In many organizations today, it is not uncommon to hear comments such as:

• “Young employees are difficult to manage.”

• “They ask too many questions when assigned a task.”

• “A small amount of feedback makes them withdraw or react defensively.”

• “They only care about what they will get in return.”

These observations are not entirely unfounded. Younger employees do differ in their career expectations, communication styles, definitions of success, and relationships with organizations. However, it would be overly simplistic to reduce every issue to a single conclusion: Gen Z is difficult to manage.

A fairer question should be asked: Is Gen Z truly difficult to manage, or are some management practices that worked effectively in the past no longer suitable for the new context?

People Should Not Be Managed Through “Generational Labels”

Gen Z is commonly understood as the generation born from the latter half of the 1990s to the early 2010s. They grew up with the internet, social media, smartphones, and almost immediate access to information. This has clearly influenced how they learn, communicate, and make decisions. They are generally accustomed to searching for information quickly, comparing multiple sources, and asking questions when they do not fully understand a request.

However, Gen Z is not a completely homogeneous group. A young employee working in technology in a major city may have very different experiences from someone of the same generation working in manufacturing, retail, or local service industries. Therefore, the label “Gen Z” may help managers identify certain broad tendencies, but it cannot replace an understanding of each individual.

If managers automatically assume that younger employees lack perseverance, are overly sensitive, or are disloyal, they may easily fall into confirmation bias: paying attention only to behaviors that reinforce their existing assumptions while overlooking positive evidence.

Managing people by generation should only serve as a reference point. A more appropriate approach is to manage individuals according to their capabilities, motivations, and levels of maturity.

Gen Z Is Not Lacking in Ambition, but They Define Success Differently

One common perception is that younger employees are no longer highly ambitious in their careers. The reality is more complex. Deloitte’s 2025 Global Gen Z and Millennial Survey, which included more than 23,482 respondents across 44 countries, found that only a small proportion of Gen Z respondents considered reaching a senior leadership position their most important career goal. However, this does not mean that they lack motivation. They place strong emphasis on opportunities for learning and development, work-life balance, and the ability to find meaning through their work.

“Only 6% of Gen Zs consider reaching a senior leadership position as a primary career goal, but they cite learning and development among the top three reasons they chose their current employer, just behind good work/life balance and opportunities to progress in their careers.”
- According to Deloitte Global’s 2025 Gen Z and Millennial Survey.

In other words, some younger employees no longer view job titles as the only measure of success. They may ask questions such as:

• What capabilities will this role help me develop?

• Will I be able to learn from my manager?

• Will my efforts be recognized fairly?

• Is this role aligned with my long-term direction?

• What kind of impact can I create?

This reflects the mindset of “What’s in it for me?” - “What value does this bring to me?”

This question is sometimes interpreted as selfishness. From another perspective, however, it reflects a need to understand the relationship between work, personal development, and contribution to the organization. Managers do not need to satisfy every employee expectation. However, they do need to help employees understand the value of their work and the reasoning behind the requirements placed upon them.

Why Do Traditional Management Approaches Often Create Conflict with Younger Employees?

1. Assigning Tasks Without Explaining the Purpose

Some managers are accustomed to giving instructions in the following manner: “Just do it. You will understand later.” This approach may be effective in environments that place a strong emphasis on compliance and clearly defined hierarchies. However, when younger employees do not understand the purpose of a task, they may feel that they are merely completing an isolated assignment.

When an employee asks, “Why do we need to do this?”, the manager may interpret the question as resistance or a lack of compliance. However, it may also reflect a need to understand the context so that the work can be performed more effectively.

A clear management request should not only answer the question “What needs to be done?” It should also clarify:

• Why is this task important?

• What is the expected outcome?

• How does the task affect customers or other departments?

• What are the standards for completion?

When employees understand the objective, they are more likely to act proactively and regulate their own performance.

2. Providing Feedback Only When Employees Make Mistakes

In many organizations, managers provide little feedback when everything is proceeding normally. Conversations take place only when mistakes occur. As a result, employees may not know what they are doing well, what they should continue doing, or what they need to improve before an issue becomes serious.

Deloitte has found that many Gen Z and Millennial employees feel that their managers do not fully meet expectations in their roles as guides, mentors, and developers of talent. At the same time, learning and development opportunities are among the most important factors influencing their choice of employer.

Effective feedback does not need to wait until the annual performance review. It may take the form of a short conversation after a meeting, a project, or a customer-service situation:

“Your presentation of the data was quite clear. However, next time, you should present the conclusion earlier so that the audience can grasp the key message more quickly.”

The more specific and timely the feedback, the easier it is for employees to translate it into action.

3. Controlling the Process Instead of Managing Results

Some managers evaluate employees primarily on how long they are present at work, how quickly they respond to messages, or whether they follow the manager’s preferred method. Meanwhile, younger employees tend to expect greater autonomy in how they perform their work.

Empowerment does not mean a lack of control. Managers still need to clarify:

• The required outcome.

• The completion deadline.

• The quality standards.

• The boundaries that must not be exceeded.

• When employees are required to report or seek approval.

Once these factors have been clarified, employees should be allowed to choose an appropriate method of execution.

Modern management is not about monitoring every movement. It is about building a mechanism that enables employees to exercise autonomy within an agreed scope of responsibility.

4. Expecting Initiative Without Creating Safety for Experimentation

Organizations often expect younger employees to be creative, think boldly, and take action. However, when they present an incomplete idea or make a mistake, the manager’s first reaction may be criticism.

In such an environment, the safest choice for employees is to remain silent, wait for instructions, and do only what they have been explicitly told to do. The manager may then conclude that the employees lack initiative.

To encourage initiative, organizations need to distinguish clearly between:

• Mistakes caused by a lack of responsibility.

• Mistakes caused by insufficient capability.

• Mistakes made during controlled experimentation.

These three types of mistakes cannot be handled in the same way.

Being “difficult to manage” is sometimes a sign of an expectation gap. Many conflicts between managers and younger employees do not arise from a lack of goodwill. They emerge because the two sides are operating from different frames of reference. Neither side is entirely right or entirely wrong. The issue is that expectations have not been clearly discussed and aligned.

What Should Managers Change?

• First, assign work according to the principle of “clear objectives – clear outcomes – clear authority.”

• Second, shift from being a commander to being a coach.

• Third, provide brief but frequent and timely feedback.

• Fourth, clarify career development pathways and progression opportunities.

• Fifth, manage through fairness rather than indulgence.

The Role of L&D in Bridging the Generational Gap

This issue cannot be addressed solely through a training program designed for Gen Z. Organizations need to develop both sides simultaneously.

For Managers

L&D programs should focus on:

• Managing a multigenerational workforce.

• Delegation and empowerment.

• Workplace coaching.

• Effective feedback.

• Performance management.

• Motivation and engagement.

• Psychological safety.

• Change management.

For Younger Employees

Development should focus on:

• Professional responsibility.

• Adaptability.

• Communication with managers.

• Emotional self-management.

• Problem-solving thinking.

• The ability to receive feedback.

• Perseverance and execution discipline.

L&D should not take the side of any single generation. Its role is to build a shared language, shared capabilities, and shared mechanisms for collaboration so that different generations can work effectively together.

The nature of work is changing rapidly under the influence of technology, AI, and growing productivity pressure. Microsoft has identified a notable paradox: most employees feel that they lack sufficient time or energy to complete their work, while more than half of leaders still expect productivity to continue increasing.

In this context, the capability of direct managers becomes even more important. Their role is not limited to assigning work. They must also help employees learn faster, adapt more effectively, and use technology more productively.

Conclusion

Gen Z has distinct characteristics, but difference does not mean that they are difficult to manage.

• Behind the act of asking questions may be a need to understand the objective clearly.

• Behind the desire for feedback may be a need for development.

• Behind the demand for flexibility may be a desire to be evaluated based on effectiveness rather than formality.

• Behind the question “What’s in it for me?” may not simply be personal benefit, but also a need to understand what the work means for their own growth.

Therefore, before concluding that younger employees lack initiative, commitment, or are difficult to manage, managers should ask themselves:

• Have I assigned the work clearly enough?

• Have I delegated an appropriate level of authority?

• Have I provided feedback in a timely manner?

• Am I genuinely helping employees grow?

The most important question is no longer: “How can Gen Z fully adapt to the current management approach?”

Instead, it is: “What should organizations and managers change so that different generations can make the best use of their capabilities?”

This is also the guiding spirit behind Lead-UP Academy’s “90-Second Practical Management” video series: rather than rushing to judge an entire generation, we work with organizations and management teams to re-examine how work is assigned, authority is delegated, feedback is provided, and people are developed, so that every generation has the opportunity to make the fullest use of its capabilities for the shared development of the organization.

---

Lead-UP Academy | Learn to Act – Act to Lead