Twenty-somethings: PAY ATTENTION
Don: That’s your job! I give you money, you give me ideas!
Peggy: And you never say thank you!
Don: That’s what the money is for! You are young. You will get your recognition. And honestly, it is absolutely ridiculous to be two years into your career and counting your ideas. Everything to you is an opportunity.
Really? So let your future stars stew? Diminish their initial accomplishments? Push the date of recognition out into the future instead of acknowledging progression?
30+ somethings: if you think being austere and distant while judiciously ladling subtle pats on the back once a lifetime is motivating us, you’re right in a sense. It is motivating us to leave. I’m not sticking around at a firm that doesn’t acknowledge my efforts expediently, and that’s a problem for you, because I’m good. Too much of this attitude and you’re going to look to the backbone of a firm full of grunts with no qualifications beyond an inability to move on. You’re supposed to cultivate strong personalities with big ideas, not let them starve! They’re your future leaders!
The whole point of Mad Men is that you aren’t supposed to be emulating these people. They are not examples, they are terrible warnings; Don Draper is an awful boss who doesn’t understand how to relate to people. That’s why he fails - because no one in his life gets what they need, and his individual brilliance is never quite enough to compensate. So the next time you do a side-part and put on a fedora, keep in mind you’re wearing a costume that says “I don’t understand my favorite television show.” And if you manage like him, you shouldn’t expect success.
First of all, a bit of context which may be helpful. I am 27. I’m somewhere in between my “twenties” and my “thirties.” I also run a company of about thirty people. So my opinion on this scene — and the relative merits of its “advice” — comes with that background. I have also at times sought praise too much (my first grade teacher actually commented on this on my first report card: “Michael seeks praise and reinforcement too often”) and I’ve had to readjust my approach.
I think that the scene is extremely valuable and contains real insight that should be helpful to people regardless of age. Here’s why: as an adult you should have the strength of character that allows you to determine, somewhat definitively, whether or not you are doing a good job. If you need constant pats on the back to know that you are doing a good job, or to stroke your ego, you need to spend more time developing your sense of self. Spending your life waiting for and relying on external validation is a very poor way to live.
Apart from that one central takeaway is this: as an employee — or, really, as a person — you should not need and you should not expect constant positive reinforcement. As an employer — or, really, as a person — you should not feel the need to offer constant positive reinforcement. That said, people should offer praise when it’s due and earned. Saying “good job” doesn’t cost anyone anything and it can in fact be very beneficial. But not for the sake of saying “good job” — instead praise should be offered for good work that you would like to see more of. Praise shouldn’t be given so much that it loses its meaning.
I think the reason why this scene resonates so much is that there are lot of people out there — many in their twenties — who rely on external positive input for their sense of self and achievement. These same people often seem to miss the subtle hints that they are not doing a good job. It’s almost like feedback has been cheapened: the norm is overwhelming positive feedback. If one does a really excellent job the praise must be turned up to 11. Even worse, when someone does a poor job — or just a middling job — the lack of praise isn’t enough to deliver the message that the job done is not good.
This generation does not do well with “you could have done that better.” The result of such feedback should be self-examination and questions about how to do the job better next time. Instead, too often, the result is “why don’t you like me?” or “why don’t you value me?” This should not be the takeaway: the takeaway should be “how can I do a better job next time?”
Again, this all comes back to having a healthy and strong sense of self. If your ego is in the “right” place you should be able to know that you’re doing a good job without other people telling you so… and you should be able to understand that you’re doing a poor job and can improve without too much prodding. The truth is that in a work environment you’re paid to do a good job, and your reward is your paycheck. It’s up to you to make the most of it. A good manager will also mentor you and tell you when you’re doing well and when you’re not… but it is not the job of your manager to be your ego stroker.
Much of this season of Mad Men has focussed on the generation gap between the older, established players (Don, Roger), the younger up-and-comers (Peggy, Pete) and those who sit between both worlds (Joan). It’s great to see the show’s thematic content used as fodder for discussion about today’s workplace. Clearly, the inter-generational push-and-pull is nothing new, but I think Mike brings up a really good point about the new “norm” of feedback: a baseline positive. It probably derives from an educational background of “good effort! that’s not quite right, but you should be proud of how hard you tried”, or something along those lines. When you reach a workplace environment where there’s just not enough time for such pleasantries, or stakes are too high for such feedback, a response like “this is wrong, go back and try again” becomes absolutely crushing - not because it’s particularly negative (like Don’s “You should be thanking me every morning when you wake up, along with Jesus, for giving you another day!”), but because anything LESS than positive feedback is negative.
It’s not a clearcut issue of young workers needing to re-evaluate their workplace expectations. I know I’ve been frustrated in the past for receiving less-than-positive feedback from a boss for whom I have little-to-no respect (ie a career middle manager). The interesting part of all this is that I actually CRAVE constructive criticism from a mentor or manager I admire - in order to improve my own skills. It’s why I’d really advocate an apprenticeship model for developers, since I think an association with a mentor could do more to improve someone’s coding and design thinking than any number of books, no matter how well presented.
