The Next Generation of Leadership at Yahoo Inc - Case Study Example

After the Baby Boomers The Next Generation of Leadership at Yahoo! Inc. After the Baby Boomers The Next Generation of Leadership at Yahoo! Inc. I. Introduction As Yahoo moves into the next generation of leadership, the company will be facing a shift in leadership. Its present leadership which are composed of the Baby Boomers will be retiring within the next 15 years and this leads to the problem whether the organization is ready for the future. With the change in generations, from Baby Boomers to generation X, there are major concerns with what will motivate, retain and help to promote the new and upcoming talent.  II. Discussion of the organization Yahoo Inc is a global internet based company that operates the Yahoo! Internet portal. The website offers different product and services that includes search engine, email, delivering news, photosharing and media streaming. The company was founded in 199 by David Filo and Jerry Yang when they were Phd candidates at Stanford University (Yahoo Inc, nd). In 2010, Yahoo was rated as the most popular website in the US having monthly unique visits of 120 million. Yahoo’s Executive Team is composed of Marissa Mayer as its Chief Executive Officer, President and Director where the co-founder David Filo sits as Chief Yahoo (info.yahoo, nd) III. Problem it is trying to solve Yahoo Inc. is readying the organization to become future ready when its present roster of leadership retires within 15 years. The present roster of leadership are composed of baby boomers and it is expected that the next generation, the Generation X will be assuming the next leadership. Generation X has different values, motivation and belief system from its predecessors and Yahoo has to make necessary changes now, or adopt new leadership strategies to make the organization ready for the leadership of Generation X. It therefore begs to answer the question what changes are necessary to make the organization ready for the future? IV. Analysis of decision making model Schullery presented a table how the value system of various generation works that could be a basis of decision making model of Gen X. In effect, this table represents all the employees of Yahoo since the table covers the entire age bracket of its employees which are the baby boomers (its senior employees/officers), Gen X and Milennials. This table would help understand the value system of Gen X that would later reflect on the kind of leadership that they would exercise in the company. Figure I. Decision making model of Gen X compared to other generations Value Boomers Gen X Milennials Leisure 3 2 1 Extrinsic 3 1 2 Intrinsic 1 2 3 Altruistic 1 2 3 Social 1 2 3 (Schullery, 2013) The research of Schullery revealed that Gen Xers are quite balanced in their value system. Unlike the baby boomers who are more prone to leisure and extrinsic rewards, Gen Xers does not prioritize leisure that much and extrinsic rewards are low on their value system. This meant that Gen Xers are not motivated primarily by money and monetary rewards and value more intrinsic rewards. Intrinsic rewards include, satisfying job, recognition and the feeling of making a difference. This is supported by the study of Khor and Mapunda (2014) that Gen Xers wanted prioritizes “doing what you love with passion” (10). Henseller simplified the explanation that Gen Xers has a new set values, morals and belief system and reject many of the old values held by baby boomers such as money as the mark of success (Henseller, 2014). The altruistic and social value which Schullery reported as more pronounced than baby boomers meant that Gen Xers are no longer believers of old singular charismatic leaders that characterized the baby boomers but are more believers in team work and distributed responsibility. This is very much true considering that the idea of flat organizations were born in the Generation X. Translating this model to Yahoo Inc., this meant that the company must not only use monetary reward to motivate and develop future leaders of the company. It must go beyond fat pays and bonuses (which are now viewed with skepticism) to motivate employees but must also include interesting and meaningful work. Its plan to develop and make the company ready for the leadership of Generation X is also consistent with the value held by Gen X to have distribute responsibility than relying on few people. This must be expanded however to include large pool of team because Gen Xers leadership are likely to depend on team rather on development which includes decision making. V. Timeline to solve the problem The program can be implemented in a 10 year program. The timeline can be breakdown into the following timeline. Year 1: Identification of candidates for future leadership. Candidates can apply or selected with the candidate’s consent. The list of candidates would be inclusive and not only selected to a few. The company remuneration and leadership program will also be crafted during this period. Year 2: Orientation of the candidates of the program. This would also include orienting employees in the company about the changes that will be made to make the company ready for the future. Year 3 to 5: Implementation of the program and fine tuning of the program. Year 6: Implementation of the new remuneration system. This remuneration system will not only include pay but also recognition, job rotation, job matching etch. Year 7: Potential candidates will have their on the job training being exposed to leadership roles. Job rotation will be introduced to make the candidates acquire a more holistic perspective of the company. Year 8: Institutionalization of the program. Year 9 to 15: Promising candidates start to fill up positions vacated by retiring senior officers of the company. VI. Logical solution to the problem The main issue is to determine what changes will be needed to make Yahoo truly ready for Generation X coming change in the leadership world. To address the issue properly it would be necessary to understand the Gen X first. Gen Xers looks for meaning in their work beyond pay. Most Generation X also believe in grooming a team and not one person alone because the company would become vulnerable if the company is dependent on a few numbers of people. In a way, Gen X values the essence of a team than a single charismatic leaders. Being such, it is expected that Gen X leaders would be more democratic and team oriented (Khor and Mapunda, 2014). They are also persistent and risk takers. To make the organization ready for change, team oriented, although it is a given that one must be technology savvy at yahoo, it is a priority among Gen Xers. Having said this, the logical solution to the problem is to rethink the entire motivation mindset of the organization that future leaders and employees will no longer be motivated by fat pay and bonus alone but more on intrinsic values such as meaningful work, doing what they love doing and work life balances. This means that Yahoo Inc. must develop a holistic remuneration program where employees and future leaders will find meaning in their work. It also requires for Yahoo Inc. to reengineer its leadership structure from being hierarchial to a flat organization or at least minimize the level of its hierarchy. It could introduce the idea of teams and projects where teams work on projects and not being directed by a central management. It could also redesign the workplace to be “less formal” because Gen Xers rejects formality and institution look. It may already be a given at Yahoo Inc. but it must be emphasized that the upcoming leadership of Gen Xers are technology savvy and this has implication in the workplace such as being a paperless company and mobile working such as telecommuting. Creating this kind of environment at Yahoo Inc. will not only prepare and train potential leaders for future leadership at Yahoo but it also prepare the organization and its people of the kind of leadership that will be exercised when Gen Xers will assume leadership. VII. Conclusion It is advantageous for Yahoo Inc to be forward looking because it ensures the company’s survival and viability in the long term. It acknowledges that there will be changes that will happen and it is already readying the organization for such changes. Having this kind of mindset, the organization is almost certain to remain relevant and competitive in the future. Creating the environment where future leaders will thrive have also other benefits in addition to making the organization ready for future leadership. Having a program that prepares the future leaders of the organization will make the prospective candidate stay in the company in anticipation of being promoted to senior leadership. This will reduce the attrition rate significantly not to mention that employees will be more motivated realizing that the company is preparing for their leadership in the future. A motivated workforce also meant higher productivity making the company more competitive not only today but also in the future. The mindset of future leaders in the company may be totally different from their predecessors. But acknowledging that Gen Xers have different values and belief system from baby boomers is already a good start to prepare the company for their leadership. References DI GIOVANNI, M. (2014). No Need for Gen X, Millennial Workplace Battle. Credit Union Times, 25(26), 8. Henseler, C. (2014, August 20). A Bubble Generation: The Millennials, Generation X, and Historical Amnesia. Retrieved November 30, 2014, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christine-henseler/a-bubble-generation-the-millenials_b_5691564.html Kodatt, S. (2009). I Understand "You": Leadership Preferences Within the Different Generations. Proceedings Of The European Conference On Management, Leadership & Governance, 61-65. Khor, P., & Mapunda, G. (2014). A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experiences of the Generation X and Y Entrepreneurs. Annual International Conference On Business Strategy & Organizational Behaviour (Bizstrategy), 6-15. doi:10.5176/2251-1970_IE14.04 Schullery, N. M. (2013). Workplace Engagement and Generational Differences in Values. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 252-265. doi:10.1177/1080569913476543 Read More