Whether young people or seniors are better leaders in organisations has become a debatable topic. While I acknowledge why some people agree with this suggestion, I still strongly disagree with it.
Proponents argue that organisations should have young leaders for several reasons. They would say that young individuals can bring certain advantages to organizations, particularly their ability to drive innovation and adapt to trends. For instance, technology giants like Snapchat and Google were founded by young individuals whose open-mindedness facilitated groundbreaking ideas. Additionally, their sensitivity to emerging trends can enhance a company’s image and market position.
However, these strengths are often confined to industries like technology, where creativity and adaptability are paramount. In addition, innovation is just one aspect of management that can often be handled by other roles, whereas leadership demands a broader range of skills, including decision-making and team management. In more traditional sectors, younger leaders may struggle with these aspects due to their lack of experience and maturity, highlighting the critical role of seasoned leaders.
Nevertheless, I still completely oppose the given suggestion due to a number of factors. First of all, organizations operate better under the guidance of older leaders. With their extensive experience, older managers are better equipped to assess complex situations and make informed decisions, ensuring stability and long-term success. For example, Bernard Arnault, the 73-year-old leader of LVMH, has leveraged his deep industry knowledge to sustain the conglomerate’s growth and dominance in the luxury market.
In conclusion, it is understandable why there are young directors who bring vision and innovation to the organization. However, I still cannot support it given the aforementioned arguments.