The objective of this literary review is to examine what academics and researchers have found regarding the perceived generational characteristic differences of today’s Generation Y and the expectations and conflicts between the workforces of previous generations when working together. This will be accomplished by examining recent literature to identify where possible generational tensions may develop and those effective methodologies for enhancing beneficial working relationships among the generations.
Introduction
Generation Y is now entering the workforce, bringing with it a unique set of generational characteristics that separate it from previous generational cohorts. Researchers have identified generational cohorts as having formed from the collective experiencing and sharing of those social, economic and historical significant events among members of the same generation. For example, those individuals (Veterans) who have lived through the Great Depression experienced and developed a set of unique emotions, experiences and opinions about that experience that is uniquely theirs (Murray, Toulson & Legg, 2011).
Researchers argue that Generation Y is unique from previous generations for a variety of reasons. If this argument is valid, then by not understanding what separates this generation from previous generations, these differences if not addressed can give rise to conflict and tension within the workplace. This paper examines some of those unique characteristics of Generation Y and examines what separates this cohort from previous generations and how those differences impact the work environment. For those individuals and managers in the workplace charged with overseeing this incoming cohort, understanding these differences will assist them in creating a work environment that will reduce conflict and misunderstanding and enhance productivity (Hansen & Leuty 2011; Meriac, Woehr & Banister, 2010).
However, the literature about this subject matter is conflicted. Giancola (2006) and Twenge (2010) argue that generational cohort differences and the inherit assumptions about these perceived generational gaps is based on research which employs limited sample studies and as such the research that supports the concept of generational differences is subject to criticism. This argument is further supported again by Twenge, Campbell and Freeman (2012) who argue that previous studies of generational characteristics and differences are again suspect for being too limited in their scope and for not encompassing nationwide sampling during research. Recognizing that there does exist some conflicting opinion and controversy with defining a generational cohort of 60-70 million individuals strong, these characteristic definitions should be viewed in the broadest of strokes.
Defining the Generations
Of the four generations in America; Veterans, Baby Boomers, Generation X and Generation Y, researchers have identified a set of specific , yet broadly based characteristics for which they use to describe and separate the cohorts from one another:
Veterans (born 1945 and earlier) have experienced a life that has been marked by social and economic difficulty and upheaval. The Great Depression, two world wars, regional wars, the threat of a nuclear exchange with the Soviet Union. This generation knows hardship and as such has built a life centered on being frugal, demonstrating loyalty to their employers and possessing a desire to keep working well into retirement. Conformity to the organization and society as a whole and not individualism was seen as being a virtue. Higher education levels among the Veterans cohort is generally limited. Retirements among Veterans were often the result of extenuating circumstances such as health reasons and not for personal enjoyment (Hansen & Leuty, 2011; Murray et al., 2011; Szinovacz, 2011).
Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964) are the largest generation by sheer numbers. The Baby Boomers avoided the World Wars and the hardships of the Great Depression, however, were instilled with the lessons and memories of those events from their parents about their experiences. An unpopular regional war and a prolonged Cold War left its impression on this group. This generation experienced great prosperity and affluence. Loyalty to one’s employer was a central theme and a pattern of workaholics emerged as the Baby Boomers sought to get ahead and keep up with the neighbors. Retirement was seen as a right for that loyalty; however, socio-economic factors have begun to cast a shadow of doubt on the possibility of retirement and many Baby Boomers are delaying and questioning that decision. Higher education levels among Baby Boomers began to flourish (Hansen & Leuty, 2011; Market, 2008; Murray, et al, 2011).
Generation X (born 1965-1979) began to question the idea of employer loyalty, having witnessed the rampant outsourcing of jobs, corporate downsizing, corporations going bankrupt and the loss of jobs and retirements, and the full effects of modernization within the industrial landscape reducing the need for non-skilled labor. The return of personal hardships as a result of economic difficulties and collective tragedies (9/11, mass shootings, long duration regional wars), Generation X began to accept the idea that loyalty was a commodity best reserved for one’s self and family. Willing to change jobs often and viewing the world with skepticism, Generation X has learned to rely on themselves. Often raised as “latch key children,” parenting skills within this generation have been described as being overprotective. Higher education was an expected passage that the generation was instilled with. Many within Generation X are facing skepticism with the idea of retiring due to personal high-debt burdens and low savings records (Anguelov & Tamborini, 2010; Barnes, 2009; Hansen, Leuty, 2011; Market, 2008: Murray, et al, 2011).
Generation Y (born 1980-2000), described by some researchers with the use of the negative connotation “generation me” cohort; these individuals are generally described with negative connotations such as being self-centered and unmotivated. However, this cohort has emerged as the most educated, technology savvy generation ever. To this generation, work is seen as an elective activity to further one’s personal goals rather than a necessity. This generation has been instilled with an attitude of equality, teamwork and collective success. Opposing the status quo of the traditional business hierarchy is an accepted mantra and has inspired in Generation Y a belief that traditional role acceptance may not suit them as it did their elders. These Generation Y members who are graduating from college are finding themselves with burdensome levels of debt that was accumulated during their college years (Barnes, 2009; Murray, et al, 2011; Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010).
The literature among academics and researchers collectively agree that there are many distinctive components to the Generation Y cohort. This cohort is described as being highly educated, internet savvy and being inspired to volunteer with those social causes that its individual members can relate to. However, this generation has also been described as having a lack of respect for authority, self-centered, a sense of entitlement and for those who are entering the workforce, demanding a work life balance that has escaped its parents (Barnes, 2009; Barzilai-Nahon & Mason, 2010; Murray et al., 2011; Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010).
Generation Y is trying to enter the workforce at a difficult time. The American economic conditions are plagued with stubbornly high unemployment. State and local governments have reduced their spending and their hiring. Corporations are holding onto their cash reserves. And there is a sense of uncertainty among the population as America goes through an election cycle and a “Fiscal cliff” approaches. Compounding the difficulty for Generation Y finding long term, full time employment, the previous generations, who are also effected by the current economic conditions, are not leaving the workforce. These factors have helped to contribute to an unemployment rate of 17.1% for this Generation Y cohort (Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS], 2012; Marple, 2012).
For those Generation Y workers who make it into the workforce, they bring with them a unique set of values, beliefs, needs and attitudes that separate them from the previous generations within the workforce. The difficulty for Generation Y is that corporate and governmental organizations have an established workplace hierarchy and set of internal inertias that normally resists internal change from the status quo; especially from those employees who are just arriving. For those Generation Y members who have high expectations of the work environment being similar to their academic or there life experiences with their extracurricular activities, this could result in a “culture shock. This “culture shock” creates an environment from within the organization which can result in organizational conflict, high turnover rates, mistrust and lower productivity among the younger workforce (Barzilai-Nahon & Mason, 2010; Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010).
Core Problem Areas
Reviewing the available literature, researchers have focused on five common areas of potential conflict for this cohort within the workforce which managers should understand in order to prevent workplace struggles.
Work Place Relationships- Researchers report finding Generation Y to be a demanding workforce and have used the word “needy” to describe this cohort. The use of the word “needy” seems to be misplaced as it implies the generation is in need of physical support when research indicates otherwise. What observers of Generation Y are noting is that the cohort tends to be a very socially connected unit whose members seem to be deire constant social interaction and communication among their peers. This constant interaction is now spilling over into the workforce as workplace supervisors report this cohort’s need for constant praise, reinforcement and reassurances. This is by no means the fault of the Generation Y cohort. Barnes (2009) contends as a result of having been raised by the previous generations over doting “helicopter parents” this cohort has grown accustomed to the idea of working and interacting as a collective unit and not as an individual. Parents who have pushed and instilled their children with the expectations of team trophies, continual positive affirmations and the “everyone is a winner” philosophy, we now find this behavior is now being carried forward into the workforce as a result of a lifetime of positive conditioning (Myers & Sadaghiani 2010).
A unique aspect of this generation is being found with their employment retention. Loyalty to a single employer does not have the same meaning to this cohort as it once did to their parents and grandparents. Generation Y has been described as seeking “instant gratification,” which infers that this cohort is prepared to change jobs frequently and with little hesitation. However, this may be a simple explanation to a more complex scenario. Generation Y has witnessed family and friends losing jobs, homes, savings and enduring long term unemployment. This generation appears to be more apt to leave one employer for another when there is a perception of better opportunities for themselves. This idea of being self-serving or needy may in fact be a method of self-preservation that has developed having watched parents struggle with their own workplace issues (Hershatter & Epstein, 2010; Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010; Twenge, 2010).
Myers and Sadaghiani, (2010) report finding the Generation Y’s approach to workplace etiquette has been perceived to represent a lack of respect for the older workers which could quickly spill over into conflict. Here, the writers suggested approach to this potential conflict is by encouraging the older generations (managers) should look on these situations as opportunities to enhance the engagement of their younger cohorts by increasing their responsibilities. In order to fulfill the cohorts need for instant gratification, Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons (2010) suggest organizations could examine overhauling their compensation programs and consider dividing annual compensation increases out over the course of a year. Real, Mitnick and Maloney (2010) put forward that management and front line supervisors could shift from a “supervisory” mentality to a “mentoring” mentality with this younger cohort.
Work life commitment- Scholars are also finding that the Generation Y cohort seeks to establish a work/life balance that contrast with that of the workaholic Baby Boomers and Generation X for who working to excess was an accepted way of life. Generation Y has seen the effects of the Great Recession and the toll taken on their parents who have lost jobs, homes and savings. This has left an impression on this cohort where working excessive hours of overtime does not have the appeal that it once did to the previous generations and instead they are seeking a work life balance that has escaped their predecessors (Josiam, Reynolds, Thozhur, Crutsinger, Baum & Devine, 2008; Ng, Schweitzer & Lyons, 2010; Twenge, 2010).
Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons (2010) argue that this experience has influenced Generation Y to seek out organizations that will provide flexibility between the needs of the employer and the needs of the employee. For many occupations and employers, work no longer means simply working from nine to five, sitting in a cubicle five days a week. Many organizations are evolving and adopting new technologies which will allow for work methodologies to be varied, work environments enhanced and employee flexibility to be embraced. Organizations that seek to hire members of Generation Y will need to look beyond salaries and consider workplace flexibility, unique perks and think “outside of the box” as they compete for the most talented workers among this generation.
Consider the examples of the Federal Emergency Management Agency use of telework to allow employees more home time. Google allowing for free meals, nap rooms and onsite medical to its staff. And outdoor equipment leader, Recreation Equipment (REI) allowance of free use of rental equipment and sabbaticals to its staff. These organizations are demonstrating that flexibility and not necessarily salary incentives within the workforce can be an attractive workplace inducement to a cohort that values its freedom and time off.
Civic engagement- Twenge, Campbell & Freeman (2012) report finding Generation Y has a willingness to participate in volunteering in community service actions that exceeds that of previous generations. Generation Y appears to have developed a belief that it is their personal responsibility to impart change in the world and several high profile members within their cohort are doing just that. This thought process has been found to be carried forward to where it influence’s their decisions to work for those companies that they see are committed to social and civic engagement and share their individual and generational values (Twenge, 2010; McGlone, Spain & McGlone, (2011).
Myers and Sadaghiani (2010) propose that Generation Y has been instilled with altruistic values from their parents and equate altruistic values as a part of personal leadership. Private corporations have recognized the inherit value of community involvement and many Fortune 500 companies embrace “giving back” to the community as part of their strategic plan. Corporations that tout this component of their employee package may become more appealing to Generation Y prospective hires, than say, those who do not embrace civic orientation.
Relationship to Technology- Hershatter and Epstein (2010) report that with the explosion of social media, reduced costs of technology and its democratization for the masses, Generation Y is considered to be far more technology savvy than any of the previous generations. This is a generation that is spending thousands of hours online via various electronic platforms and this behavior has provided Generation Y a unique capability to engage in electronic social media, protest, collaboration and research unlike previous generations. And, it may help explain why they appear to be in need of constant social interaction.
While the Baby Boomers and Generation X generations engineers and scientist built companies around expanding our exposure to the computer and the internet, it is the Generation Y cohort that is expanding our ability to engage in social networking with such platforms as Facebook, internet blogs, and cell phone applications. The end result of this action is it is not Generation Y that is adapting to society, we are adapting to this generation social needs (Hershatter & Epstein, 2010).
For those organizations that see the future of their work environment shifting from fixed office spaces to virtual offices with the adoption of teleworking, Myers and Sadaghiani (2010) suggest that the Generation Y cohort will switch roles with the older workers and will become the go to organizational mentors for the older workers helping them to adapt and adopt to the necessary information based technologies and platforms that organizations adopt.
Interacting with Management- Barzilai-Nahon and Mason (2010) research suggests that the traditional top-down organizational models may alienate Generation Y who has been raised and educated in a collective team model. From a young age, Generation Y has been encouraged to work collectively and to accept collective achievement. There exists a notion that “everyone gets a trophy” for their efforts (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010).
The research of Murray, Toulson and Legg (2011) indicates that the previous three generations have grown accustomed to the traditional top-down management style of corporations and organizations. This may conflict with the team centered approach that Generation Y has grown accustomed to from their earlier life experiences and could be a source of aggravation with older workers. Barzilai-Nahon and Mason (2010) suggest that Generation Y may even be alienated by the traditional top down management strategy of organizations and that this in turn could contribute to increased employee turnover within those organizations.
Barnes (2009) and Hershatter & Epstein (2010) note that Generation Y lacks the confidence, critical thinking and problem solving skills of previous generations; attributes that are commonly seen as a rather important subset of individual and corporate success. Eschewing original thought over public consensus, Generation Y appears to lack the motivation at pursuing answers and engaging in inquiry if the answer is not readily apparent. When difficulty with a problem exists this generation is more apt to ask for help from others, than say attempt to resolve the problem by use of their own means.
Organizations that attract Generation Y workers may need to examine workplace management strategies to compensate for these above noted exhibited weaknesses while at the same time capitalizing on the strengths of this generation. Mangers should recognize that these defined weaknesses are a direct influence of external factors that were beyond this generation’s control and more of a product of how they have been raised.
Problems with Research
Researchers have used a variety of research methods to study the generational differences of Generation Y from the other cohorts and these methods include national surveys, cross sectional study designs, reviews of existing research, reviews of literature, the use of focus groups, and examination of existing case studies. Within each data set there are defined limitations to its scope and breadth for which researchers readily recognize and acknowledge. A recognized difficulty with conducting research of this type lies within the subject matter itself and the methods at researching the subjects.
Researchers are recognizing that by conducting these studies they are examining their subject matter at a specific time period within their lives. Individual personalities, perceptions, values, wants and needs will change over time based on factors both within and outside of this generation’s span of control. Therefore, a Generation Y’s individual values, needs and wants at the age of twenty-two, may not be the same values, needs and wants when they reach middle age or most certainly when they reach their senior years (Meriac, Woehr & Banister, 2010; Twenge, 2010).
Ng, Schweitzer and Lyons (2010) report that research could be biased based on the subject matters themselves. Those studies that are self-reported may include answers that are biased by the parties studied and reflect unrealistic expectations and experiences within the workplace. Low response rates as experienced by Real, Mitnick and Maloney (2010) can further reduce the quality of the research and result in responses that are skewed and not reflective of a majority.
For those studies that fail to include large populations, or center on one geographic location as reported by (Josiam, et al., 2008), the studies can create a response field that is suspect to bias or skewed to the geographical resident population of the study. Hansen and Leuty (2011) go further and caution that as a result of using the small population fields, the research when interpreted will reflect false answers when compared to a study more reflective of the cohorts’ population. This hypothesis is giving credence when we see the conclusions reached by the next researchers.
Murray et al. (2011) openly challenge and dismiss the traditional idea that each cohort has developed its own particular set of generalizations. The researchers argue that there are more similarities shared among the cohorts than are the differences between them. For those studies that postulate otherwise, they simply lack the empirical evidence from which to take their positions. This argument, when compared to the others researcher’s opinions appears to be the outlier, however, appears to have sufficient weight to support further research within this subject matter.
Conclusion
Four generational cohorts of workers now occupy the workforce. Each generational cohort has specific wants and needs within the workforce that separates it from the other. Each cohort has developed a set of preconceived notions about the other. These factors can create an environment where conflict and tension can emerge, if these needs and misunderstandings are not addressed. For the employer, the challenge lies in recognizing these generational differences and creating an environment that allows for the necessary flexibility for all generations of workers to work within these differences. Those organizations who are able to do this will effectively harness the energies and talents of each generation while reducing internal conflict within the workforce.
References
Anguelov, C. E., Tamborini, C.R., (2010). Retiring in debt? An update on the 2007 near retiree cohort. Social Security Bulletin, 70, (4) 69- 76.
Barnes, G.(2009) Guess who’s coming to work: Generation Y. Are you ready for them? Public Library Quarterly, 21, 1, 58-63.
Barzilai-Nahon, K., Mason, R. ( 2010) How Executives Perceive the Net Generation. Communication & Society, 13, 3, 396-418.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012, August 28). Employment and unemployment among youth-Summer 2012. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/youth.nr0.htm.
Butrica, B. A., Smith, K, E., Iams, Howard M. (2012). This is not your parent’s retirement: Comparing retirement income across generations. Social Security Bulletin, 72 (1) 37-58.
Giancola, F. (2006) The generation gap: More myth than reality. Human Resources Planning, 29 32-27.
Hansen, J., Leuty, M, (2011) Work values across Generations. Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 34-52.
Hershatter, A., Epstein, M., (2010) Millennials and the world of work: An organizational and management perspective. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 211-223.
Josiam, B., Reynolds, J., Thozhur, S., Crutsinger, C., Baum, T., Devine, F., (2008) Attitudes to work of generation Y students in hospitality management: A comparative analysis of students in the United States and the United Kingdom. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 11(3) 295-314.
Market, J. (2008). The fading dream of retirement: Social and financial considerations affecting the retirement decision. Sociological Spectrum: Mid-South Sociological Association. 28, 2, 213-233.
Marple, J., (2012). Searching for a detour around the fiscal cliff. TD Economics Special Report, 1-6.
McGlone, T., Spain, J., McGlone, V., (2011) Corporate social responsibility and the millennials. Journal of Education for Business, 86: 4, 195-200.
Meriac, J. P., Woehr, D. J., Banister, C. (2010). Generational Differences in work ethic: An examination of measurement equivalence across the three cohorts. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 315-324.
Murray, K., Toulson, Paul., Legg, S., (2011) Generational Cohorts expectations in the workplace: A study of New Zealanders. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 49, 476-493.
Ng, E., Schweitzer, L., Lyons, S., (2010) New generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 281-292.
Myers, K,K, Sadaghiani, K,. (2010) Millennials in the Workplace: A communication Perspective on millennials organizational relationships and performance. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 225-238.
Real, K., Mitnick, A., Maloney, W., (2010) More similar than different: Millennials in the U.S. building trades. Journal Business Psychology. 25, 303-313.
Szinovacz, M. E.(2011). The aging workforce: Challenges for societies, employer, and older workers. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 23, 2, 95-100.
Twenge, J., Campbell, W., Freeman, E., (2012) Generational Differences in young adults life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation, 1966-2009. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, Vol 102, 5, 1045-1062.
Twenge, J., (2010) A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in work attitudes. Journal of Business Psychology 25, 201-210.
