Food for thought: Exploring generational perspectives and fisheries

During a recent staff meeting, we discussed regional and generational differences. Jeff used a phrase that stood out as notably midwestern. A younger colleague asked about another linguistic topic: What does “…” in a text or email mean to you? Ellipsis comes to English from Latin, meaning “to leave out.” While everyone agreed that the presence of ellipses literally meant “something has been omitted,” the emotional connotations read very differently across generations. Senior staff tended to think of … as “trailing off,” as if what's being said is not a big deal. Staff members who identified themselves as “Millennials” or members of “Gen Z” felt strongly that ending a thought with an ellipsis indicated something was intentionally left unsaid to them. Without shared context, misunderstandings can quickly arise. Many forms of literature and social media have highlighted the behavioral and perspective differences between Generation Z, Millennials, Baby Boomers, and the now-rising Generation Alpha, often emphasizing how these generations differ in catchy sound bites (Chung, 2019; Collins, 2024; McCrindle et al., 2022; Twenge, 2010). When most minds reflect on generational perspectives in fisheries, technology is the first to come to mind. In the past 20 years, fisheries professionals have gone from flipping through books in libraries and mouth-pipetting to having a world of information buzzing in our pockets and a wide array of manual, electronic, and even automatic pipettors. Even though we are more connected as a society, there is an advertised growing philosophical gap between the various generations, with some going as far as to claim “intergenerational warfare” (Jones, 2020; Twenge, 2010). Generational theory is the work built upon definitions first explored by Karl Mannheim in his 1923 essay, “The Problem of Generations,” which describes the commonalities of individuals born within different periods and explains the social conflict and historical change in the United States (Hazlett, 1992). The basis for a generation is that young adults’ lived experience is much different than their elders. As people age, their perspectives and priorities change in response to that evolving world. The key generational events that shape a generation’s consciousness—such as terrorist attacks, wars, economic recessions, pandemics, and technological revolutions—shape the opportunities the new generation experiences during this critical stage of development, building who they are (Dimock, 2023; Milkman, 2017). The theory of generations suggests that historical events and social changes shape their perspectives and life paths, creating distinct generational patterns (Dimock, 2023; Lowe et al., 2020; Milkman, 2017). Generational theory and the “Generational Gap” emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, driven mainly by student protests from the Baby Boomers, credited with sparking a cultural revolution (Lowe et al., 2020). The Baby Boomer generation significantly impacted American culture, primarily due to their large numbers (Newport et al., 2014; Russell, 1987). A 1987 LA Times article described them as a “transformative” and “diverse” generation whose concerns became the nation’s concerns, with their experiences shaping national attention (Russell, 1987). However, the Baby Boomer generation is not uniform. Within those 19 years, different subgroups formed based on world events (like the Vietnam War and the election of Ronald Reagan) and factors like region, economic class, and gender. As a result, Baby Boomers have varied political views, influenced by the specific circumstances of their coming-of-age experiences (Newport et al., 2014). Despite its prevalence and history, contrary evidence challenging generational theory has led some prominent organizations to shift away from this entrenched belief. Commonalities span the generational cohorts, so much so that some question whether generational differences are real or the byproduct of age, and some go as far as to call them “tired stereotypes” and “a figment of our collective imagination” (Dimock, 2023; Duffy, 2021; Lowe et al., 2020). Interestingly, even with technology, Fristedt et al. (2021) demonstrated that despite different technology exposure, perspectives on technology unite across generations rather than just within. Kirschner and De Bruyckere (2017) showed that technological inclinations may have to do more with exposure than ­generational identity. There is growing momentum to end generational labels. After 170 social science researchers wrote a letter calling generational labels arbitrary and counterproductive, The Pew Research Institute ceased its use of generational categories, citing five reasons: (1) generational categories are not scientifically defined, (2) generational labels can lead to stereotypes and oversimplification, (3) discussions about generation often focus on differences instead of similarities, (4) conventional views of generations can carry an upper-class bias, and (5) people change over time (Cohen, 2022; Dimock, 2023). The petitioners for the change stated that there is no “empirical or theoretical justification” for naming generations outside of the Baby Boom, and divisions have no scientific basis (Cohen, 2022). Rudolph et al. (2021) addressed several myths surrounding generations, asserting that the intersection of age and period makes generations impossible to study and that no statistical models can disentangle generational effects that differ by country. Rudolph et al. (2021) suggest that perceptions of generations should be managed as they can lead to prejudice and a social tolerance for “generationalism,” a modern form of age stereotyping. While the debate over the existence of generations and generational theory is beyond our expertise, we recognize that our preconceived notions of differences based on generational identity can impact professional dynamics in fisheries, influencing stakeholder engagement, professional relationships, and mentoring. Fisheries management involves a complex network of interest groups, including governmental bodies, fishing communities, environmental organizations, scientists, and industry representatives. Management of the perception that different generations bring distinct values, attitudes, and approaches can alter the outcomes of fisheries management initiatives, impacting resource management, conservation, and collaboration outcomes. Open dialogue that respects each generation’s diverse perspectives can lead to more well-rounded decision making. For example, my young coworker approached me with curiosity rather than a perceived judgment of me when I used “…” in communication. Open dialogue requires saying something when you see something, staying neutral, and being willing to learn. In turn, respectful reciprocal knowledge-sharing and dialog can facilitate the exchange of expertise between groups and overcome potential biases. Mentoring in fisheries involves sharing knowledge, skills, and experiences between experienced and less experienced professionals. Formalized mentoring typically occurs in a one-way flow. However, less recognized forms arise, such as intergenerational, where professionals with diverse experiences exchange knowledge and collaborate informally through workshops and collaborations. In fisheries, as in other fields, generational labels can shape how professionals interact and learn from one another, often influencing assumptions, biases, and expectations. For effective mentoring—whether traditional or intergenerational—key elements are trust, respect, a safe space for learning, and openness to diverse perspectives, as this diversity enriches the learning environment and promotes growth for everyone involved. By focusing on respect, shared knowledge, and a commitment to learning, fisheries professionals can bridge perceived divides, creating a collaborative environment that supports learning, growth, effective management, and forward-looking conservation efforts. Regardless of generational identity, everyone wants to be respected and valued (Lowe et al., 2020). Biases generated by perceived generational identity can influence fisheries professionals’ communication. Those biases can broadly impact and potentially negatively affect attitudes toward resource management, obstruct responses to emerging challenges, stifle ­collaborations, and hinder our ability to recruit and retain fisheries professionals. By putting the label aside and fostering an environment of mutual respect and learning for all, fisheries professionals will be more effective collaborators and communicators able to generate more effective fisheries management. And remember how a simple exchange with a coworker can turn your team into a happier and more productive group.