Age, Experience and Worldview
Where does innovation come from? I think we’ve all been in a few meetings where “youth” is the answer. If you’re like me, you’ve also heard “new employees,” regardless of age. I don’t think I’ve yet heard “those close to retirement,” but it wouldn’t surprise me.
To be honest, I always kind of dread these discussions. It’s not that I don’t want to be part of a discussion about innovation; it’s that the perception of where innovation comes from feels quite tired and unexamined.
I want to take a peek at the source of innovation, the person. I do think a lot of innovation can come from youth. A different education, a constant immersion in a media-rich environment and a fresh introduction to the workplace is bound to give this cohort a number of “why is it done this way?” kind of moments.
Likewise, new public service employees enter an organization either with the “youth” lens or with the lens of someone who has been working in a different kind of structure. They may simply bring different approaches, or they may have that same sort of questioning “why?” moment.
Both of these groups bring something valuable to the table – a different perspective. They offer a shock to our current thinking. They haven’t been indoctrinated into the rules, structures and dogma that govern the way we do our jobs.
I don’t think, however, that innovative ideas come from a certain age or a certain set of experiences. Primarily, I think new ideas come from your worldview. Worldview is a nice all-encompassing word to describe how you see the world. It’s your description of reality. Perhaps another way to say it is that our worldview is the collection of conclusions we bring with us based on what we’ve seen.
As you can imagine, everyone’s worldview is different. You can be trusting or less trusting, more open to risk or less. You can believe in the power of a god and you can believe in the power of the state. You can think that social media is the end of community or a new beginning. When somebody believes in grassroots organization and somebody else believes in corporate benevolence, those different worldviews bring different/new/innovative solutions to addressing public issues. These differences create distinct approaches and different solutions to challenges.
The nature of most organizations is to build consistency and uniformity into everything, including how we think. The organization works hard to keep everything static and in control. Maybe you’re still having innovative ideas, but the typical response and reaction within the walls of the organization to new thinking makes it difficult to express those ideas (and continue expressing them).
What youth and new employees can bring is a distinct worldview that hasn’t yet been critically transformed. Eventually, most employees resolve themselves to a worldview that includes something like, “At work, it’s easier to follow the rules than to examine them.” Until that defeatist language is added to the worldview, some profound things are liable to slip out.
Accessing individuals who see a different reality and believe that change is attainable are key elements of innovation for me. Right now, the “low hanging fruit” are the individuals that readily bring that kind of thinking. It’s a mistake, however, to attribute that kind of thinking to a demographic cohort or a certain experience. We’re missing all the worldviews that are quietly being suppressed.
I was talking to a friend the other day and she said, “I came to government with a set of skills, abilities and passions, and none of them get used.”
Innovative ideas are there. We’re just not asking for them.

Nevin — I tend to wholeheartedly agree with your perspective on this topic of what type of individuals bring forth more to the table with respect to “innovation”. Worldview is definitely more important than age — at least from my observations / experience. As you know, I work for a technology company and I see examples of a diverse set of people expressing both innovative and conservative ideas. It really depends on the individual — age is only one factor and not the most important one.
Now the issue of organizational structure and how the human being within such a structure interact is probably a greater determinant of whether or not innovative thinking thrives or is choked. In your blog post you mention a co-worker that feels their skills are not utilized well by government. Not surprising — government organizations are typcially large bureaucracies. Don’t get me wrong — I’m not be critical of just government here. Large private corporations have the same problem with bureaucracy. There is a great quote that I saw one time (used to have it up on my wall at work) but I can’t for the life of me remember who it was or exactly what it said but it goes something like this:
“A large bureaucracy, with its need for linear logic and conformity to myriad rules and controls is the ultimate idea killer conceived of by man”.
I believe that this quote is generally true — take a look at a company like GM! I rest my case! This is why you see more disruptive innovation coming out of stealthy, small organizations. You’ll also notice a particular type of personality — worldview — attracted to such organizations. You’ll see the same people hating their jobs within government or other large bureaucracies. I work with someone like this.
Again, I totally agree with you — it’s about worldview and beliefs not age that drives innovative thinking. Some people just have what it takes to think beyond the state of the art while others are more conservative. Undoubtedly this cuts across all demographic cohorts.
Here’s an article that appeared recently which touches on the issue of workplace innovation and creativity. I think that this sums up quite nicely how age is not the only factor.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/managing/weekend-workout/workplace-creativity-shrivels-on-the-vine/article1474956/
Thanks Chris. As always, I appreciate your take.
I think one of the recurring themes when I write is my wish for organizations to realize (and address) the importance of “organizational structure and how the human being within such a structure interact.” I’m glad you see its relationship here.
At least in part, I’ve tried previously to address how I think an organization could operate differently to evoke more diversity of thought. If you haven’t read an old post of mine on The Three Cs, it’s one of my favourites. http://proceeduntilapprehended.com/2008/07/22/the-three-cs/