top of page
Search

Ageism

Writer's picture: James RuleJames Rule

Updated: May 6, 2020

Why do some businesses still harbour this bias when sport abandoned it long ago? Age is irrelevant. It is contribution that counts.

In my experience the difference between how age is perceived in sport compared to business is startling.


I want to focus on this issue so that you can reflect on this dichotomy and consider if ageism exists in your organisation. The recruitment and development of talented staff is essential to the sustainability and growth of any organisation. An age bias should not be allowed to undermine this crucial process before it has even begun!


If I were to ask you for a sporting example of a prodigious young talent lighting up their relative sporting arena, I am sure you would be able to find an example.


A fine one occurred this summer when 15 year old American tennis player Cori Gauff became the youngest player to qualify for a Wimbledon Grand Slam match and wowed the crowds by beating Venus Williams. Going back a few years, many will recall the 16 year old Wayne Rooney making his top flight debut with Everton. Tiger Woods in golf, Sachin Tendulkar in cricket are two other internationally recognised sportsmen who had a phenomenal impact on their sport from a very young age.


Sporting organisations, their leaders and coaches are invariably relaxed about young players representing them in critical roles. In fact they actively encourage it. The vast majority of team sports such as rugby, cricket and football have dedicated Academy Programmes which are set up with a specific aim to recruit young boys and girls and develop them to a standard where they can progress to represent their organisation at a senior level.


In business all too often I find a much more hesitant attitude to recruiting young inexperienced staff. Management frequently begin drafting their job specification referencing experience as a key requirement. With that desire to find a safe, experienced pair of hands they consciously or unconsciously create a bias towards recruiting older staff. Their focus tends to be on what can go wrong if they recruit an inexperienced young person and how to avoid that pitfall.


Some of you may disagree with the above and feel that you don’t have any ageism in your business. You may be confident that you actively recruit graduates and or young recruits and always remain open minded about recruiting the best person for the job irrespective of age. If that is the case then it is to be commended. However recruitment is only one part of how ageism can manifest itself. The second area is the level of contribution the newly appointed member of staff is able to make. I would pose these two questions: How much of a voice do they have? And can they genuinely influence the strategic direction of your organisation?


When a young player has made his debut in a team he has become a part of the team. As a consequence he or she will be encouraged to feel confident to play a full part in the performance review of the team. In simplest terms an 18 year old debutant in a team has to feel confident providing critical feedback to a vastly more experienced (and certainly older in age) fellow player. Coaches want that brutally honest feedback and contribution to the overall vision of what they are striving to achieve, namely the improvement of the team performance.


It is at this level that in my experience the differences between sport and business are most stark. Frequently in business the new recruit that is young and inexperienced is encouraged to ‘keep their head down’, ‘serve their time’ and ‘get some runs on the board’. These are all different ways of saying the same thing, which is you have not been here long enough to earn the right to express an opinion. Particularly if that opinion is a critical one of a senior colleague or the strategic direction of a business. Invariably such comments are not welcomed as honest and constructive feedback for the greater good, but rather a disrespectful misplaced opinion from a cheeky youngster!


Leaders should not confuse time served by staff in a role with competency. Yes, experience is vital, but it has to be the right experience. By that I mean experience that develops the talent of your staff, that challenges them and allows them to grow. In the sporting context for example you can train a rugby player in the gym and on the training field for years, but that experience is not the barometer of their value. Ultimately you need to give them experience in the high pressure environment of participating in a competitive match. In a sporting context we can understand this viewpoint.


The coach can see the physical performance but also the mental performance of his player. For example, how the player responds to a mistake when they are in front of tens of thousands of supporters verbally and physically reacting, with potentially hundreds of thousands more also watching on television. It is easy to understand that the coach cannot assess these capabilities if he leaves his player on the sidelines.


So the obvious question is therefore why in the business world are we in effect leaving our new recruits on the sidelines by not giving them a voice in the evolution of the business in which they work?


A teenage player that has proven he can stand up to the rigours of competitive matches and contribute to the overall performance of the team is more valuable to his organisation than a player several years older who has not delivered the same standards on the playing field. Age is irrelevant to the coach and the club for whom he plays. It is their contribution to the team performance that counts. This principle applies equally in business. If we give new recruits the platform to demonstrate their abilities, then again age and time served at the company is not the most important criteria of value. Rather it is the level and consistency of that individual’s contribution which is of paramount importance.


Creating that platform for new young recruits is a cultural challenge that sits squarely at the door of the leader of any organisation. They need to set the standards of what they expect (young staff to have a voice) and ensure the processes are in place (how that voice is facilitated, presented and received respectfully and constructively). A critical step in this process is ensuring that your management team embrace and are aligned with the philosophy that age is not a barrier to contribution. This invariably is a process that can take time and needs constant reinforcement.


As a CEO of two separate rugby clubs, I have worked with many different coaches. All have differences in their philosophies with regard to how and when they promote young players into their teams.

Those philosophies can change over time. For instance, a coach who operates in sports with relegation will potentially be far more open to developing young talent at the start of a season than at the end of the season if the team gets dragged into a relegation battle. The same is true in business in times of profit and prosperity. It is easier to take a chance on new, inexperienced recruits but far harder in times of adversity for the business or wider economy. This is where the leadership of the CEO is integral to ensuring the management feel empowered to keep driving the overall vision of giving young recruits a voice and a chance to demonstrate their abilities. He or she needs to reinforce that if we as a business had the confidence to hire a recruit, then we need to have the belief in them to let them have a voice and contribute from day one. The empowering effect of this can be enormous on the new recruit.


Ageism does not relate solely too young recruits and so I will once again return to the sporting analogy. Invariably we view elite sport as a young persons’ profession. But how do we define young? Whatever the definition, there will always be somebody who challenges the status quo. For example, Tom Brady is still the star quarterback for the New England Patriots at 41. Serena Williams is still competing professionally at the age of 38. In the last month Nigel Benn has announced a comeback in professional boxing at the age of 55!



How does this relate to business? Well once again the simple position is we must always judge the value of a staff member not on age but on contribution. In terms of talent identification we must always remain open minded to the possibilities for staff to retrain and transition from one role or department to another. This applies to existing staff as well as new recruits.


Several times in my career I have seen staff start a completely new role in the twilight of their career and deliver impressive results.

I believe that one of the most important legacies of a leader is the quality of the staff that they develop. As I look back on my own career thus far, one of my proudest achievements is that five different members of staff that have worked for me have gone onto become Chief Executives. They were all talented, industrious individuals and I’m sure would have been successful without my intervention. However, I would hope that I was able to play a small part in their growth.


To truly maximise your ability to deliver that legacy of staff development, ensure that there are no traces of ageism in your organisation. Get everyone onto the playing field and don’t leave anyone on the sidelines!


To work with the team at The Lonely Leader contact us at hello@thelonelyleader.co.uk


113 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


Commenting has been turned off.
  • Instagram
  • linkedin
  • Spotify

©2019 by The Lonely Leader. Terms

bottom of page