When I think of the term “helicopter parents,” I am reminded of my playground days playing basketball in New York. One of the playground celebrities was “Helicopter Norris” who could reach the top of the backboard at his mere six feet, five inches of height. All the neighborhood kids were entranced. Of course, this was before the prevalence of “helicopter parents.”

In a recent planning meeting, one of the participants indicated that a young job applicant invited his parents to a job interview. The question was then raised, “what are ‘helicopter parents’ and what impact do they have on the workplace now and in the future?” This is an excellent question that warrants further exploration.

Yes, the aforementioned story is occurring in the today’s workplace. First, parents that earn the “helicopter” description are those that hover over every action and activity of their children and then continue this practice into their teenage years and beyond. It is true that today’s world is unpredictable and presents different challenges compared to past generations. However, balance is essential. Parental guidance is extremely important, but support and advice are very different than constant hovering. In discussions with two prominent NCAA basketball officials, they indicated their biggest challenge was not a coach or player, but the overzealous parent!

Helicopter parenting is currently impacting the workplace, without question. For example, many individuals that are products of hovering parents, lack critical thinking skills. Often well-meaning parents complete assignments and projects on behalf of their child. This approach not only enables helplessness in the child but also creates a lowered self-worth and diminished motivation; essentially cheating the child out of the pride of a self-completed task. Helicopter parenting also attempts to insert equality and fairness in each activity so losses and struggles are minimized or completely removed. Unfortunately, this approach does little in preparation for real, workplace situations.

Growing up in upstate New York, I often took part in neighborhood pickup basketball games. We organized our own games and established the rules. Occasionally, fights and arguments broke out, but we usually resolved them. Parents in my neighborhood considered this process part of growing up. In our games, not everyone was picked to play. When you were not selected for the game, it was a blunt suggestion of something like, “go home and practice and come back when you get better!” Perhaps this was not the most appropriate or gentle phrasing but it was nevertheless, part of the process. In addition, some of the toughest hits in basketball, baseball and football were by females in the neighborhood, which was clearly accepted.

Yes, my generation “went to school in the snow, uphill both ways” as you may recall your grandparents saying. However, the organization of my pickup games, and groups such as 4-H and Future Farmers of America (FFA) taught critical emotional intelligence skills. Some activities were structured with supervisors but many were unsupervised, allowing creativity and imagination to develop the rules of gamesmanship. These activities served as a crucial foundation of social skills upon which adult social life would be built.

Parental supervision and guidance is essential. However, part of guidance is allowing the freedom to learn and explore one’s own heart and mind. Do not be afraid to encourage unstructured activities as they can be a great builder of life skills. Every individual needs the opportunity to discover his or her own strengths and weaknesses, make mistakes and enjoy successes. I suggest that guiding children as they navigate difficult situations may be more helpful than removing the challenges. Chances are if you trust your children to make sound decisions, they will trust themselves to do the same. Parental involvement is indispensable to a healthy childhood and successful adulthood. Remember, however, experience is life’s greatest teacher.

Finally, to conclude my story, the interview went on but with the parents waiting in the lobby. This upset one of the parents who expected to ask some critical questions. I agree that this situation necessitates some critical questions but probably not from one of the parents!