[AchieveLife]

This hasn't been my experience at all as a young person. Really the old/young paradigm is a shallow mask of personality traits and their relative development.

As a young person I've encountered older individuals with the motive to

- Shape me into their image (duplicating the ego)

- Threatened by my existence (ego in survival mode)

- Oppress my voice and project what they think I should be (super-ego acting like a child)

- Attempt to take advantage of my 'youthful ignorance' (ego with neutral/evil alignment)

- Interact with me like an individual and genuinely place interest in the mutual growth (self)

I highly value people I run across who fit that last motive.

[jimrhods23]

"Oppress my voice and project what they think I should be (super-ego acting like a child)"

I'm in my 40s and am managing a team of developers in their 20s. What may sound like oppression many times is a desire to not go down a path to failure that I can see from a mile away, but someone with less experience may not even understand.

My way isn't always correct either. If you can back something up with great supporting evidence, you win. I find that many people now don't feel they need to back anything up with evidence and any sort of criticism is seen as oppression.

"Interact with me like an individual and genuinely place interest in the mutual growth"

I feel like if you don't run into someone who fits this motive, you won't even listen to what they have to say because you feel like you are being oppressed.

"Threatened by my existence (ego in survival mode)"

You can thank companies that fire the people with experience and hire the youthful and cheap for this.

[ok_coo]

Thinking about myself when I was that age, the biggest problem is that they don't know what they don't know. (myself included) And I'm still there, there's a ton I still don't know but looking back, it was egregious.

There is _no_ substitute for experience. That said, it's important to have employees of all ages. I just hope people can find a place to work that emphasizes building good teams instead of cost minimization because it's good to have a balance.

[JohnFen]

> That said, it's important to have employees of all ages.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

Experience is essential, as you point out. Experience is what lets you know well in advance what is likely to work and what isn't, what the most fruitful and harmful approaches are, and so forth.

Inexperience has its virtues as well. Experience (particularly recognizing and avoiding errors before they're made) is not 100% effective, and can sometimes make you discount an innovative approach that is valuable. Inexperienced people, by virtue of a lack of preconceptions, can sometimes come up with obviously impossible or impractical solutions that, in the end, aren't either of those things.

If a workforce has a diverse set of people, including diversity of experience, that makes the workforce stronger.

[AchieveLife]

> What may sound like oppression many times is a desire to not go down a path to failure that I can see from a mile away, but someone with less experience may not even understand.

There's a cultural difference here. In a culture of collaboration that experience is simulated for the group to grow mutually. In the hierarchical culture it's the objective reasoning that is the focal point. The difference is motivation of growth vs money.

> I feel like if you don't run into someone who fits this motive, you won't even listen to what they have to say because you feel like you are being oppressed.

I never said I won't listen. I value people who focus on collaboration because I can trust they have a stake in our mutual growth. This is not a feeling rather a thought.

> You can thank companies that fire the people with experience and hire the youthful and cheap for this.

No, I credit the people who create the bias around them in everyday interactions. Bottom line is that present day moments are not made up of stereotypes. People are responsible for their behaviors and attitudes.

[jimrhods23]

"There's a cultural difference here. In a culture of collaboration that experience is simulated for the group to grow mutually."

So, to 'grow mutually', we need to use ideas that never work or will take the project down a path of failure? This does not foster growth or success.

I want the best ideas to win, if it's mine or from an inexperienced colleague.

"The difference is motivation of growth vs money."

You can try bad ideas on your own time If you are working on a project and being paid for it, I don't really know how it doesn't have some motivation for money.

"I never said I won't listen. I value people who focus on collaboration because I can trust they have a stake in our mutual growth. This is not a feeling rather a thought."

Teaching you the proper way is focusing on mutual growth, so you will be successful in future projects that might involve the same problem.

"No, I credit the people who create the bias around them in everyday interactions. Bottom line is that present day moments are not made up of stereotypes. People are responsible for their behaviors and attitudes."

So you don't want to be told what to do and you have no problem with a company ushering out more experienced developers and replacing them with ones that are cheaper and younger.

While people are responsible for their behaviors and attitudes, I can't imagine if you were in the same situation you wouldn't be resentful. This is because you are young. In 15-20 years, I think your attitude and outlook on life will be much different.

[AchieveLife]

> So, to 'grow mutually', we need to use ideas that never work or will take the project down a path of failure? This does not foster growth or success.

Not sure where you are getting that from... Sounds like you have a negative bias towards inexperience. A collaborative culture sees situations as opportunities to grow.

> I want the best ideas to win, if it's mine or from an inexperienced colleague.

That describes a competitive/market culture in the organizational theory of Robert Quinn and Kim Cameron.

> Teaching you the proper way is focusing on mutual growth, so you will be successful in future projects that might involve the same problem.

I disagree. Teacher -> student relationship is one way. What I want is peer <-> peer focused on exchanging knowledge.

Personally, I've experienced what you are suggesting. It didn't work for me and my sound perspective was often dismissed.

> So you don't want to be told what to do and you have no problem with a company ushering out more experienced developers and replacing them with ones that are cheaper and younger.

Wooahhh, what a strawman argument. 1: I want autonomy in an organization. 2. Never said any of that.

> While people are responsible for their behaviors and attitudes, I can't imagine if you were in the same situation you wouldn't be resentful. This is because you are young. In 15-20 years, I think your attitude and outlook on life will be much different.

Don't project yourself onto me. You don't know me well enough to make that assertion.

Overall, based on your comments I think you have a lot of negative biases from past experiences that you are projecting on an internet stranger. It's ok to have our differences. There is no 'silver bullet' culture. I've participated in a culture similar to what you are suggesting. I grew a lot and enjoyed learning from others. I've grown older and want a different environment that I think is best for my growth and QOL.