Search results

This study attempts to understand the research clusters and thematic evolution of the topic generational diversity at workplace, over the period of 2001–2009 and 2010–2018. Furthermore, it attempts to identify the key shifts (and convergence) that have taken place in the value system across generational cohorts.

In this context, the first stage of the study involved an in-depth systematic analysis of extant literature on multigenerational workforce between 2001–2009 and 2010–2018 by applying bibliometric analysis. Following an explanatory mix-method approach, the second stage of the study comprised of 32 interviews conducted across generations, exploring the role of ethics at the workplace.

It was revealed that during the period 2001–2009, communication and identification of generational characteristics emerged as the major themes. The 2010–2018 period unraveled four themes of research – retaining and engaging millennials through leadership, generational differences in work values, impact of generational differences on organizational-level variables and generational diversity in education and nursing. The outcome from the second stage showed that work values differ across generations with an emphasis on intrinsic work values, and work values have rather deteriorated, with baby boomers possessing stronger work ethics in comparison to the millennials. Finally, an integrated model for multigenerational workforce has been proposed.

This paper provides significant inputs to the expanding research in the area of work values, as it delves into the principal mechanisms leading to differences in work values among generations.

Bibliometric analysis, which is a quantitative approach to understanding the intellectual structure of a research topic, has been applied to generational diversity at the workplace. This constitutes a novel attempt that can be bracketed as a pertinent contribution to the field.

The rising costs of recruiting and hiring workers and the seismic shift of age demographics in the United States workforce has created much stir around the concept of generational cohorts. Although much has been done by researchers and practitioners alike to attempt a better understanding of each generational group’s leadership preferences, confusing and contradictory results has attracted much criticism. This critique has inspired efforts to look at the concept of leadership and followership preference through an alternative lifespan developmental lens. Because leadership influences are inherently social influences, a person’s overall lifespan development level may potentially provide a deeper perspicacity of the phenomenon than examining it from the more conventional generational cohort perspective. However, specific research into this area is lacking. This paper adds to the literature by uncovering what we are missing in research and practice when we look at age-related leadership phenomena solely from a generational cohort perspective. A review of the contradicting literature on generational cohorts and leadership is offered. Next, specific lifespan developmental theories are examined, and propositions and implications of such research are extended.

This paper aims to examine generational formative referents as factors that influence meeting attendees’ adoption and technology use within virtual and hybrid meetings, and test the applicability of the technology acceptance model (TAM) as presented by Davis (1986). This study investigates how attendees’ experiences from their respective formative years (i.e. generational formative referents), the basis of the Generational Cohort Theory (GCT), influence the TAM model constructs.

A partial least squares analysis test is utilized to determine technology acceptance within meetings across three generations: Baby Boomers (1946-1964), Generation X (1965-1978) and Generation Y (1979-2000).

The multi-group comparison determined all three generations responded similarly with regard to the paths being tested, indicating each of the three generational cohorts within this study are influenced by the experiences of their formative years, which are different for each generation.

The findings add to the limited foundation for scholars wanting to further analyze technology use within meetings, and for those interested in generational influences.

This study provides useful information for marketers and planners to increase meeting attendance, enhance attendee satisfaction, and further explore meeting engagement opportunities.

Underpinning the GCT, this study is the first within hospitality and tourism studies to investigate a theoretical model on generational technology use within meetings.

This study aims to address demographic variables believed likely to restrain or modify homogeneous attitudes and values purported as inherent in each generational cohort and associated with divergence of workplace preferences and expectations.

Using a subsample of data collected from a larger study conducted as part of the General Social Survey and supported by the National Science Foundation, this study contributes to the emerging generational differences in literature by using Kruskal–Wallis tests in the analysis of five generational research questions.

In one sense, the results of this study appear to reflect the mixed and confusing disarray of evidence regarding the influence of generational differences on job preferences and workplace behaviors. On only two of the five job characteristics in this study did generational cohort membership demonstrate beyond random chance divergence in generational preference. However, the analysis of the interaction of cohort membership and demographic covariates on these two job characteristics points toward merit in further examination of relationship of subgroup differences relative to overarching assumptions about generational attitudes and norms of behavior.

A number of limitations to the interpretation of this study merit reflection. First, given that the data for this study were cross-sectional in nature, the relationships in our study may be subject to temporal change. Second, the data were secured by self-report and is subject to all the limitations of self-reported data. Third, some of the demographic variables in this study were the result of aggregation in an attempt to secure adequate observations in each cell, and as such, important variance may have been concealed. Fourth, the study did not control for the confounding influence of age difference on cohort preferences.

In a rush to adapt and develop different approaches to human resource management in hope of meeting the needs of successive generational cohorts, it behooves scholars and practitioners alike to acknowledge the confused state of research on generational cohorts and to question the assumed monolithic model of generational cohort job-related likes and dislikes.

This study would suggest that the assumed homogeneity of generational values and attitudes and their influence on the US workplace frequently fails to consider the heterogeneity evolving from the rural/urban characteristics where cohort members experienced adolescence.

Scholars will appreciate the broad perspective presented in this study and the potential new avenues for research. For practitioners, the study provides valuable insights into the three dominant generational cohorts currently in the workplace, thus enabling practitioners to understand the underpinnings of performance and work climate with greater depth and breadth of perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to examine, utilising the Kaleidoscope Career Model, whether members of the Baby Boom generation and Generation X differ in their needs for authenticity, balance, and challenge.

Survey data were obtained from 982 professionals located across the USA. Correlations, t‐tests, and multiple regressions were performed to test the hypotheses.

Members of Generation X have higher needs for authenticity and balance than Baby Boomers. There was no difference in needs for challenge between Baby Boomers and members of Generation X.

A limitation in the study, as well as in most of the research on generational differences, is the use of cross‐sectional designs that fail to capture the influence of the aging process. A longitudinal, multi‐survey design over the lives of individuals would enable scholars to capture within‐ and between‐person differences and to permit a better understanding of whether differences are in fact due to generational effects or to aging.

Knowledge of the differences and similarities among the various generations in the workforce can help organizational leaders make important decisions about human resource policies and practices.

Many studies in the popular press stress the prevalence and importance of generational differences in the workplace. However, the little academic research that has been conducted has shown mixed results. The study uses the theoretical framework of the Kaleidoscope Career Model to examine generational differences in work attitudes.

This paper compares the work values of the People's Republic of China's (PRC) millennials with their parents.

The Chinese version of the multidimensional work ethic profile (1. productive use of time; 2. centrality of work; 3. hard work; 4. delay of gratification; 5. leisure; 6. self-reliance; and 7. moral reasoning) was used to survey PRC millennials and their parents. A repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparing work values for a subsample of 68 same-gender parent/child dyads. A one-way ANOVA was used for comparing the work values of the total sample of 217 PRC millennials and their parents.

The repeated measures ANOVA found that one of the seven work values for the male dyads and three of the seven work values for the female dyads were significantly different. The one-way ANOVA found that four of the seven work values for males grouping and five of the seven work values for the females grouping were significantly different.

Social norms and socialization by parents may moderate the influences of changing social conditions on personal values formation predicted by the theory of generations. Researchers need to sample across demographic and socioeconomic subgroups to understand subgroup differences when conducting cross-generational research. Taking large samples, aggregating data and drawing conclusions about cross-generational values may not be a valid approach in trying to understand the complexity of cross-generational values differences.

Managers should be wary of broad declarations about cross-generational values differences. The differences in generational values are nuanced.

This paper shows when controlling for same-gender parents, cross-generational values are very similar. This contrasts other findings on cross-generational values.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the microgeneration between Generation X and the Millennial generation. The research question addressed was “What makes the Xennial generation unique and how might the knowledge of these differences be beneficial to organizations?”

The research question was analyzed by a review of literature through the lens of generational theory. This study reviewed current literature on generational theory, years encompassing specific generations, and differences between recent generations in the workplace.

It was discovered the exact years distinguishing generations were unclear because generations fade into one another without a distinct starting and stopping point. This overlap creates a cusp generation or microgeneration. The presented findings suggest microgeneration employees could aid in reducing workplace generational tensions.

Organizations can benefit from creating flexible workplaces accommodating the desires of multi-generational employees while still meeting the goals of the organization as a whole. It is important managers approach generational differences with a clear perspective of what information is valid and what may simply be popular. It is crucial to remember employees are individuals who never completely fit a stereotype, generational, or otherwise.

Very few academic articles on generational differences mention cusp generations and none address their unique opportunities for organizations in the workplace. Members of microgenerations between major generational cohorts may be a key to reducing workplace friction between employees of different generations.

The present research offers insights into the generational stereotypical beliefs that different generations of nurses hold about the own and the other generations and the implications on the work floor.

This cross-sectional, exploratory study employs a cognitive mapping approach known as the repertory grid. The sample consisted of 15 Generation Y, 15 Generation X and 15 Baby Boomer nurses.

Beliefs of nurses about their own and the other generations direct social categorization and generational stereotypes of the in-group and out groups. These stereotypes mold nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards their coworkers and are enacted leading to self-fulfilling prophecies. Especially Generation Y and Baby Boomer nurses are negatively stereotyped and have their ways to deal with these negative stereotypes.

Nurses and their managers who hold generational stereotypes may unknowingly create cliques within an organization and adopt behaviors and expectations based on generational (self-) stereotypes. The author offers noteworthy insights for fostering intergenerational synergies amongst nurses, which are important since the level of interdependent relations amongst nurses required to provide care.

The present study moves away from the research about the typical characteristics of nurses across the generational workforce. Instead, mental models about how different generations of nurses construe their coworkers belonging to different generations including their own generation are drawn. Employing the repertory grid technique (RGT), an established method for uncovering people's personal and collective belief systems, the present study shows how generational stereotyping and self-stereotyping among nurses belonging to varying generational cohorts occurs and debates its implications.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the presence of generational differences in items measuring workplace attitudes (e.g. job satisfaction, employee engagement).

Data from two empirical studies were used; the first study examined generational differences in large sample, multi-organizational administrations of an employee survey at both the item and general-factor levels. The second study compared job satisfaction ratings between parents and their children from a large nationwide longitudinal survey.

Although statistically significant, most generational differences in Study 1 did not meet established cutoffs for a medium effect size. Type II error was ruled out given the large power. In Study 2, generational differences again failed to reach Cohen’s cutoff for a medium effect size. Across both studies, over 98 percent of the variance in workplace attitudes lies within groups, as opposed to between groups, and the distributions of scores on these variables overlap by over 79 percent.

Prior studies examining generational differences in workplace attitudes focused on scale-level constructs. The present paper focused on more specific item-level constructs and employed larger sample sizes, which reduced the effects of sampling error. In terms of workplace attitudes, it appears that generations are more similar than they are different.

This paper aims to compare the levels of status consumption for Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Generation Y (Millennials).

With an email sample of 220 adult consumers living in the southeast USA, this study measures status consumption, generational cohort, and demographics.

The study finds significant differences in the level of status consumption by generational cohort. The average level of status consumption was highest for Generation Y, followed by Generation X and then Baby Boomers. In looking at the significance of these differences between individual cohorts, there was a significant difference between Generation Y and Baby Boomers. This suggests that while there are differences in the level of status consumption by generation, this difference is only significant between Generation Y and Baby Boomers. This paper then examines if this relationship between generational cohort and status consumption is impacted by demographic variables, such as gender, income, and education. The results illustrate that, holding generation constant, there is no significant relationship between gender, income, or education with status consumption. There is also no significant interaction between generational cohort and the demographic variables of gender, income, and education. This suggests that the relationship between generational cohort and status consumption is due only to generation and is not being impacted by other demographic variables.

Limitations of the study include that it was a convenience sample of predominately white, educated, and younger adult respondents. Additional research is needed to specifically examine ethnic group differences and cohorts prior to the Baby Boomers.

For luxury marketers they need to consider generational cohort, rather than other demographic variables, when segmenting their market.

This paper addresses a gap in the literature by examining if there are differences in the motivation to consume for status based on generational cohort, focusing on the cohorts of Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Generation Y. Additionally, this paper proposes that generational cohort is a better means to segment the status consumer than other demographic variables.