“Mission Tactics” and Management of Generation Y

There are big changes going on in the workforce. Many baby- boomers are leaving and the new hires were often born in the 1980’s and 90’s. Any leader who has been managing people of different ages can attest to how different this “Generation Y” approaches work and the workplace:

1. Technology, communications, social networking and multitasking are second nature. The best and brightest among Y-ers are also strong in teamwork and presentation skills
2. Work is something you do, not a place you go to, there is a desire to have the workplace adapt to you instead of the other way around. Expectations are high in terms of pay, career progression, vacation and other (simpler) perks like casual dress or listening to iPods at work
3. Loyalty to an organization is low, employees can bolt if they perceive better opportunities somewhere else
4. Upbringing has seen great emphasis on building and preserving self- esteem, so a premium is placed on “Success” and “Rewards”, even when perhaps there is not much success to reward. On-going positive reinforcement is expected and well received, corrective feedback or coaching is not always received equally well
5. Used to direction and guardrails, many Gen Y individuals are not great with unstructured situations, but prefer detailed instructions and guidelines

With staffing oftentimes skeletal already, managers have new issues to deal with when managing Generation Y. How do you motivate them? Provide feedback when something is wrong? How can you trust employees will take initiative or be accountable? What about decision- making, do managers have to make all decisions?

As somebody with managerial experience with employees of different ages and from different cultural backgrounds in different organizations, I offer up the following idea: management by objectives/ MBO works well with all kinds of employees, if they have correct skills and are empowered to make decisions. In the military, elite units in many countries are managed using a version of MBO called mission tactics.

Under mission tactics the leader does not give detailed orders and directives. Rather, she communicates the desired outcome or result, what resources are available, and gives teams or subordinate leaders opportunity to plan an approach based on their skills and expertise.

The leaders role once plans are in place is not to micro- manage, but make sure there is reporting, alignment and progress against milestones. Coaching is provided as needed, and successes duly celebrated.

Mission tactics were first used in combat situations where lack of communication made information difficult to share, and orders difficult to give. Instead soldiers understanding the commander’s intent could make independent decisions, be flexible and use initiative for a mission to succeed.

The big advantage of managing civilian organizations in a mission tactics mode is employees are free to tackle each task as best they know how, instead of having a manager commanding and controlling. Work teams that are well put together will help individuals from Generation Y be assertive around planning, to take initiative, and receive feedback from their peers.

If the task is important and there is a reward for successful completion, employees of all ages and level of experience will apply themselves, work hard and do their best.

The PR Disaster that is Arizona: How Not To Attract Foreign Investment

Cities and states are in intense competition over visitors and new companies, to create jobs and maintain a healthy tax base. Tourists, business visitors, corporate headquarters and factories, as well as investors are important target audiences for marketers.

Many geographical locations invest in people and incentives like tax subsidies to create a good climate for new business. Access to transportation for goods and people, suitable office space, and trained workers are also part of the picture.

However, that difficult to define Quality of life is what, all things equal, sets places apart.

Arizona has a nice climate, spectacular scenery, endless clean solar and wind energy, unique native american culture, plenty of real estate, good airports, improving schools, and good universities. But it has an image problem. And it is of its own making.

Regardless of what political views we may have, the sorry fact is:
In national and international media, Arizona comes across as a backwards, primitive place where people carry and use concealed guns, and vigilantes roam the border, intercepting destitute immigrants. Law enforcement wastes time and energy chasing immigrant construction workers and nannies , instead of dealing with serious crime like drugs or violence. http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2010/05/12/l-arizona-un-etat-policier-par-francois-vergniolle-de-chantal_1349921_3232.html 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article7113838.ece 

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,692119,00.html

This image is difficult to change, but to make things worse the new Arizona SB 1070 set to take effect later this summer is making illegal immigration a state misdemeanour in addition to a federal civil violation. This makes the state (where perhaps 1/3 of the population is Hispanic) come across as downright racist. http://www.economist.com/world/united-states/displaystory.cfm?story_id=16060133

Other places vying for foreign investment, say North Carolina or Michigan for manufacturing, or California for clean energy companies, must be squealing with delight: one of their potentially most difficult competitors has shot itself in the foot.

In this day and age of social responsibility, companies, States and other organizations are vulnerable to negative publicity. Boycotts from a slew of organizations are already taking a toll on the Arizona economy (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/phoenix-hospitality-business-is-hit-by-boycotts-2010-05-18) and are now starting to eat into the State reputation, which may be an ever bigger long term problem http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/why_boycotts_succeed_and_fail 

From a PR perspective, decisive political action is needed to restore investor and business confidence in Arizona:

1. Eat humble pie, but confidently explain what problems SB 1070 is intended to tackle, and work jointly with the federal government and other states for effective and fair solutions
2. Visibly and decisively deal not with the symptoms, but the underlying issues: a porous border, illegal drug use in the US, weapons smuggling to Mexico
3. Show leadership in immigration reform, allow importation of the labor needed, when it is needed. Many countries have guest worker programs that work well and help their economies grow
4. Emphasize the demographics and sustainable competitive advantages Arizona offer. Listen to potential investors, and offer what they look for, be it trained workers, access to credit, commercial real estate, or tax breaks
5. Target specific industries and countries for investment promotions, like solar and wind energy generation, tourism and real estate, with investors from places like Germany, Spain or, for that matter, Mexico
6. Keep an eye on the competition. Benchmark, identify best practices and keep refining both messaging and incentives for investors.

To get this done, a strategic vision and a broad consensus is needed between business, civic organizations, and politicians on the State and Federal level. The perspective must be market- driven and fact based. There is no room for emotions or lack of flexibility.

If the strategic marketing work starts now, maybe Arizona can be the top-notch destination it deserves to be in time for the centennial celebration next year?

To read more about marketing of locations, I recommend “Marketing Places” by Kotler, Haider and Rein, on Free Press.