----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mike Gurstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:27 AM
Subject: Column:DF: Generation Hexed


> CONNECTIONS: July 2001
>
> Generation Hexed
>
> By David Forrest
>
> � David Forrest, July 2001
>
> Recent dot-com failures and layoffs will leave more than devastated stock
> markets in their wake. Online commerce is destined to continue, but the
> failing fortunes of this new breed of wacky, zany and creative Internet
> companies will likely mark the end of a generational experiment in
changing
> the world.
>
> There are echoes of an earlier time in the enthusiasms, excesses and
> rhetoric of the dot-com start-ups. Rejection of established institutions
and
> the creation of a counterculture based on personal freedom, creativity,
new
> forms of community, and control over one's own life are themes that
resonate
> from the experiences of another generation in the 1960s.
>
> Quoted in The New Republic last January, recent Harvard Business School
> Graduate Phil Buchanan summed up the spirit of the dot-com experiment in
> words that recall Haight Ashbury's Summer of Love. "It was as if people
were
> talking about a social movement when they talked about e-commerce and the
> Internet. You would literally hear people say, 'I have to go to Silicon
> Valley and be part of this because I don't want to have to answer my
> grandchildren's Where were you when everything changed? and say I was
> working at some boring old-economy company in the Northeast.'"
>
> Generation X - born between 1961 and 1981 - the 13th generation in the
> United States, has inherited a period in history when change is constant,
> careers uncertain and security elusive. Faced with fewer options than
their
> parents, and a life with no guarantees, many have become risk takers. A
1993
> study conducted by Marquette University and the University of Michigan
found
> that 70 percent of new business start-ups were created by entrepreneurs
> between the ages of 25 and 34.
>
> The gulf between Generation X and its parents' generation is profound. "No
> other generation in living memory has come of age with such a sense of
> social distance - of adults doing so little for them and expecting so
little
> from them," William Strauss and Neil Howe said in their book Generations:
> The History of America's Future, published in 1991.
>
> A Time magazine article published in 1997 reported the results of a survey
> conducted by the Center for Policy Alternatives, a Washington think tank:
> "72% of 18-24-year-olds believe this generation 'has an important voice,
but
> no one seems to hear it.' Asked how older generations viewed them, their
top
> answers were 'lazy,' 'confused' and 'unfocused.' Asked how they saw
> themselves, they replied 'ambitious,' 'determined' and 'independent.'"
>
> The creative frenzy of dot-com experimentation presented a unique
> opportunity for Gen Xers to actualize their ambition, determination and
> independence - creating a casual, fluid and high-energy workplace that was
> radically different from anything seen before in traditional companies.
The
> hallmark of these new economy ventures was their sheer youth and boundless
> creativity. Twenty- and thirtysomethings with visionary ideas had a real
> shot at unlimited riches. More often than not, they succeeded. Just as
> important in their own eyes, they had fun.
>
> Most of these companies spent lavishly and never made money. And while the
> establishment enthusiastically bought into the dot-com field of dreams, in
> the end it had less enthusiasm for risk and more interest in collecting
the
> promised returns on its investments. This February the New York Times
> reported that the Nasdaq 100 was still trading "at 811 times the combined
> earnings of the companies in the index."
>
> While market reaction was long delayed, it finally came with a vengeance.
> According to the Washington Post, venture capital funding for Internet
> companies fell 45 percent last year, representing a drop of $6.5 billion.
> Hundreds of companies have closed, laying off tens of thousands of
workers.
> It's been a very hard landing and a tough adjustment for a generation of
> workers who felt they had touched the Holy Grail. As in the 1960s, it
> appears that the expected revolution will never materialize.
>
> "Last year 80 percent of the technical jobs were creative, new. Now it's,
> like, 80 percent practical," Paul Villella, president of HireStrategy.com,
> was quoted as saying in a recent Washington Post article. "We've seen a
> complete reversal in the job market. It's not fun, innovative stuff
anymore.
> It's more 'we-gotta-get-it-done and make-it-work' type work."
>
> The dot-com experiment is over and the signs of retrenchment are growing.
> Bricks-and-mortar companies look more attractive these days, and new
economy
> revolutionaries are returning to more traditional jobs. Many will take
their
> Internet skills back to mainstream companies, helping them to adapt to a
> more slowly evolving online world. It's not the dream they fought for, and
> there's little likelihood now of windfall gains.
>
> Writing in The New Republic last January, Michelle Goldberg summed up
their
> predicament. "Many of my friends are out of work, three magazines I
> regularly wrote for have folded in the last two months, and more will
likely
> follow. I'm still making a living, but the excitement that crackled
through
> San Francisco in the last couple of years - the feeling that a new world
was
> being born, that exhilarating opportunities abounded, that I couldn't
> forgive myself for missing one single second of it - well, that's gone."
>
> While the world won't miss the over-the-top excesses of the dot-com
> start-ups, it surely needs the ambition, determination and independence of
> these Internet pioneers. Society and the workplace must find new places to
> apply their energy, commitment and creativity. They've taught us important
> lessons about living a dream and pushing the boundaries, and there's too
> much to lose if they choose instead to drop out.
>
>
> RESOURCES:
>
> Business Week - March 20, 2001 - Legacies of the Dot-Com Revolution
> http://www.businessweek.com/careers/content/mar2001/ca20010320_628.htm
>
> The New Republic - January 23, 2001 -
> Fall to Grace
> http://www.thenewrepublic.com/012901/soskis012901.html
>
> The New Republic - January 23, 2001 -
> Where do Gen-Xers Want to Go Today?
> http://www.thenewrepublic.com/cyberspace/goldberg012401.html
>
> The Wall Street Journal Online - November 15, 2000 -
> Midlife Crisis Hits Young Dot-Commers
> http://www.zdnet.com/ecommerce/stories/main/0,10475,2654115-2,00.html
>
> Time Magazine - June 9, 1997 -
> Great Xpectations
>
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1997/dom/970609/society.great_xpectat.html
>
> Washington Post - April 20, 2001 -
> Collapse of Dot-Coms Stifles Tech Innovators
> http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/165077.html
>
> Washington Post - April 25, 2001 -
> As Dot-Coms Fall, so does Generation X's Moment in Sun
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A61358-2001Apr24
>
> ____________________________________
>
> David Forrest is president of Global Vision Consulting Ltd., a firm that
> helps organizations turn strategy into action. He has published more than
a
> hundred articles on trends in business and technology.
>
> Bob Este <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> regularly forwards David Forrest's columns to The
> Alliance for Capitalizing on Change and guests under a special
distribution
> agreement.  If you wish to comment or ask Mr. Forrest a question regarding
> one of his columns, you can reach him at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> ____________________________________
> If you no longer wish to receive David's columns, simply email
"unsubscribe
> DF" to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

Reply via email to