advice is not confined to managers who work with athletes. Leadership coaches more generally suggest that to win “the culture race with this group” – with Gen Zers – leaders and managers must reach out and show them they care.
I was struck by the Journal article because it’s in stark contrast to most of what’s happening in the real world. For example, an American president who never seems in the slightest concerned about what his subordinates think or feel or need or want, no matter their age or stage. Instead, America’s most obvious role model, Donald Trump, presides over his domain as if he were king. King during a time when they ruled by divine right.
Nor do America’s most successful corporate leaders seem radically different – especially in the tech industry. Even before he commanded DOGE like a brutal general, Elon Musk is known to foster toxic work environments – summarily firing employees, depriving them of benefits, and not giving a damn about their welfare. Same with Mark Zuckerberg. According to an article in Fortune magazine there are five types of bad bosses and Zuckerberg fits three of them. And while he was running Amazon, Jeff Bezos was known for making sky high demands; for being seriously stingy especially when it came to pay for those lowest on the Amazon ladder; for cultivating a culture that was notoriously confrontational; and for firing off phrases like “Are you lazy or incompetent?”
Similarly, as soon as it became politically palatable post-Covid to require workers to be back in the office full time, several other of America’s most visible executives did just that. Notwithstanding the preference for many if not most for a semblance of work-life balance, JPMorgan’s CEO Jamie Dimon was an early and vocal critic of remote work, insisting that “it doesn’t work in our business.” As was Goldman Sachs CEO, David Solomon, who in May 2021 called working from home “an aberration that we are going to correct as soon as possible.”
I’m just a reporter. A reporter reporting on the yawning gap between ideal leadership and real-world leadership. In the former experts recommend that superiors adjust to accommodate their subordinates. In the latter experts insist that subordinates adjust to accommodate their superiors.