Blog

Why Applicants No Longer Want to Be Subordinate – and Why That’s a Good Thing

“I remember when people were grateful just to get a job.”

I hear this sentence again and again. In leadership coaching sessions. In workshops. On LinkedIn. And it is usually followed immediately by another observation:

“Today, applicants want to work from home, have flexible working hours, modern hardware, and ideally even a professional espresso machine. And if they don’t get all that, they’re gone.”

Many leaders find this development irritating. Some even see it as a challenge to everything they experienced in their own careers. After all, many of them learned early on to adapt, make compromises, and accept their place in the hierarchy.

But this is exactly where it is worth taking a closer look.

Because the real question is not why young people today are no longer willing to be subordinate. The more interesting question is: Why do we still expect them to be?

The Myth of the Generational Conflict

When people talk about work, it usually does not take long before terms such as Generation Z, Millennials, or Boomers come up. It quickly creates the impression that entire generations simply think and behave differently.

Research, however, paints a much more nuanced picture. The year we were born explains only a small part of our behavior. Factors such as life stage, education, social environment, and financial security are far more important. A 25-year-old university graduate living in a major city often has different expectations from a 25-year-old skilled worker in a rural area. Not because of the year they were born, but because of the realities of their lives.

That is why the debate about generations often falls short. It offers simple explanations for a topic that is considerably more complex.

When leaders say that young people no longer want to be subordinate, they are usually not really talking about generations. They are talking about a fundamental shift in how we understand work.

What We Are Really Negotiating

Behind many discussions about working from home, working hours, or workplace equipment lies a deeper question.

Who actually gets to set the rules?

For a long time, the answer was clear. Companies defined the conditions, and applicants decided whether to accept them. That worked in a world of work characterized by clear power imbalances, less transparency, and significantly fewer alternatives.

Today, the situation is different.

People can compare employers within minutes. They research company culture, leadership, and working conditions. At the same time, many companies are struggling to find qualified employees.

The result: the balance of power has shifted.

Not completely. But noticeably.

And that is precisely why the old logic of subordination is becoming less and less effective.

Subordination Was Once Functional

To understand the current debate, it is worth looking back.

For a long time, our society was strongly hierarchical. Authority was rarely questioned. In families, schools, and companies, roles and expectations were clearly defined.

These structures had advantages. They provided guidance and made decision-making simple.

But they also came at a price.

They required conformity.

Today, we question many of these traditional roles. In my view, that represents social progress. We no longer automatically accept authority simply because someone is older, has been around longer, or holds a particular position.

Competence matters more than status.

This applies to families just as much as it does to organizations. And that is precisely why traditional leadership models are coming under increasing pressure.

The Crucial Shift in Perspective

Many conflicts in recruiting arise because the two sides are still operating with different mindsets.

The old model is:

One side sets the terms. The other complies.

The new model is:

Both sides state their needs and determine whether they are a good fit.

The difference may seem small, but it changes everything.

If an applicant says, “I prefer working with a MacBook,” that is not necessarily a demand. It is a preference.

And if a company says, “We only use Windows systems,” that is not necessarily a demonstration of power either. It is simply a condition of the working environment.

The real leadership task is to make these needs and conditions transparent and determine whether working together makes sense.

Meeting as Equals Does Not Mean Everyone Gets Everything They Want

There is one misconception I encounter again and again in this context.

When we talk about meeting as equals, many people immediately assume that anything goes.

But that is not what it means.

Meeting as equals does not mean that every request has to be granted. It simply means that people are allowed to express their needs.

A company can absolutely say:

We need you in the office four days a week.

Or:

We only work with certain systems.

That is perfectly legitimate.

But it is equally legitimate for an applicant to say:

That does not work for me.

Then there is no drama. No subordination. No power struggle.

Just clarity.

And that clarity is often far more valuable than a hard-won compromise that leaves both sides dissatisfied later on.

Why Modern Leadership Is Increasingly About Creating Clarity

One idea from the podcast episode has stayed with me in particular.

Many leaders still see their role as enforcing rules. Modern leadership, however, increasingly works differently.

It is less about dictating what applies.

And more about making visible what people need.

What does the company need?

What does the team need?

What does the individual need?

And above all:

Where do these needs align, and where do they not?

This ability to create clarity will probably become more important in the coming years than any traditional model of authority.

Because knowledge cannot be commanded. Neither can engagement.

Both emerge when people understand why they are doing something and feel that they are being taken seriously.

Conclusion: The Problem Is Not the Generation

If we are honest, the debate about working from home, MacBooks, or flexible working hours is rarely about those things themselves.

It is about how we understand collaboration.

The idea that applicants or employees should fundamentally subordinate themselves comes from a different world of work. A world that no longer exists in the same way today.

In its place comes something more demanding.

Negotiation.

Transparency.

Meeting as equals.

This requires more effort than simple hierarchies. It demands stronger communication skills and greater clarity.

But ultimately, it also leads to better decisions.

And to working relationships that are not based on obedience, but on mutual understanding.

If you would like to explore in more depth why traditional models of subordination are increasingly failing today and what modern leadership requires instead, listen to the full episode of Veränderungsstabil.

Listen to the full podcast episode here

Do you want to strengthen modern leadership in your company, improve your recruiting processes, or create a culture of collaboration on equal terms?

Then let’s talk and explore together what conditions people really need to work successfully with one another.

Schedule an appointment directly here