As far as I know, many of us have heard of the division of ’79, ’86 and ’99 into generations. X, Y and Z. But, to draw lines between people that grow up in a comparable societal context, is the same as cutting your spaghetti into edible chunks. As a consequence, the Italians will severely dismiss you at the dinner table. However, when you identify a new generation, society eats it. Books, publications and marketing research. It’s there, in abundance. And it’s not that I do not identify with the characteristics that make me part of Generation Y, but it artificially anticipates on future clashes between these generations. And although I understand the nature of difficulties and conflicts I will experience when I enter the work force (that is almost: now), I also feel as if a forced division will never contribute to the solution. If I look at my fellow peers, skilled in many disciplines and proud owners of short-attention spans, they can’t answer the question what their ideal job looks like. It’s a bit of everything. They can’t be a consultant, teacher, text-writer, speaker, entrepreneur, artist and jurist at once, because to use this classic terminology implies these professions to be full-time occupations. But, what if you can take on all these different roles in one working-life, does that mean you’re not sufficiently skilled at anything? Overestimate your own capacities? Scared to make decisions? I don’t think so. But I do think we need a new language to bridge these classical and modern professions, channel established knowledge into the right funnels and look for that common denominator to carry out towards each other. A characteristic we, hopefully, all share: curiosity.