Why traditional systems clash with young India’s demand for purpose, flexibility, and digital-first work culture
Rai (Raj) Shamani’s message from the World Governments Summit is blunt: leadership is not failing because Gen Z is “difficult”, but because many systems are still built for an older reality—fixed careers, rigid hierarchies, slow-moving policy cycles—and that mismatch is now showing up everywhere from hiring to public trust. Gen Z’s demands for purpose, flexibility and a digital-first experience are not “preferences” anymore; they’re fast becoming the baseline expectations for how modern institutions should work.
A Dubai moment that landed in India’s timeline
At the World Governments Summit in Dubai, entrepreneur and creator Rai Shamani said leaders are struggling to understand young people and argued that Gen Z is often misread as lazy, distracted or entitled. In his telling, the real issue is that Gen Z is “allergic” to outdated leadership and outdated workplace assumptions—especially when those assumptions clash with the speed and transparency of a digital life.
The comment struck a chord for Indian audiences because it reflects what many young professionals, students and creators have been saying in everyday language: “We’ll work hard, but tell us why it matters—and don’t trap us in rules that don’t make sense anymore.” That sentiment echoes Shamani’s earlier public remarks about young people working hard for people and causes they believe in, and being less impressed by titles and hierarchy.
What Gen Z is really asking for
A big misunderstanding is treating Gen Z’s priorities as perks—something to be offered only in good times. Shamani’s broader argument is closer to this: Gen Z is ambitious, but selective; they want dignity, growth and a reason to care.
Across workplaces and institutions, three expectations keep surfacing:
- Purpose-driven work: Gen Z tends to invest energy when they believe in the mission, not only the paycheck or designation.
- Flexibility and mental well-being: Younger employees are pushing back on burnout culture and demanding healthier boundaries, and leaders who dismiss this often lose trust first and talent next.
- Digital-first lifestyles: This generation lives in an “always-on” environment where speed, convenience and transparency are standard, so slow processes feel like disrespect rather than delay.
Why the gap is structural, not just generational
It’s easy to frame this as “young vs old”, but the deeper tension is between how institutions are designed and how life now functions.
Most governments and large organisations still run on models built for stability: fixed office hours, linear career ladders, paper-heavy compliance, and decision-making that climbs multiple levels before anything happens. Gen Z, meanwhile, grew up watching entire industries change overnight—smartphones reshaping communication, UPI-like instant payments normalising speed, and now AI rapidly changing how work is done.
That’s why Shamani’s point lands: when leadership treats Gen Z’s expectations as attitude problems, it misses the structural mismatch. The “system” expects patience and loyalty by default; the “user” expects relevance, clarity and agency by default.
Is leadership evolving fast enough?
In pockets, yes. In many mainstream systems, not yet.
Some modern companies are already experimenting with flatter structures and less obsession with titles—an approach Shamani has spoken about earlier, predicting a future where rigid titles fade and people focus more on building than on hierarchy. But public institutions and large legacy organisations change slower, and Gen Z experiences that gap as everyday friction: unclear career paths, outdated HR rules, limited flexibility, and communication styles that feel one-way rather than participatory.
At the same time, the global conversation at the World Governments Summit shows leaders are aware that digital lifestyles are reshaping how people work, transact and interact—and that “experience” matters, not just infrastructure. The challenge is converting that awareness into reforms fast enough that young citizens and workers feel the difference in real life, not just in speeches.
What an India-friendly reset can look like
If leaders genuinely want to “understand Gen Z,” they may need to stop trying to convince young people to fit old systems and instead modernise the systems around three practical shifts:
- Design policies like products: Make them simple, mobile-first, transparent, and measurable—because Gen Z’s relationship with institutions is increasingly like a user relationship, not a lifelong membership.
- Replace control with clarity: Gen Z responds better to clear outcomes, honest feedback, and psychological safety than to micromanagement and fear-based authority.
- Make growth visible: When learning, movement and recognition are structured and fair, young employees don’t need motivational posters—they can see a future inside the organisation.
Shamani’s underlying provocation is worth taking seriously: Gen Z isn’t waiting for permission to reshape work culture and civic expectations; they’re doing it through job choices, public conversations, and digital communities that reward authenticity and accountability.
