Entitlement or Honesty?
posted by Frank Pasquale
The Millennial Law Prof blog has been rounding up good suggestions for bridging the “generation gap” between law profs and the majority of their students. The blog also advises law students, and makes the following point:
Millennials have to understand that they’re fighting an uphill battle against the perceptions of professors and employers that Millennials (a) are like Xers and (b) have an inflated sense of themselves. This means that Millennials have to approach these supervisors with a lot of humility until the supervisors realize what an asset Millennials really are.
As one who does not share that perception of Millennial self-aggrandizement, I have to wonder, where does it come from? Journalistic think pieces like Dan Zak’s “Me” provide some of the fodder, but that article only provided one clear empirical finding:
Narcissism and entitlement among college students have increased steadily since 1979, according to a study to be published this year in the Journal of Personality. Between that year and 2006, 16,000 college students were asked to pick between such paired statements as “I expect a great deal from other people” and “I like to do things for other people,” and “I will never be satisfied until I get all that I deserve” and “I will take my satisfactions as they come.” The data are clear: The ascent of narcissism and entitlement is dramatic. “What we really have is a culture that has increasingly emphasized feeling good about yourself and favoring the individual over the group,” says the study’s co-author, Jean Twenge. . .
Twenge is the author of Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled — and More Miserable Than Ever Before (Free Press, 2006). But I seem to remember this theme in books like Bellah et al.’s Habits of the Heart, or Christopher Lasch’s Culture of Narcissism–books written before most of the millennials were even born.
As with this study of pride and envy, I have a sense that what we may be seeing nowadays is less a new culture of self-indulgence than a culture of candor. Compare, for instance, the 90% or so of HLS students who (in Richard Kahlenberg’s early 1990s book Broken Contract) said upon entering law school that they wanted to pursue public interest work, with the following statistical finding:
A recent survey of 1,949 attorney wannabes taking the LSAT exam suggests the biggest driving forces are money and the chance to springboard into political office. Seventy-three percent of respondents, both male and female, told the test-preparation firm Kaplan that high income was a somewhat or very important factor for them, while 42 percent – disproportionately male – said they would probably or definitely ride their law degree into a run for political office. Public service? Righting wrongs? Intellectual challenge? Sorry: Those didn’t make the cut.
As Kahlenberg notes, less than 10% of his class at Harvard actually went on to go into public service work. The LSAT takers in the survey may well generate a higher percentage than that. It’s hard to see why, in a world of sky-high housing prices and harrowing insecurity about access to health insurance, the survey takers would be optimistic about their ability to take anything but the highest paying option. New economic realities and new candor may be driving cultural trends here far more than Twenge & Zak’s account of a rising sense entitlement.
Nevertheless, I will give Zak credit for rounding up some suggestions beneficial to all individuals, regardless of age:
“We are a dissatisfaction market society. Advertising constantly creates the notion that whatever we have is not enough. We can declare independence of that” [says psychologist Carl Pickhardt]. . . .But how? It’s about realigning our expectations and then squelching the nagging voice in our minds that propels our discontent.
Pennsylvania psychologist Pauline Wallin calls this voice our “inner brat,” which is an evil twin to our “inner child.” . . . “We have enough big things to be upset about, and people are losing their minds over small things,” she says. “Frustration leads to aggression. If you don’t let yourself get frustrated in the first place, then you don’t get so angry and you don’t blow things out of proportion.”
Another habit to form is being grateful. Clinical experiments show that people who express gratitude in some form every day live more-content lives, and they record lower levels of narcissism and entitlement. “On the drive home from work, it’s a matter of turning the radio off and thinking about how wonderful your job is or, if your job sucks, how wonderful your family is or, if your family’s in shambles, how good your health is,” says psychology professor Mike McCullough, who studies gratitude at the University of Miami.
Or, as Thich Nhat Hanh has said, nearly every day is a great day to be thankful one does not have a toothache.
March 5, 2008 at 7:42 am
Posted in: Economic Analysis of Law
Print This Post
Responses (11)
John C - March 5, 2008 at 9:05 am
I think a “culture of candor” is a good way to put it, although a “culture of rudeness to your supervisor” is perhaps another. I have had more than a few run-ins with first year associates and summer associates who seem not only to think that they know everything about what they are doing (which they do not), but that they have no problem telling their supervisors so and acting offended if challenged. My sister, who has done human resources at a large investment bank for some time now, has told me on more than one occasion that there is a marked difference in attitude by kids who started within the last two years versus anyone older. For the worse, I might add. Anecdotes all, but when you keep hearing anecdotes, you start believing in a trend . . .
Maybe a “culture of candor” is the right terminology, maybe it isn’t, but it is a problem no matter what you call it. A basic level of manners and respect to one’s superiors (even just to their faces) is not too much to ask. And, not to put too fine a point on it, it is a problem one does not encounter as often from millenials reared in other nations or who are first-generation Americans. Snobby millenials would do well to keep this in mind when competing at the workplace with these folks.
was there - March 5, 2008 at 11:28 am
The rule of thumb at my firm is that for each summer associate dinged for low quality work, three summer associates are dinged for attitude — principally, for a sense of entitlement. So if that’s really your disposition, some “covering” is in order.
Maryland Conservatarian - March 5, 2008 at 11:28 am
“As Kahlenberg notes, less than 10% of his class at Harvard actually went on to go into public service work.”
I remember Kahlenberg’s book – it came out right before I startd law school and I dutifully read it. As I recall, his immediate contribution toward the public interest after HLS was a job with Senator Robb’s office…which I guess qualifies because the Senator was a Democrat (however Doug Wilder may have disagreed). I wonder if a classmate had taken a similar position with Newt Gingrich, would Mr. Kahlenberg had counted that person in that less-than-10% good guy category?
Brian Holland - March 5, 2008 at 2:18 pm
I imagine that “culture of candor” is more on the mark. Although I won’t claim this as a fully formed thought, I find it rather ironic that the many of those decrying the perceived “sense of entitlement” (pointing to no one here, but referencing more generally my anechdotal experiences) grew up in a culture of what might be called artificial worth, where race, gender and wealth often served as substitutes for actual achievement. Today, we assign numerical and other values to every aspect of a person’s life, from intelligence to credit score to number of friends — an experience all the more accute among younger members of society. The idea of entitlement flows naturally from this exercise in categorization. For example, if you do well enough (numerically) at a good enough school (numerically), you have “earned” your right to be at a big (numerically) firm. I find it most amazing that so many folks marvel at this. You are “entitled” in the sense that we have told you precisely what it takes (numerically) to get the job, or at least a category of job, and you achieved that result. Why would you suddenly prostrate yourself to the person who gave you the job you “earned”? As to why they insist on being listened to (i.e., not learning at the bended knee), it seems a natural outgrowth of the achievement culture. They feel that they must demonstrably prove their worth (it has always been that way for them). Likewise, their supervisor must also prove their worth to the Millennial. And why not? I think we should be happy that with this culture of achievement, expectation and perhaps entitlement, the data clearly shows that Millennials are committed to public engagement. That may benefit us all in the long run.
Brian Holland - March 5, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I imagine that “culture of candor” is more on the mark. Although I won’t claim this as a fully formed thought, I find it rather ironic that the many of those decrying the perceived “sense of entitlement” (pointing to no one here, but referencing more generally my anechdotal experiences) grew up in a culture of what might be called artificial worth, where race, gender and wealth often served as substitutes for actual achievement. Today, we assign numerical and other values to every aspect of a person’s life, from intelligence to credit score to number of friends — an experience all the more accute among younger members of society. The idea of entitlement flows naturally from this exercise in categorization. For example, if you do well enough (numerically) at a good enough school (numerically), you have “earned” your right to be at a big (numerically) firm. I find it most amazing that so many folks marvel at this. You are “entitled” in the sense that we have told you precisely what it takes (numerically) to get the job, or at least a category of job, and you achieved that result. Why would you suddenly prostrate yourself to the person who gave you the job you “earned”? As to why they insist on being listened to (i.e., not learning at the bended knee), it seems a natural outgrowth of the achievement culture. They feel that they must demonstrably prove their worth (it has always been that way for them). Likewise, their supervisor must also prove their worth to the Millennial. And why not? I think we should be happy that with this culture of achievement, expectation and perhaps entitlement, the data clearly shows that Millennials are committed to public engagement. That may benefit us all in the long run.
Brian Holland - March 5, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I imagine that “culture of candor” is more on the mark. Although I won’t claim this as a fully formed thought, I find it rather ironic that the many of those decrying the perceived “sense of entitlement” (pointing to no one here, but referencing more generally my anechdotal experiences) grew up in a culture of what might be called artificial worth, where race, gender and wealth often served as substitutes for actual achievement. Today, we assign numerical and other values to every aspect of a person’s life, from intelligence to credit score to number of friends — an experience all the more accute among younger members of society. The idea of entitlement flows naturally from this exercise in categorization. For example, if you do well enough (numerically) at a good enough school (numerically), you have “earned” your right to be at a big (numerically) firm. I find it most amazing that so many folks marvel at this. You are “entitled” in the sense that we have told you precisely what it takes (numerically) to get the job, or at least a category of job, and you achieved that result. Why would you suddenly prostrate yourself to the person who gave you the job you “earned”? As to why they insist on being listened to (i.e., not learning at the bended knee), it seems a natural outgrowth of the achievement culture. They feel that they must demonstrably prove their worth (it has always been that way for them). Likewise, their supervisor must also prove their worth to the Millennial. And why not? I think we should be happy that with this culture of achievement, expectation and perhaps entitlement, the data clearly shows that Millennials are committed to public engagement. That may benefit us all in the long run.
John C - March 5, 2008 at 4:27 pm
As to why they insist on being listened to (i.e., not learning at the bended knee), it seems a natural outgrowth of the achievement culture. They feel that they must demonstrably prove their worth (it has always been that way for them). Likewise, their supervisor must also prove their worth to the Millennial. And why not?
Let’s not set up straw men. This isn’t about “learning on bended knee” – it is about learning, period. It also isn’t about “demonstrably proving their worth,” when, as new associates, they don’t have much worth other than what they can learn from others. It’s not about a “culture of achievement” – it’s about an increasing number of folks who don’t know how to behave in a respectful manner in the workplace.
Jason - March 5, 2008 at 8:52 pm
“42 percent – disproportionately male – said they would probably or definitely ride their law degree into a run for political office. Public service? Righting wrongs? Intellectual challenge? Sorry: Those didn’t make the cut.”
Since when is a run for office incompatible with a desire to do public service and right wrongs? The narrow definitions of “public service” and “public interest”, usually made by liberals who feel the need to point out how special they are for being martyrs for the cause, do no one any good.
(Kahlenberg, as Maryland points out above, is precisely this type of person. And I say that as someone whose politics are more or less in line with his. (To the extent that they’re “less in line”, it’s because I’m further to the left.))
A.J. Sutter - March 13, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I can’t testify as to whether things have changed in the past two years or so, but arrogance in junior associates seems to be a recurrent problem, at least in upper-tier firms. It may also depend on what areas of practice are in vogue at the time. In 1988 I was working at a second-tier full-service L.A. firm with an entertainment practice, and had to deal with 1st-years in the corporate dept. whose lofty aspirations were to transfer into the movie/TV dept. as a stepping-stone to becoming an agent (admittedly, their attitude was a perfect fit with their career goal). In 1998 I was at the Silicon Valley office of one of the biggest Big Law firms, where every junior lawyer and summer associate assumed he or she would jump into venture capital or investment banking (or else become GC of a soon-to-be IPO’d company) within a year or two. More than once was I told by such folks that the client for whom they were being asked to do an assignment was a “crap company” (or words to that effect) because of its stock price performance, for example. Naturally, all had gone straight from undergrad to law school to law firm without being slowed down by anything so vulgar as actual business experience. Plus ça change etc., I expect.
A.J. Sutter - March 13, 2008 at 8:43 pm
I can’t testify as to whether things have changed in the past two years or so, but arrogance in junior associates seems to be a recurrent problem, at least in upper-tier firms. It may also depend on what areas of practice are in vogue at the time. In 1988 I was working at a second-tier full-service L.A. firm with an entertainment practice, and had to deal with 1st-years in the corporate dept. whose lofty aspirations were to transfer into the movie/TV dept. as a stepping-stone to becoming an agent (admittedly, their attitude was a perfect fit with their career goal). In 1998 I was at the Silicon Valley office of one of the biggest Big Law firms, where every junior lawyer and summer associate assumed he or she would jump into venture capital or investment banking (or else become GC of a soon-to-be IPO’d company) within a year or two. More than once was I told by such folks that the client for whom they were being asked to do an assignment was a “crap company” (or words to that effect) because of its stock price performance, for example. Naturally, all had gone straight from undergrad to law school to law firm without being slowed down by anything so vulgar as actual business experience. Plus ça change etc., I expect.
생활지혜 - September 9, 2008 at 6:26 am
딸국질은 횡경막의 경련에 의해서 일어 나는 것으로 쇼크를
준다거나 잠시 호흡을 멈추면 낫는다.
하지만 경우에 따라정신적 부담감으로 빨리 멎지 않을 때가 있다.
멈추게 하는제일 좋은 방법은 심호흡을 한 뒤 견딜 수 있는데까지
숨을 쉬지 않는 것이다.
또는 숨을 멈춘채 찬물을 조금씩 마셔도효과가 있다.
그래도 가라 앉지 않으면 조용히 숨을 내쉬면
서 아랫배를 들이밀거나 때때로 배에 힘을 가득 준 뒤 호흡
을 멈추는 복식호흡도 좋다.
출처:http://cafe.daum.net/lifebean
Leave a Reply