Steve Jordan explains why, in his opinion, the international moving industry is missing a trick by not fully embracing the talents of the younger generation.
For years I have heard that the industry needs to promote young talent. “They are our future”, people say. But I wonder just how heart-felt that emotion really is. Here’s why.
It is true that organisations across the industry have set up Young Movers groups. BAR did it years ago then resurrected it more recently, the FEDEMAC group is very active as is, of course, the FIDI 39 Club, IAM’s Young Professionals and LACMA Next. These are all excellent organisations that do a lot of good work … and, I am sure, have a lot of fun in the process. They are, without doubt, an excellent way of nurturing talent, building relationships and forging friendships that will last a lifetime – assuming young people stay in the same industry for a lifetime nowadays. But that’s another story …!
But I am beginning to wonder whether the whole industry is missing a trick.
We live in a rapidly changing world. Technology today is widely recognised as changing at an exponential pace, far faster than in the past. While there isn’t one single ‘speedometer’ for technological change, adoption timelines, patent filings, data growth, and scaling laws (such as Moore’s Law*) are common measures. Together, they show that innovation is not just faster - it’s accelerating. Some say it’s accelerating towards a singularity in which innovation falls over itself and, presumably, we all scream for help.
For people of my generation, who grew up in the 1960s when technology was represented by a digital watch with red numbers, this is mind-blowingly scary. Although many of us grapple with its wonders, we are, mostly, out of our depth. We bumble by, but it’s technology that is not really for us. Even the generation that followed, the children of the 1980s, find it all hard to hold on to. They get it, but are not fully invested. It seems to me, however, that today’s 20 and 30-somethings, are. Even if they have trouble mastering everything that technology delivers, they are in a much better position to deal with it than the rest of us.
So, I have a radical proposal: pass the tiller over to them. Let them run things. Rather than introduce them slowly into the fabric of our associations, allowing them to organise charity events and social evenings, give them the big job: let the under 40s lead and make the decisions that matter.
That doesn’t mean, of course, that the wisdom of the older generation should be ignored. Absolutely not. But how about the associations, instead of setting up separate wings for the youngsters, they set up mentor groups for the oldies? Leave the day-to-day running to the young people, who are in a much better position to recognise and take advantage of the technological opportunities that emerge. When they need historical guidance, a reflection from the past, they can ask for it from those who have lived a little longer. Until then, let the older generation trust them.
After all, age is a relative concept. Someone who is 40 years old is hardly a juvenile. At 40 I’d started a business, travelled to more countries than I could count, had four children, two marriages, and bought and sold three houses. My hair was turning grey. Not everyone is the same but there are a great many, very capable people around, some of whom would, I suspect, be willing to lend their expertise for the greater good. And consider this, Mark Zuckerberg was 19 when he started Facebook, Jeff Bezos was 30 when he started Amazon, Richard Branson was 20 when he started Virgin, and try to name me a musician who did their best work in their sixties! Not many.
But my theory has two hurdles ...