Generations at Work: Who's Better At...?
Do 
you know which generation is hot, and which is not, when it comes to business acumen?
A recent scientific study, conducted at the University of California, measured the business behavior of "seniors" (over 50) versus "juniors" (under 30).
The tests measured three metrics, all of which are crucial in business situations. Can you guess which generation did the best in each metric?
First question:
TEST #1: The first test measured the extent to which each group would take a calculated risk. Which group took on the biggest risks? Click on your choice below:
WRONG!
The "Flower Power!" generation made more slightly more risky investments than the "No Fear!" generation.
.
.
.
Next question:
TEST #2: The second test measured the extent to which each group was willing to cooperate with one another. Which group was best at cooperating? Click on your choice below:
CORRECT!
The "Flower Power!" generation made more slightly more risky investments than the "No Fear!" generation.
.
.
.
Next question:
TEST #2: The second test measured the extent to which each group was willing to cooperate with one another. Which group was best at cooperating? Click on your choice below:
WRONG!
The "do you own thing" generation tended to cooperate more and better than the "social networking" generation.
.
.
.
Next question:
TEST #3: The third test measured the ability of each group to compete with one another. Which group was the most competitive? Click on your choice below:
CORRECT!
The "do you own thing" generation tended to cooperate more and better than the "social networking" generation.
.
.
.
Next question:
TEST #3: The third test measured the ability of each group to compete with one another. Which group was the most competitive? Click on your choice below:
WRONG!
The "yoga pilates" generation were slightly more competitive with each other than the "extreme sports" generation.
.
.
.
Surprised?
Click for my opinion of this "issue" »
CORRECT!
The "yoga pilates" generation were slightly more competitive with each other than the "extreme sports" generation.
.
.
.
Surprised?
Click my opinion of this "issue" »
SOME FINAL WORDS ON THIS "ISSUE"
To be entirely honest, I find these "old versus young" competitions funny but not meaningful. Here's why.
The tiny variations that you find between two groups of this type are dwarfed by the giant variations that you find between individuals. Knowing that an oldster is 5 percent more likely to be a risk taker than a youngster doesn't tell you anything useful about the individual you're dealing with right now.
The same thing is true of gender differences. Sure, it's fun to speculate on what's different between the sexes. But the truth is that gender doesn't predict much about the individual person. In fact, basing your opinion of somebody on a minor statistical variation connected with their group is a good way to get blindsided.
If there's anything to be learned from "generation" studies, it's that people are always looking for useful ways to sort individuals into group, in order to better understand them. The only problem is that it doesn't work.
That being said, there was one finding of that study that I DID think was interesting. It turns out that groups that mixed young and old outperformed groups consisting of only one or the other.
In other words, if you want to have a successful team, you build one that represents more than one way of looking at the world. But that's intuitive, isn't it?
Do we really need a study to tell us what's blindingly obvious?
READERS: Did the results surprise you?