I was at the Council on Foundations pre-conference earlier this year where Mark Rosenman asked me if I thought that “next gen” meant radical change in the nonprofit sector. Lately, the term “next gen” has become the buzzword of choice used to describe the next wave of nonprofit leadership, specifically in describing generational changes in the sector. I always thought “next gen” was a funny little term for Generation Y, connoting an image of a sea of young, fresh faces pumping our fists into the air, ready to take over the world. I wish we had had more time to discuss it, but I recall that my main comment to Mark was that I didn’t necessarily think that the next generation, namely Generation Y, represented drastic change. I was shocked at myself as soon as the words left my mouth. With all of my commentary on how nonprofits need Generation Y leadership, my sense was that although we have vast potential, the majority of us “next gen” folk are not using our skills, education, or power to change the status quo. Rather, much of our complaining rallying within the nonprofit sector has been around improving work conditions, and obtaining higher salaries. While it’s clear that young people really want to work in the nonprofit sector, it’s still not entirely clear to me whether we really want to develop the kind of leadership that will effect real social change. Are we still interested in the pursuit of truth and justice? If not, then who moved our values?
Somebody said:
To be young and not be revolutionary is a biological contradiction.
Very well, then, we contradict ourselves. Just because we’re young, does not necessarily mean we really want things to change. As it turns out, we’re not talking about a revolution. At least not in the traditional sense if, by revolution, we are referring to one of its many definitions:
- a fundamental change in power or organizational structure,
- a sudden, complete or marked change in something,
- or even the Latin “revolutio,” to turn over
Most Generation Y nonprofit leaders are not thinking about changing anything. The “next gen” is pretty much still emulating the older generations, afraid to fail, trying not to rock the boat for fear we won’t ever get a chance to sit at the big kids table. We are trying to get the right education so we can learn how to do all the right things at the right time so we can get the right jobs so we can move up into the right positions so someone can bestow upon us the right kind of power that will allow us to finally make a difference and make things right in the world. Believe me, I know because I get tons of related questions through this and my other blog. We forget that even in the 21st century, the fundamental aspects of creating change have not changed.
We forget that:
The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution is not a Cause on Facebook.
The revolution will not be Twittered.
The revolution will not be webinared or webcast and will not be available for download afterward.
The revolution will not be funded.
The revolution will not happen if we wait for permission.
The revolution will not happen if we keep our mouths shut.
The revolution is not (entirely) online and you cannot access it with your iPod or even on your shiny new Mac. The revolution is out there in your community doing the dirty, messy work of 2 million nonprofits, speaking out to oppose that which you are against and speaking up to advance what you are for. The revolution is taking responsibility for our schools and joining your daughter’s PTA, running for a seat on the board of your neighborhood association. The revolution requires the courageous leadership of you and me and everyone we know. We must be the change we wish to see.
Does Generation Y really want change? If the answer is yes, then we’re going to have to prove it.
Just to throw my two-cents in, I have often felt a bit isolated in “next gen” conversations lately for the reasons you have listed. Many of them revolve around how to improve leadership skills and one’s own lot in life within the current leadership structures. I find deep conversations on changing current structures (which tend to be hierarchic), leading in a new way, or even what leadership can mean rather than what it has meant, to be few and far between. I know that my own views on leadership are far more “out there” than is probably practical, yet I think we need to discuss, consider, and even act on some radical notions if only to learn from our failures.
I never thought of the discussion in these terms, but now that you’ve spelled it out like this … whoa. I feel unsettled. And I’m also wondering if this why my passion/loyalty lies not with the sector, but with my function (I’m a writer/communicator).
Perhaps my subconscious picked up on this disconnect well before I did today. Maybe that’s why I think the world will be changed not through one sector, but collective behaviors.
And the more I think about it, the more I think your analysis jives with other touted Gen Y behavior. We’ve grown up comfy in the golden years. On some deeper level, do we perceive rocking the boat that carried us here as too risky? Too unwanted? Dare I say we’re being selfish or afraid?
Whatever the case, you’ve called my conscience to task, Rosetta. I’m going to take a hard look at what’s driving my work, and figure out where I fall on this spectrum. Because I have a feeling it’s not as positive or revolutionary as I’d like it to be.
Thanks for an excellent, thought-provoking post.
This article doesn’t make much sense to me. What’s revolutionary about joining the PTA or running for a seat on the board of your neighborhood association? Absolutely nothing. Joining he PTA is a barely even a progressive action- it’s used to pacify parents that should be quite worried about the having their children raised by the state. The education system in this country exists so that both parents can work (and be taxed) and so that children learn that behaving and doing what one is told is the ONLY way to succeed. They feed the youth of this country filth for food and tell them that every school year exists so you can go to the next year, and that their passion wait, and that if you don’t think that you should spend 40 hours a week strapped to a desk then there is something wrong with you, and you ought to be medicated. It’s dehumanizing, outmoded, and offensive to anyone that values what makes humanity special.
You want revolutionary? Work less, and for your self, and take time everyday to spend with children, yours or anothers, and teach them how to learn, while giving them inspiration, insight, and encouragement.
And how about running for a seat on the board of your neighborhood association? What sort of neighborhood to people live in? This could be a revolutionary action, if used in the right way; if used to start a neighborhood watch, or set beautification standards, then forget it.
Why would you say “We forget that…” and then a series of cliched things that the youth does will not be revolutionary? Sometimes, revolutions ARE twittered (Iran), and Facebook Causes are probably the best use for that system. What’s revolutionary- voting? going to college? reading buzz-word laden blogs like this?
Hi Rosetta,
I think one of the keys to your post here is related to how we define the word “revolution” and then actually try to assess whether revolution is necessary to achieve a better world (at least in the U.S.) I like that you stress as important the work that takes place outside of the Internet. At the same time, I think the points brought up by Jarred are good ones. Technology has shown itself to have potential in facilitating direct action and charitable giving. And it does matter whether or not we accept the terms of action as implicitly sanctioned by our existing institutions (eg; the PTA). The revolution that really occurred on this continent was not so much the formation of the United States, but the supplanting of native ways of life by a life focused more on capital and private property. It’s unlikely that we’ll return to the ways of the first Americans and Mexicans and it’s also unlikely that we’ll be able to continue as a primarily acquisitive society. So, in light of all this, you need to ask…is the change we need revolutionary? Counter-revolutionary? Evolutionary? How does your vision of the right kind of nonprofit leadership fit with your idea of “revolution”? The answer to this matters. I see you reaching towards a good discourse here about what makes people effective in nonprofits and enables them to foster real beneficial change, not just a cool way to make a living and become an “important person”. I’d like to see you develop it some more in future posts.
@Eric – Thanks for sharing your feelings here. I’ve been thinking lately of a quote by Richard Foster:
“Superficiality is the curse of our age. The doctrine of instant satisfaction is a primary spiritual problem. The desperate need today is not for a greater number of intelligent people, or gifted people, but for deep people.”
I do agree with you in that many of our conversations amongst peers our age are not as deep as they could be…which makes me wonder why. Do we feel that since we don’t yet have the positions or the power that we don’t have the luxury of having those kinds of conversations about leadership? Or is it that we are still defining leadership AS the position title itself?
@Julia – Thank you for commenting so thoughtfully here. Part of the reason I wrote it is because I am feeling unsettled too…not just with my generation, but with myself. Am I staying true to my passion for change?
I like what you said about the world being changed through collective behaviors – not just the nonprofit sector. Indeed it is the parents, the teachers, the volunteers, the writers, the poets as well as all the nonprofit folks that will contribute to lasting change in the world.
@Jarred – Thank you for reading! I think I use the word ‘revolution’ and ‘change’ interchangeably…it is just semantics to me really. What I think we both agree on is that change does not happen by going along with the status quo…no matter what you think of PTA or neighborhood associations as examples. You CAN be revolutionary in whatever arena of social change you choose. The point is to make that choice. Thanks for bringing up the Iranian’s struggle that was documented on Twitter…but it did not necessarily happen there. It happened in the streets, by the people, raising their voices, demanding their rights. As for college, voting, etc. I think that it’s not really about where you GO to make change, but what you DO with that power when you get it. Appreciate your thoughts!
@Stephen – Wonderful, wonderful questions you’ve posed here. Thank you for reading and taking the time to comment. This is, indeed, a thread I’ve been trying to explore more on this blog…what DOES good nonprofit leadership look like? And how do we learn from it when we see it?
Thanks for giving me more to think about!
I noticed you used the phrase, “The revolution will not be funded.” Have you had a chance to read the book by that title? Having worked briefly and naively in philanthropy, I found that the book’s arguments rang surprisingly and disappointingly true. I’m curious what your thoughts are and why you chose to include that phrase in your list.