Professionalism is the real generational divide

When we talk about generational differences at work, the conversation often turns to technology, flexible working or work-life balance. Yet one of the biggest sources of tension may be less visible and that’s our different ideas of what “professional” looks like.

Leadership consultant Zoe Thompson joined the police at 18 and spent two decades in police leadership before moving into coaching. When she joined me recently on my Alastair Greener Generationally Speaking podcast, she recalled walking into rooms where people assumed she was somebody’s executive assistant, when she was in fact the most senior officer present. She has also experienced the reverse where the most casually dressed person turns out to be in charge. “The biggest difference is in what professional looks like,” she told me.

That can include dress, language, deference, punctuality, communication and how authority is demonstrated. The difficulty is that we often treat our own version of professionalism as universal, rather than something shaped by the world in which we entered work.

My 2024 communication preferences survey of 4,067 UK adults found that 75% of workers believe the way people think and behave at work varies according to age. Communication style was the difference identified most often, by 51%. 71% of Gen Z respondents said they found it easier to communicate with people close to their own age, compared with 36% of Baby Boomers. In my separate study of HR professionals, preferred management style was among the three most commonly observed age-related differences, identified by 51%.

However, the detail does not always fit the stereotypes. 55% of workers aged 18 to 21 agreed that formal procedures and policies can restrict people, compared with 32% of Baby Boomers. Yet half of that younger group described their workplace relationships as distant and rather formal. Young workers are not necessarily casual about everything. They may simply be formal about different things and that’s where misunderstandings might begin. On the podcast, Zoe made another important observation: “You could have been in an organisation for 20 years and you won’t know anything more than somebody who’s been there for six months, because so many things are changing.”

Experience still matters enormously, but length of service no longer guarantees that someone has all the most relevant knowledge. While younger colleagues may understand new technology, customer expectations or changing cultural norms, more experienced colleagues bring judgement, perspective and knowledge built over time. This is why strong organisations value both.

Leaders should therefore ask what “professional” means in their workplace. Reliability, clarity, competence and treating people well are meaningful standards. However, clothing choice, whether a camera is switched on during Teams meetings and how many pleasantries open an email, may simply be preferences masquerading as rules.

We should also examine who benefits from our definition. If “professional” quietly means looking, sounding and behaving like those already in charge, talented people who don’t fit that mould may be overlooked.