Top 10 Topics for Directors in 2018: Managing five generations of employees

Jan 2, 2018

Reading Time : 3 min

By: Lauren Leyden, Grace Margaret O'Donnell, law clerk (not admitted to practice)

People from different generations often have different priorities. For instance, Millennials commonly prioritize a work-life balance in a way Baby Boomers do not. Because of this, younger employees may seek a casual work environment, flexible schedules and the ability to work from home. For older employees, however, a formal physical presence in the office can be paramount, and a basis on which performance is evaluated. Employees from different generations may also have differing views relating to compensation. Older generations tend to be comfortable with traditional compensation structures and look for higher base salaries and more  comprehensive benefit plans. However, these forms of compensation do not always appeal to younger generations in the same way. Many members of the younger generation look beyond a paycheck and respond better to “soft perks,” such as sabbaticals, office amenities and even branded gear. We find that younger employees often respond best to work cultures that emphasize entrepreneurship and individuality. They appreciate companies that encourage side projects and allow exploration of individual interests.

Employees from different generations can also have different expectations regarding the type of work they will perform and the leadership style they will encounter. Younger employees tend to expect to be involved in meaningful work quickly. They resist doing more administratively focused work or duties considered to be “grunt work.” Older employees, however, can expect younger employees to “pay their dues.” Millennials are also often quick to put forward their own ideas and opinions, since they commonly experienced that type of open learning environment in school; but those from older generations may view this forwardness as disrespectful. Younger generations that grew up with regular feedback in school and through social media tend to expect superiors to provide real-time and frequent, although not formal, evaluations. The opposite, annual formal feedback with little in between, is more commonly the expectation of older generations.

Finally, employees across generations can struggle to communicate with one another effectively. Older generations may prefer in-person interaction or phone conversations, whereas Millennials, who grew up with technology, often prefer communicating through text-based platforms, such as email. Even in emails, different generations may have varying expectations about what language and tone is appropriate. Abbreviations, the use of capitalization and red exclamation marks mean different things to different people.

Many options are available for addressing the issues facing a multigenerational workforce. Companies and their boards should examine what motivates their specific employees. Because every workforce varies, it can be helpful to conduct surveys or hold informal focus groups to find out what employees respond best to with respect to compensation, schedules, even dress codes. Being open to a broader array of options on something like compensation, rather than a one-size-fits-all-approach, can result in greater employee satisfaction and performance. To help employees work together effectively, employers can encourage cross-generational mentorship programs. Team-building exercises, social excursions and even just making sure that breakout groups in training or projects include employees from different generations are all successful strategies.

Employees from all generations can benefit from these arrangements, and they help to dispel stereotypes. Companies can also enact firmwide policies regarding dress, office presence, and email etiquette to clarify expectations and present a cohesive appearance to clients. One place to consider embracing generational diversity is the composition of company managers and the board itself. The addition of younger members in lead positions at various levels and as board members not only can make transitions easier, but younger generations can make meaningful contributions and offer insights about their own communities. If managed correctly, boards and companies alike can benefit from the wisdom, collaboration and innovation that comes with generational diversity

View the full report here.

Share This Insight

Categories

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.