“Want to attract and retain Gen Y? Better rethink everything” [The Arizona Republic] explains how employers can attract younger workers and discusses 37signals (including some quotes from Jason).
In order to appeal to us, employers need to rethink their rules a bit. Forget rigid 40-hour workweeks. Forget traditional company hierarchy…
One company that has led the charge in shifting the work-life paradigm, especially when it comes to employee relations, is 37signals. Headquartered in Chicago, it’s a multi-million dollar organization deeply committed to maintaining a work-life balance for its employees.
President Jason Fried says today’s employers present the biggest roadblock. “Simply put, employees are treated like children. They are not allowed to think for themselves, and there are too many layers of approval, just too much insulation that prevents anyone from doing anything. The traditional workplace is broken, and until someone realizes that, there’s always going to be conflict.”
This suffocation by protocol is dead on and will never allow an employee to “go beyond” or achieve something extra for the company. This is a critical link that most organizations continually fail to acknowledge. They are too focused on ensuring employees do no wrong that they actually prevent them from achieving anything beyond status quo.
But there is hope, and a solution that is more common sense than radical procedural change.
To counter the “traditional workplace,” Fried had this to offer: “We challenge them. We give them different, interesting projects. We encourage them to do something outside of work and teach us what they’ve learned. It’s no help to our company to hire someone based on a skill or to get stuff done.”
It is a simple, no-brainer solution, but one that is too often lost.
Vicky H
on 24 Sep 08I think a lot big part of it is hiearchy in company’s. Most larger company structures are built on layers of structure and command. To do something truly innovative most larger company’s cannot get past levels.
Reminds me of my takeaway from “Good to Great”. Most company’s are good, as long as their good (in their eyes, stockholder’s eyes, or whomever is calling the shots) they will never push themselves out of their own mold to be great.
There is no reason too. Mediocracy, one of my hated words, is very acceptable in business. Business looks at revenue by quarter, it’s all short term. No one cares about a year, five years from now, because their only beholden to the short term which is to maintain not exceed.
Anyone who wants to do something great is out of the box, shaking the mousetrap, and setting off the domino chain.
Actually many managers are intimidated by young, intelligent employees. To think their underlings may be smarter than they are is enemy territory, mix that with a few tablespoons of ego, a cup of entitlement, and a full on midlife crisis and your recipe will never make it out of the 19.95 easy bake oven.
Tim Jahn
on 24 Sep 08Couldn’t have said it better (although I tried)!
The average employers are stomping the creativity and vision of their employees through bureaucracy, processes, endless meetings, paperwork, etc. As with media, the model needs to be shifted here. There’s a new way of thinking that companies are not picking up on.
Matt W.
on 24 Sep 08It’s getting old. Thousands of companies, for hundreds of years have touted their laissez-fair attitude as revolutionary, only to later discover it doesn’t scale.
Anybody who believes 37signals’ success is based on 3-day weekends is confusing cause and effect.
GeeIWonder
on 24 Sep 08“Want to attract and retain Gen Y? Better rethink everything”
Sure. Do you think calling them Gen Y, or pretending there is a Gen Y will actually help? Or have you maybe already lost the battle at this early step of your plan?
employees are treated like children
This is too often true. Equally too often true is employees who behave like children.
Robert Einspruch
on 24 Sep 08It always sounds like these posts are coming from an anti-authority mindset. I think that is a great mindset for a startup or small company that is looking to do things differently. But I have seen in one case where the lack of structure and accountability led to a real mess. To extend your “children” metaphor, it was like the kids were in charge of dinner and in the end made a mess and there was nothing edible to eat. I guess it comes down to strong leadership and accountability; if you have those two things then it does not matter if the work week is 40 hours or 4 hours. I guess my question is how do you scale this? Maybe it only applies to small, hyper-focused entities like 37signals where (I presume) everyone is also a shareholder?
Stephen
on 24 Sep 08The linked article is pretty vacuous. I feel llike I’ve been reading about workplace revolution for years. The generational nonsense is particuarly irksome. Is this generation the first to want to earn more money? Is this really a generational thing? Are all these 20-something technophiles really turning down jobs because they don’t get a Blackberry?
Or made it up? The only point of the article that rings remotely true is the idea that working hours are changing and becoming more flexible. This has been happening for over a decade and there are a myriad of reasons for it. Globalisation, technology and balancing family life without nannies top the list, not demanding 20-somethings.
Luis
on 24 Sep 08Why only younger workers? Why can’t this apply to all workers? I’m sure that all people who work, regardless of age would want this.
Benjy
on 24 Sep 08Matt, in terms of these type of ideas scaling to larger companies… there was this article in Business Week about how Best Buy is implementing a number of these types of progressive ideas in the workplace. They did away with the traditional 8 hour work day, etc. in their corporate headquarters and it has worked well… they’re now supposedly implementing similar programs even in their stores. They’ve been so successful that the people who dreamed up the programs are even consulting for other companies about it now.
Anon
on 24 Sep 08Totally true in small companies also – we call ourself start-up (around 20 employees) and this article was pretty much bulls-eye
Patrick Henry
on 24 Sep 08Agree with Matt W.
Mike
on 24 Sep 08To piggyback on what Luis said, it isn’t just Gen Y that is pushing for flexibiltiy. It is also working Moms (and Dads) who are demanding it or empty-nesters (whose kids are finally out of college) who want flexible work arrangements.
It isn’t just recruitment of Gen Ys, it is talent retention that is driving flexibility.
Damon
on 24 Sep 08How many times do we need to read crap like this?
Old people think young people are lazy… blah blah … young people need freedom & flexibility … blah blah … you need young energy … blah blah … old people are dumb.
People need motivation. The form of that motivation is greatly variable (cash, freedom, fear, altruism, handcuffs, etc.), no matter how old you are. This is not rocket science.
Hint: any time a 25 year old tells you something is a no-brainer, think again. More often than not, that’s the red flag of inexperience being proudly waved.
Kory Hoopes
on 24 Sep 08Even though I totally agree with these statements, I’m at odds with how to acheive them. How does one go about either obtaining such employment? Unfortunetly 37signals can only hire so many people.
dave
on 24 Sep 08Don’t get me wrong - I generally agree with the article - but this is totally data-free, full of statements lacking evidence. Just because it works for you doesn’t mean it works for everyone.
If “traditional” companies are so broken, how come they’re still making most of the things we use? Shouldn’t the market have put them out of business by now? Or is it more of a “brainer” than it might seem to get 1,000, 10,000 or 40,000 people working together productively?
DerekSunshine
on 24 Sep 08I think the difference between large companies and start ups may just be anthropological and inavoidable.
Companies with fewer employees than Dunbar’s number can manage through reputation. Everyone sees each others’ contribution and is aware of how there own actions effect their reputation in the group. In a larger organization, the policies and channels are there to manage interaction between the various “villages” that make up large corporation.
Small is better for some things. Certainly, larger organizations can learn a thing or two on small group cohesion. However, for many human endeavors, you just need a lot of people. We wouldn’t have the Internet or Interstates or even municipal sewer and water system if it wasn’t for large groups of people working together.
Jeff Putz
on 24 Sep 08“It always sounds like these posts are coming from an anti-authority mindset.”
No, that’s not it… it’s not anti-authority, it’s the redistribution of authority.
Patrick Algrim
on 24 Sep 08Interesting conversation, I had almost this exact article written on my blog, and had no clue about it. Good places to work do exist, only they are definitely for Generation Y – they are young kids doing what the culture is doing. Meaning, the business could be about skateboarding. Pretty interesting, I am a little shocked at how similar our articles are.
Brandon
on 24 Sep 08@Matt W: Tell that to Zappos.
Brandon Konkle
on 24 Sep 08Fantastic article! This is exactly what I’ve been feeling lately. We don’t have to be shackled to this kind of corporate mentality in order to be successful! Today’s corporate environment stifles individuality and creativity and tries to turn humans into productivity-obsessed drones.
Brandan Lennox
on 25 Sep 08@dave et al.
Just because it works for you doesn’t mean it works for everyone.
It doesn’t have to work for “everyone,” so long as it works for me (or you, or whoever wants it to work). This whole scaling issue is irrelevant for companies like 37signals who aren’t obsessed with growth, as they’ve said many times over. Their attitude may not scale past 30 employees, but why would it matter if they never get that large?
MattT
on 25 Sep 08Or don’t rethink anything and hire some of the older workers who’ve been laid off over the past few years and whose age makes them practically unhire-able.
David Andersen
on 25 Sep 08Most people don’t agitate for significant change – and most managers aren’t interested in leading such change – because doing so does not follow the path of least resistance. That’s my theory.
Andropov
on 25 Sep 08It’s true that it’s impossible to use this concept on big companies, but you can use the essence. Look Toyota for example, one of the most important part of their success is asking employees about the work environment, about the processes, etc. You wouldn’t think that somebody working on a production line has valuable ideas? Who would know if not them? The managers?
You can’t live without hierarchy in a large corporation, but at least try to give some space for employees. It’s also good to ask them. I never did understand why companies, hire advisors for millions, without asking their own people!
Ian Pratt
on 25 Sep 08The problem is so many managers lack any real leadership capabilities and only asipre to management positions due to their ego.
There are so many things you can delegate and can let people do for you, if you can let you self trust your people. I spend a bit of time showing managers how to delegate and they often admit there is a lot that they can let their people do.
Now days when I run a process improvement project 100% of actions are done by the people. It is great to show them what they can do for themselves
Karl
on 27 Sep 08Is retaining people still a big problem these days?
This discussion is closed.