Socrates move over, the Millennials are here!

The millennial generation or generation Y is considered the most diverse generation to attend college (Lindsay, 2005, p 189-199). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it is estimated that the millennial generation will make up more than 25% of the U.S. workforce, about 40 plus million workers, in 2013.  44 percent read blogs and 76 percent use instant messaging/testing (The Learning Café, 2009). They are a generation that can parallel process; their brain is conditioned to effectively multi-task (Prensky, 2001). “There is a growing body of research that their IQ’s, their raw ability to access and use their intelligence has grown markedly and at a level of statistical significance” (Abram, 2009, p. 57). The millennial generation expect accelerated learning and prefer working in a culture that is aligned with their values.

Are we set up to lead today’s millennial lawyers?  Are we still trying to teach law students and young associates based on some remnant of Socratic methodology, the primary teaching style used in U.S. law schools (Sullivan et al., 2007). This dominant approach of teaching was designed to create opposition and place in question the student’s way of thinking (Scott, 2000). Supporters of Socratic style learning believe that it stimulates active involvement on the part of the lawyer to prepare them to be adversarial and to be able to quickly retort (Mertz, 2007). The millennial lawyer, however, is no longer the lawyer the Socratic style learning or authoritative leadership was designed for--their learning patterns have changed. Research indicates that this is a generation of “little patience for lectures, step-by-step logic and tell-test instruction” (Prensky, 2001, p 3). Millennials are more entrepreneurially spirited and more self-reliant (Jayson, 2006).

Neuroscience has found that styles of learning condition the brain and such past conditioning affects how we act in the future (Prensky, 2001, quoting Dr. Bruce D. Perry).   The millennial generation has been conditioned to be team oriented and to seek socially acceptable solutions juxtaposition to the adversarial and argumentative approach to resolving issues the Socratic way. This will require a teaching style that is more sensitive to the millennial lawyer’s ideas, aspirations and team spirit. Rather than being directed or challenged, this digital generation wants to experience things themselves. They are technologically savvy and want to figure things out on their own, their way (Goldgehn, 2004).

Studies show that the use of technology stimulates and increases brain activity (Fitz, 2009, p. 1; Johnson, 2009, p. 1). Technology also affected the way Generation Y interacts with others.  A survey of 27,317 students from 90 four-year and 8 two-year schools in the United States found most to be technology-savvy (Salaway, Caruso, & Nelson, 2008). Unlike past generations, the millennial generation actively uses information technology (IT) tools to communicate and express themselves (Salaway, Caruso, & Nelson, 2008). Through smart phones, the internet and social networks, the Millennial Generation are continuously connected and seek advice outside the work place even during working hours. According to Jim Taylor, Vice Chairman of The Harrison Group, this generation spends at least 72 hours per week of connected time (Tyler, 2008). 

In recent research done by Deloitte (McElroy, 2010), those surveyed believed that there is a gap in developing effective leadership. Leaders “who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language” (Prensky, 2001, p. 2).  Lawyer leaders who accept that the millennial lawyer thinks and processes differently and who is willing to speak their “language” are more likely to retain talent.

However, those lawyer leaders who are more likely to lead their young associates based on some remnant of Socratic methodology, the primary teaching style used in U.S. law schools (Sullivan et al., 2007) may not be as successful. This dominant approach of teaching was designed to create opposition and place in question the student’s way of thinking (Scott, 2000).  Supporters of the Socratic style of learning believe that it stimulates active involvement and prepares law students to be adversarial and to be able to quickly retort (Mertz, 2007).  The millennial lawyer, however, is no longer the lawyer that the Socratic style of learning promoting authoritative leadership was designed for; these future lawyers’ learning patterns are different and not readily adapting to the Socratic teaching methodology.  Research indicates that this is a generation of “little patience for lectures, step-by-step logic and tell-test instruction” (Prensky, 2001, p. 3).  Millennials have more of an entrepreneurial spirit and are more self-reliant (Jayson, 2006).

With an increased need to focus on leadership, lawyer leaders will have to shift from management-based relationships to leadership-based relationships.  Smith and Marrow (2008) noted that 93% of the 350 people surveyed by the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) stated that the challenges they face in the workplace are more complex than they were five years ago and that 85% felt that the definition of “effective leadership” had changed in that same five-year period.  

Many lawyer leadership issues seemingly stem from low or undeveloped emotional intelligence.  Smith and Marrow (2008) noted that lawyers need to be better communicators and to improve teamwork and collaboration in both associate and client service.  However, today’s law professors and legal leaders may be both psychologically and behaviorally more challenged in achieving these competencies if they have not had this type of skills training. The millennial lawyer just may be the impetus to changing teaching and leadership styles of Law schools and law firms respectively.