By Tim Page Bottorff, MS, CSP, CIT, FASSP, and Ciro Page Bottorf. Tim and Ciro are speakers at Arizona Chapter National Safety Council’s 2026 Southwest Safety Conference. Their presentation, From Boomers to Zoomers: Ending the Generational Cold War in Safety, focuses on building a shared “third space” where teams move beyond labels to work more effectively.
I remember sitting in a safety roundtable where a simple discussion about new training approaches suddenly turned tense. One longtime colleague shook his head and said, “This is how we used to do it, and it worked just fine,” while a younger professional replied, “That’s exactly the problem—none of that fits how people work now.” In seconds, the conversation wasn’t about safety anymore, but about which generation supposedly “understood” the job better.
It’s tempting to blame friction on age. We debate Boomers versus Zoomers, paper binders versus apps, “earned” versus “entitled.” But the evidence is clear: generational labels explain far less than we think, and they often distract us from the changes that genuinely improve safety. Worse, they feed into our own biases—nudging us to look for age‑based explanations instead of examining the systems, pressures, and misunderstandings that actually drive behavior.
The Myth Trap
Popular discourse confidently assigns traits to generations—work ethic here, job‑hopping there—yet the underlying research doesn’t support hard generational “effects” at work. High‑quality reviews in organizational psychology show that age, life stage, social context, and historical period interact in complex ways; simple cohort labels rarely predict behavior on the job (Rudolph et al., Journal of Business and Psychology, 2021). When we treat a near miss as “Gen Z being Gen Z,” we risk misdiagnosing the system and implementing the wrong control. It reminds me of a conversation my dad and I had on the drive home from a wedding years ago, when he joked that all the millennials there were “too busy taking photos to enjoy the moment.” I pushed back, pointing out how one snapshot had turned into a stereotype. It was a small exchange, but a perfect example of how easily we let one observation harden into a bias about an entire group.
Stereotypes also warp investigations. Certain biases encourage storylines like “veterans resist change” or “new hires won’t speak up,” even when the real drivers are training modality, competing production pressures, or ambiguous hand‑offs. Mislabel the cause, and you’ll misplace the fix. Our presentation will dive into greater detail regarding these biases, where they come from, and why they occur.
Build the Third Space
Rather than debating who’s right, we offer the solution to build a third space: a communication common ground that can transcend divided lines. In that space, we anchor conversations to what’s undeniably shared: wanting people to get home whole, pride in a job done well, and the dignity of having a voice in how work is made safe.
Third‑space collaboration borrows from intercultural communication: the fastest way to reduce threat is to name the common ground, then make room for each person’s constraints and perspective. Do this well, and the room shifts from “us vs. them” to “we, together.”
The HUMANN Approach
To operationalize third‑space collaboration on the floor, use the HUMANN approach. It’s a six‑step script you can deploy in pre‑task briefs, tailboards, or hot‑spot conversations—especially when tension is rising.
- H — Hold the common ground.
Open by naming the non‑negotiable you share: “We all want everyone sitting down to dinner tonight. Let’s make one change that protects that.” - U — Understand before being understood.
Ask what a good outcome looks like from the other person’s seat; simply say, “Walk me through it.” Curiosity signals respect and lowers defensiveness. - M — Make room for emotion and dignity.
People defend and protect what they love. If frustration shows up, name it without judgment and use stewardship language—help, support, partner. - A — Ask for alignment on the next humane step.
Translate the talk into a micro‑commitment—a baby step that reduces risk right now. - N — Name the boundary.
Don’t push beyond your own values. Name a boundary. Decide what you are and are not comfortable doing. - N — Nurture the bridge.
If you must set a boundary with a “no,” pair it with a bridge—an option, a resource, or a follow‑up checkpoint. Use a “yes, and” mindset instead of a “yes, but,” so the relationship stays intact while the work moves forward.
In the session, we’ll roleplay HUMANN in a live scenario to get a practical understanding of these steps so you can apply it in your day-to-day life.
Make Training Stick
Large‑scale evaluations of diversity and bias interventions show that raising awareness plus giving people concrete replacement behaviors improves downstream actions (Paluck, Porat, Clark & Green, Annual Review of Psychology, 2021). That is precisely what safety leaders can do with HUMANN: replace conflict scripts with care‑anchored scripts and measure the behavior change.
Why This Matters
Safety is a human performance discipline before it is a compliance exercise. Labels flatten humans. When we stop painting people with generational brushes and start listening for constraints, needs, and pride, we discover that what looked like a culture war was usually a signal‑to‑noise problem: unclear intent, untested controls, or unspoken pressures.
Build the third space. Use HUMANN to turn tense moments into micro‑commitments. Measure the behavior you want more of. You’ll get fewer arguments about identity and more movement on the controls that keep people whole.
References
- Rudolph, C. W., Rauvola, R. S., Costanza, D. P., & Zacher, H. (2021). Generations and Generational Differences: Debunking Myths in Organizational Science and Practice and Paving New Paths Forward. Journal of Business and Psychology. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32901173/
- Urick, M. J., Hollensbe, E. C., Masterson, S. S., & Lyons, S. T. (2017). Understanding and Managing Intergenerational Conflict: An Examination of Influences and Strategies. Work, Aging and Retirement. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298898256_Understanding_and_Managing_Intergenerational_Conflict_An_Examination_of_Influences_and_Strategies
- Paluck, E. L., Porat, R., Clark, C. S., & Green, D. P. (2021). Prejudice Reduction: Progress and Challenges. Annual Review of Psychology. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32928061/
- Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. Routledge.
- Tajfel, H. (1970). Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American, 223(5), 96–102.
Tim Page‑Bottorff, MS, CSP, CIT, FASSP, is an inspirational and motivational safety leader who brings over 30 years of occupational health, safety and environmental experience to his speaking sessions. He is an HSSE Senior Director for Jones Lang Lasalle, he is the Senior Vice President of the ASSP Board of Directors (2025–2026) and was recognized by the NSC as one of their Top 10 speakers for. Tim began his career as a U.S. Marine in Operation Desert Storm and earned the Humanitarian Service Medal. He’s also received the coveted ASSP Safety Professional of the Year award (2018–19), NSC’s Distinguished Service to Safety Award (2018),Tim is an ASSP Fellow. Tim is the author of The Core of Four: 4 Tools To Navigate Roadblocks to Great Human Performance. Tim is proud of his practical grass roots approach and is also proud of presenting with his youngest child.
Ciro Page‑Bottorff is a Risk Control Specialist at Sompo and former logistics specialist with 2+ years in reverse logistics and nearly 2 years of direct risk mitigation experience. He conducts multiline risk assessments for commercial clients and partners with underwriting to turn complex operations into practical controls that improve safety outcomes. With a B.A. in Linguistics—and 2+ years coaching speech & debate and tutoring math—Ciro brings a communication‑forward, teaching mindset to build collaboration through trust‑centered dialogue. Ciro is passionate about mentoring emerging professionals and helping teams convert friction into creativity.