Articles
Focus on the Future Dr. Julie M. Norman
(WV Executive Magazine Spring 2007)
If this nation had only one thing it should be concerned about, it would be the fate of our
economy. Demographers are projecting severe labor shortages in the next 10 years. The
startling fact is that we will have 25 percent fewer people in our workforce by 2015 than we do
today. This decline in workers is largely due to baby boomers retiring. Close to 8,000 people
turn 60 every day, meaning that almost 3 million workers per year are either preparing to retire
or rethinking their work arrangements. The U.S. Census projects that 78 million baby boomers
will retire with only 46 million Generation X and Y workers available to replace them. That’s a
gap of 32 million workers in the next decade that creates a severe problem for our economy. In
2008 we enter an unprecedented period in history where the generations coming into the
workforce are smaller in number and less educated than the ones before them.
This looming labor force crisis is imminent and immediate. Those retiring include over half of
our science and engineering workforce; at the federal level, the Department of Energy, for
example, will have 70 percent of its workforce eligible for retirement next year. This decrease in
the workforce is further exacerbated by the fact that the population is living longer and
demanding more goods and services. What will this do to our economy? You might be
thinking about the low unemployment rates we’ve enjoyed for the past several years and
assuming that all is good, but make no mistake: unemployment rates are no longer an
indicator of an economy’s health. While our unemployment rates remain relatively low despite
the thousands of jobs lost in manufacturing, we are replacing those jobs with low paying
service jobs. Jobs ARE being created in groups of one and two at a time, otherwise we wouldn’
t be seeing the low unemployment rates that we do. But take a look at what the new jobs are.
They’re in telemarketing, massage therapy, truck driving and certified nursing assistants. Can
we really build a new economy on those occupations? The answer is clearly NO. For a
community to thrive economically, more than a third of all jobs must be economic based. In
other words, the goods and services being produced must be sold outside the local economy.
The Skills Gap
Then there is the skills gap. While the skills gap will be a crisis in 2010, the lack of basic skills,
technical skills and competencies is a very real issue right now. Businesses report a serious
decline in the skill levels of new workers today and the training costs associated with making
them productive is exorbitant. Every generation wants the next to have more, but for the first time
in history our children are facing a lower standard of living than their parents and grandparents.
As other nations continue to become educated, competent and willing to work for lower wages,
American citizens fall well behind the curve.
It’s deja vu all over again. In December 2006, the New Commission on the Skills of the
American Workforce, a high-powered bi-partisan assembly of education secretaries and
business, government and other education leaders released a blueprint on rethinking
American education from pre-K to 12 and beyond to better prepare students to thrive in the
global economy. But consider this: recommendations for drastic reform were also made in the
1983 publication “A Nation At Risk” by the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Education
24 years ago, yet most have not been implemented to the degree intended. Most of our schools
still only offer 17 hours of instruction per week and allow nearly 3 months of summer vacation—
a model that was designed to met the needs of an Agrarian society. If someone would read the
1983 report today, they would no doubt believe the words came straight out of today’s news.
But as usual, not much has changed with our schools or the way we develop our workforce.
Other nations have spent decades preparing their young people and demanding excellence.
With all the dramatic changes that have taken place in the past 20 years, why has our school
system remained stagnate? Unfortunately, at this point I’m afraid trying to modify our current
educational system is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
The parable of the boiled frog comes to mind. The parable demonstrates how a frog’s internal
sensory apparatus is geared toward sudden changes in its environment, not the slow gradual
ones. Hence, a frog placed in a pot of room temperature water with the heat source slowly
turned up will allow himself to boil. I think this is what has happened to us as a country. We
have ignored the slow gradual changes in our society and economy, even with pleas from
various commissions who have warned policy makers for many years of the risks we now face.
We’ve been in a long, slow decline educationally compared to other countries for many years.
The sad fact is that we have become a spoiled, complacent, mediocre nation. Arrogance born
out of our superpower status over the past 75 years has resulted in ignoring other nations who
have catapulted to the top. For most of the 20th century America was a superpower not to be
reckoned with, and our education system was second to none. But while we were basking in
our own superiority, others were preparing for this day. They have caught up and even passed
us by. And with the advent of technology that brought over 2 billion new workers into the
American economy, the ability to capitalize on their investment in education and succeed in a
global market has been a dream come true. This country has prided itself on the “American
Dream” of achieving one’s highest potential, and for decades that dream was achieved, but
without a new culture of hard work, innovation and creativity, America may well become the
follower in the global economy.
Problems rising
There must be an increased emphasis on science, technology, engineering and math—STEM
education as it’s called. When 80 percent of manufacturers report shortages of qualified
workers because today’s graduates do not have the skills required to work in today’s
manufacturing, we have a serious problem. Our education system must provide a continuous
supply of well-educated STEM-grounded entrants into regional talent pools. This means a
greater emphasis on science, math, and technology-related programs in K-12 curricula and a
greater investment in teacher education and accountability in these areas.
Aside from the reforms needed in an outdated educational system, companies who already
employ workers that will remain in the workforce need to change paradigms. The new worker of
today is also no longer satisfied with traditional workplace models. Companies need to court
their top 25 percent of workers like they would their most valuable customers. Firms are going
beyond on-site daycare facilities and gyms, to adding laundry services, auto detailing, and other
on-site services to appeal to workers with busy lives. This reaction is due to the fact that it’s a
worker’s world now. In the past, workers moved out of state to find work; now it’s no longer
necessary. Good workers are in high demand, and this trend will continue for many years as
our baby boomers leave the workforce and the best workers are competitively recruited. The
best and brightest seek higher ground by working for the most prestigious firms or hanging
their own shingle. In fact, today over 25 percent of the workforce works from home part of the
time, either because their firm allows it or because they have chosen to work for themselves.
Creating a Qualified Work Force
As a Certified Economic Developer, I understand the competitive world of attracting new
investment and the site selection process. I also know that a qualified skilled workforce is the
number one reason for any business expansion or location decision. It’s no longer whether a
community has a union environment or whether there are tax abatements or free land. The
primary issue today is always the ability to provide a qualified workforce. Education and training
opportunities, the reduction of costs in finding or creating clusters of inter-related firms, and the
promise of continuing a workforce development effort beyond start-up is what appeals most to
businesses considering any state. Efforts to bring together education, training and economic
development have been mediocre at best.
Creativity, innovation and adaptability are the keys to a good life, and high levels of education
are going to be the only security our kids can look forward to. We must demand rigorous
academics, not just the basics of the 3 R’s, just as we were warned 24 years ago from “A
Nation At Risk.” As the mother of two adolescent boys, I am fearful of the future that lies ahead
for them. We have far more to worry about than whether or not some of our children are left
behind; we need to consider an entire generation failing to compete in a global economy and
the impact this will have on economic based industries. Meager incremental improvements,
band-aid solutions, and the potpourri of federal programs aimed at selected populations just
won’t cut it anymore. We need bold action.
Some have stepped forward. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is committed to working with
partners in communities throughout the country to transform our education system and improve
the outlook for all students. Their foundation has invested millions of dollars to serve as a
catalyst designed to foster innovative educational opportunities for our young people, spark
public engagement, and create a seamless web of support for high-quality learning from a
child’s first years through college and the workplace. They understand that we must either train
the brainpower ourselves or import it.
But what about the American dream? In order to keep it alive and well, we must make some
tough decisions regarding our education system and the way we recruit and retain workers.
Our federal and state governments must develop a performance-based culture of accountability
that is focused on educating students in a way that prepares them for the world of work in the
21st century, without regard to bureaucracies and special interests. We also must offer
financial incentives to attract the best and brightest teachers, and bonuses to keep the most
successful, much like any business would do. In fact, I would like to personally present a
challenge to Bill Gates—to increase the American public high school graduation rate to 90
percent by 2015 and put the U.S. back in the top five in The Trends in International Mathematics
and Science Study carried out by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (currently the U.S. stands at 19 out of 21 countries, outperforming only Cyprus and
South Africa). We spend a tremendous amount of money on education and training in this
country, so why do we continue to accept mediocrity? We should expect the same kind of return
on our investment that any successful business would expect.
With the changes in skill demands and the dramatic demographic shifts in the next few years,
the need to increase the skills and credentials of the nation’s workforce has never been as
urgent as it is today. Although the myriad of programs and services and resources that currently
exist for workforce education and training are a good beginning, they are not yet integrated into a
fully functioning system that addresses the challenges we face as a nation. We must think
broadly about the various components of the workforce education and training system and how
all of the different programs, services and incentives work together in the common goal of
helping the nation meet the skill and labor needs of today and the future. We simply can’t afford
anything less.
(WV Executive Magazine Spring 2007)
If this nation had only one thing it should be concerned about, it would be the fate of our
economy. Demographers are projecting severe labor shortages in the next 10 years. The
startling fact is that we will have 25 percent fewer people in our workforce by 2015 than we do
today. This decline in workers is largely due to baby boomers retiring. Close to 8,000 people
turn 60 every day, meaning that almost 3 million workers per year are either preparing to retire
or rethinking their work arrangements. The U.S. Census projects that 78 million baby boomers
will retire with only 46 million Generation X and Y workers available to replace them. That’s a
gap of 32 million workers in the next decade that creates a severe problem for our economy. In
2008 we enter an unprecedented period in history where the generations coming into the
workforce are smaller in number and less educated than the ones before them.
This looming labor force crisis is imminent and immediate. Those retiring include over half of
our science and engineering workforce; at the federal level, the Department of Energy, for
example, will have 70 percent of its workforce eligible for retirement next year. This decrease in
the workforce is further exacerbated by the fact that the population is living longer and
demanding more goods and services. What will this do to our economy? You might be
thinking about the low unemployment rates we’ve enjoyed for the past several years and
assuming that all is good, but make no mistake: unemployment rates are no longer an
indicator of an economy’s health. While our unemployment rates remain relatively low despite
the thousands of jobs lost in manufacturing, we are replacing those jobs with low paying
service jobs. Jobs ARE being created in groups of one and two at a time, otherwise we wouldn’
t be seeing the low unemployment rates that we do. But take a look at what the new jobs are.
They’re in telemarketing, massage therapy, truck driving and certified nursing assistants. Can
we really build a new economy on those occupations? The answer is clearly NO. For a
community to thrive economically, more than a third of all jobs must be economic based. In
other words, the goods and services being produced must be sold outside the local economy.
The Skills Gap
Then there is the skills gap. While the skills gap will be a crisis in 2010, the lack of basic skills,
technical skills and competencies is a very real issue right now. Businesses report a serious
decline in the skill levels of new workers today and the training costs associated with making
them productive is exorbitant. Every generation wants the next to have more, but for the first time
in history our children are facing a lower standard of living than their parents and grandparents.
As other nations continue to become educated, competent and willing to work for lower wages,
American citizens fall well behind the curve.
It’s deja vu all over again. In December 2006, the New Commission on the Skills of the
American Workforce, a high-powered bi-partisan assembly of education secretaries and
business, government and other education leaders released a blueprint on rethinking
American education from pre-K to 12 and beyond to better prepare students to thrive in the
global economy. But consider this: recommendations for drastic reform were also made in the
1983 publication “A Nation At Risk” by the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Education
24 years ago, yet most have not been implemented to the degree intended. Most of our schools
still only offer 17 hours of instruction per week and allow nearly 3 months of summer vacation—
a model that was designed to met the needs of an Agrarian society. If someone would read the
1983 report today, they would no doubt believe the words came straight out of today’s news.
But as usual, not much has changed with our schools or the way we develop our workforce.
Other nations have spent decades preparing their young people and demanding excellence.
With all the dramatic changes that have taken place in the past 20 years, why has our school
system remained stagnate? Unfortunately, at this point I’m afraid trying to modify our current
educational system is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
The parable of the boiled frog comes to mind. The parable demonstrates how a frog’s internal
sensory apparatus is geared toward sudden changes in its environment, not the slow gradual
ones. Hence, a frog placed in a pot of room temperature water with the heat source slowly
turned up will allow himself to boil. I think this is what has happened to us as a country. We
have ignored the slow gradual changes in our society and economy, even with pleas from
various commissions who have warned policy makers for many years of the risks we now face.
We’ve been in a long, slow decline educationally compared to other countries for many years.
The sad fact is that we have become a spoiled, complacent, mediocre nation. Arrogance born
out of our superpower status over the past 75 years has resulted in ignoring other nations who
have catapulted to the top. For most of the 20th century America was a superpower not to be
reckoned with, and our education system was second to none. But while we were basking in
our own superiority, others were preparing for this day. They have caught up and even passed
us by. And with the advent of technology that brought over 2 billion new workers into the
American economy, the ability to capitalize on their investment in education and succeed in a
global market has been a dream come true. This country has prided itself on the “American
Dream” of achieving one’s highest potential, and for decades that dream was achieved, but
without a new culture of hard work, innovation and creativity, America may well become the
follower in the global economy.
Problems rising
There must be an increased emphasis on science, technology, engineering and math—STEM
education as it’s called. When 80 percent of manufacturers report shortages of qualified
workers because today’s graduates do not have the skills required to work in today’s
manufacturing, we have a serious problem. Our education system must provide a continuous
supply of well-educated STEM-grounded entrants into regional talent pools. This means a
greater emphasis on science, math, and technology-related programs in K-12 curricula and a
greater investment in teacher education and accountability in these areas.
Aside from the reforms needed in an outdated educational system, companies who already
employ workers that will remain in the workforce need to change paradigms. The new worker of
today is also no longer satisfied with traditional workplace models. Companies need to court
their top 25 percent of workers like they would their most valuable customers. Firms are going
beyond on-site daycare facilities and gyms, to adding laundry services, auto detailing, and other
on-site services to appeal to workers with busy lives. This reaction is due to the fact that it’s a
worker’s world now. In the past, workers moved out of state to find work; now it’s no longer
necessary. Good workers are in high demand, and this trend will continue for many years as
our baby boomers leave the workforce and the best workers are competitively recruited. The
best and brightest seek higher ground by working for the most prestigious firms or hanging
their own shingle. In fact, today over 25 percent of the workforce works from home part of the
time, either because their firm allows it or because they have chosen to work for themselves.
Creating a Qualified Work Force
As a Certified Economic Developer, I understand the competitive world of attracting new
investment and the site selection process. I also know that a qualified skilled workforce is the
number one reason for any business expansion or location decision. It’s no longer whether a
community has a union environment or whether there are tax abatements or free land. The
primary issue today is always the ability to provide a qualified workforce. Education and training
opportunities, the reduction of costs in finding or creating clusters of inter-related firms, and the
promise of continuing a workforce development effort beyond start-up is what appeals most to
businesses considering any state. Efforts to bring together education, training and economic
development have been mediocre at best.
Creativity, innovation and adaptability are the keys to a good life, and high levels of education
are going to be the only security our kids can look forward to. We must demand rigorous
academics, not just the basics of the 3 R’s, just as we were warned 24 years ago from “A
Nation At Risk.” As the mother of two adolescent boys, I am fearful of the future that lies ahead
for them. We have far more to worry about than whether or not some of our children are left
behind; we need to consider an entire generation failing to compete in a global economy and
the impact this will have on economic based industries. Meager incremental improvements,
band-aid solutions, and the potpourri of federal programs aimed at selected populations just
won’t cut it anymore. We need bold action.
Some have stepped forward. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is committed to working with
partners in communities throughout the country to transform our education system and improve
the outlook for all students. Their foundation has invested millions of dollars to serve as a
catalyst designed to foster innovative educational opportunities for our young people, spark
public engagement, and create a seamless web of support for high-quality learning from a
child’s first years through college and the workplace. They understand that we must either train
the brainpower ourselves or import it.
But what about the American dream? In order to keep it alive and well, we must make some
tough decisions regarding our education system and the way we recruit and retain workers.
Our federal and state governments must develop a performance-based culture of accountability
that is focused on educating students in a way that prepares them for the world of work in the
21st century, without regard to bureaucracies and special interests. We also must offer
financial incentives to attract the best and brightest teachers, and bonuses to keep the most
successful, much like any business would do. In fact, I would like to personally present a
challenge to Bill Gates—to increase the American public high school graduation rate to 90
percent by 2015 and put the U.S. back in the top five in The Trends in International Mathematics
and Science Study carried out by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational
Achievement (currently the U.S. stands at 19 out of 21 countries, outperforming only Cyprus and
South Africa). We spend a tremendous amount of money on education and training in this
country, so why do we continue to accept mediocrity? We should expect the same kind of return
on our investment that any successful business would expect.
With the changes in skill demands and the dramatic demographic shifts in the next few years,
the need to increase the skills and credentials of the nation’s workforce has never been as
urgent as it is today. Although the myriad of programs and services and resources that currently
exist for workforce education and training are a good beginning, they are not yet integrated into a
fully functioning system that addresses the challenges we face as a nation. We must think
broadly about the various components of the workforce education and training system and how
all of the different programs, services and incentives work together in the common goal of
helping the nation meet the skill and labor needs of today and the future. We simply can’t afford
anything less.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Generational Diversity in the Workplace
Never before in the history of the American workplace are so many different age groups working
together in such close quarters. Mature-Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, GenXers and now the
Nexters (Millennials) are working shoulder to shoulder, cubicle to cubicle. Not only is
workspace reduced, but as organizations flatten out, there is less separation by job description.
At no time in American history have so many different generations with such diversity in world
views and work philosophies been asked to team up and work together.
There have been multiple generations working in organizations before, but they were usually
separated from each other by virtue of their job descriptions and a system of hierarchy. Senior
employees were mostly male, white, and were in command positions. Middle-aged employees
tended to be in middle management. And the younger workers were everywhere else. Their
contacts were mostly with their peers, or one level up, with their supervisor.
Historically, generational mixing was rare, or significantly structured by formality and protocol.
When senior employees made decisions, they were "handed down" and communicated to the
younger workers through the line supervisor. There was no sharing of how the decisions were
made, the strategy behind the order, or for that matter, any requests for input or feedback.
Today social and physical separations are minimized as barriers to generational mixing.
Sometimes, because of the post-industrial info-centered work world, the person in charge may
be younger than those he or she manages. As younger workers bring technological skills that
some seniors may not possess, they may find themselves supervising older employees.
As profitable businesses strive to run leaner and meaner, the diversity issues of people under
stress can slow down productivity, affect customer relations, increase employee turnover, and
cause retention of good employees to be a costly problem.
Merit is overcoming longevity in the deciding factors that contribute to promotion. This is not a
bad thing, after all. But as younger employees compete for the same jobs - and often get them -
as older senior employees, there is often strife in the workplace.
There are four generations working today, however, there are three very distinct and primary
generations vying for positions in a workplace of shrinking upward opportunity. The
Tradiationalists, the Baby Boomers, the Generation X, will soon be encountering the youngest
sector of the job force: the Nexters, or Generation Net or as some have called them, Millennials.
In a recent web poll taken by Fast Company magazine, 69% of respondents answered "yes" to
the question, "Does your workplace suffer from a generation rift?"
One respondent, in Montreal, said, "At 19, I am part of the younger crowd in my workplace. I,
nonetheless, take my job and professional development very seriously. I am upset at the
treatment I receive from many of my older co-workers ... No matter how hard we try, we will
always be the 'girls' or 'young ones' to them. It is demoralizing to be so disrespected when I put
so much of myself into my work."
On the other hand, another responded "no," representing 31% of respondents, and said, "Our
shared hunger for knowledge and the thrill of pooling our intellectual resources and discoveries
creates a climate where age has become irrelevant. Personally, I find a work environment
where I can learn from the 'seniors' and be pushed by the idealism and energy of the 'young
ones' to be the ideal place to grow and create." - "Greg," Orlando
One outcome of this generational blending can be creativity. People who come together from
different perspectives always have the potential to bring different thoughts and ideas to problem
solving. The potential for positive creative synergy is immense.
Unfortunately, another outcome of this generational mixing is intergenerational conflict
differences in values, world views, ways of working, ways of talking, thinking, even dressing,
which can set people in opposition to one another.
Here are some of the complaints overheard in the workplace:
"They have no work ethic. They're just slackers."
"I have a rule: I don't attend meetings after 5. I have a life."
"He's been here 6 months and he wants a promotion!"
"If the company isn't loyal to me, I'm not loyal to them."
"You can't tell them what to do. They have no idea about strategy."
"Just tell me what needs to be done. I want to run my own show."
Dealing with diversity in the workplace means understanding and relating effectively with
people who are different than you. The ability for a diverse group of people to build strength and
unity through their diversity is the power that propels organizations into new dimensions of
performance. Discussions of workplace diversity in the United States tend to start with the
topics of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and disability. Indeed, organizations that
want to thrive in the future will need to have employees and managers who are aware of and
skilled in dealing with differences along these identity lines.
Another slice of diversity that is not always included in typical diversity discussions, however, is
generational diversity. In any large organization, you are bound to find divisions, units, or work
teams where at least four distinct generations are working side by side. Sociologists,
psychologists, and everyday managers have identified important differences between these
generations in the way they approach work, work/life balance, employee loyalty, authority, and
other important issues. This presentation seeks to uncover some of the basic characteristics of
the generations in today’s workforce and discuss the relevance of these differences to
organizational performance. The intent is to prepare you for learning the many ways to motivate
all generations.
What Are the Generations?
A generation is a group of people defined by age boundaries—those who were born during a
certain era. They share similar experiences growing up and their values and attitudes,
particularly about work-related topics, tend to be similar, based on their shared experiences
during their formative years.
If this definition sounds vague (what constitutes formative years? How can millions of people
across the nation “share experiences” just because they are alive at the same time?), that is
because it is. Generations are fuzzy things. Their beginning and endpoints are approximations.
The variations within generations are expected to be large. But the generalized characteristics
of each generation do prove to be useful in managing diversity in the workplace, because they
help individuals understand their own and others’ assumptions about how organizations
should be run and how people should be treated.
Researchers have divided today’s workforce into four generations:
Generation Born: Approximate Age Now:
Matures-Traditionalists 1920–40 62–82
Boomers 1940–60 42–62
Generation X 1960–80 22–42
Millennials 1980–2000 <22
As mentioned above, the boundaries are relatively fuzzy. The dates provided above that
separate the generations are not set in stone. Generally speaking, matures are folks who grew
up during the depression and World War II (this generation is sometimes referred to as the
Veterans). The Baby Boomers (named after the boom in births following WWII) were those that
came of age in the 1960s. Generation X grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, and Millennials are,
frankly, still coming of age (but they are in the workforce!). The following table provides a
summary of current research about the characteristics of each generation group.
Matures- Traditionalists
This generation was born before World War II, and many of them grew up during (or at least
had personal memories of) the Great Depression in this country. As many Matures have
already retired, this generation only accounts for approximately 5% of the workforce today.
Those that are still working, however, are in senior positions and wield considerable power.
This generation is strongly influenced by family and religion. Education is viewed as a dream,
and leisure time is understood as a reward for hard work. This generation’s discomfort with
change and focus on stability and rules is often attributed to the painful upheaval associated
with the Great Depression and World War II. This generation is marked by the following core
values:
• Dedication
• Sacrifice
• Hard Work
• Conformity
• Law and Order
• Respect for authority
• Patience
• Delayed reward
• Duty before pleasure
• Adherence to rules
Boomers
The actual “boom” in births in this country is identified by demographers as 1946 through 1964,
but other experts say that the boomer generation is generally identified as those born between
1940 and 1960. This group grew up during a time of prosperity (1950s) turned into a time of
social upheaval (1960s and 1970s). Now aged between forty and sixty years old, the boomers
account for 45% of the workforce, more than any other generation.
This generation is often described as “self-absorbed.” They certainly tout the power of the
individual to accomplish whatever he or she sets out to. They applied their parents’ hard work
ethic more to the benefit of the individual, as opposed to the “company.” This generation began
to experience a transition in the stability of the family, however. Education was seen more as a
birthright than a dream. This generation is marked by the following core values:
• Optimism
• Team orientation
• Personal gratification
• Health and wellness
• Personal growth
• Youth
• Work
• Involvement
Generation X
The emergence of Generation X into the workforce coincided with the identification of
generational differences as important in the workplace. In the early 1990s articles started
appearing describing this generation as it moved into the workplace—with some suspicion and
frustration. Born between 1960 and 1980, Generation Xers are now between 20 and 40 years
old and number slightly fewer than the boomers, accounting for 40% of the workforce.
Generation X grew up during the 1980s and 1990s. In terms of workplace attitudes, Generation
X is known primarily as the first generation to enter the workforce after the first wave of corporate
downsizing. This affected Generation Xers’ approach to workplace loyalty and contributed to
their entrepreneurial spirit. Where their parents lived to work, Generation X works to live, and
work/life balance is also a hallmark of this generation.
Latch-key kids, often the children of divorced parents, change is more the rule for Generation
Xers than the exception. Unlike their parents who challenged leaders with an intent to replace
them, Generation Xers tend to ignore leaders. Their core values include:
• Diversity
• Thinking Globally
• Balance
• Techno-literacy
• Fun
• Informality
• Self-reliance
• Pragmatism
Millennials
The newest generation in the workforce, Millennials are those that were born after 1980. The
oldest individuals in this generation are only 22 years old, yet they still account for approximately
10% of the workforce.
We are still learning about this generation (I would hope so; my three-year-old is part of this
generation, and I am still learning about her!), but one of the clear defining characteristics is
around technology. This generation was raised on the internet. Generation Xers are no
strangers to technology, but Millennials have known nothing but PCs, email, and the internet.
They knew what the verb “to click” meant before they could read. This has made their
perspective more global, connected, and around the clock.
Millennials take the Generation X’s work/life balance one step further, to the point where leisure
is actually interwoven with work. They are known for their flexibility, and they are often at least
initially more comfortable with diversity than other generations. Their core values are being
identified as:
• Optimism
• Civic duty
• Confidence
• Achievement
• Sociability
• Morality
• Street smarts
• Diversity
So What?
The differences between generations may be interesting, but do they mean anything in the
workplace? The answer is yes, but the more important questions are “Why?” and “How?”
The why goes back to the lists of core values presented above. Values drive behavior, often in
ways that we don’t even notice. When people are working side-by-side and have largely
different values, conflicts tend to erupt, hampering productivity and morale in workplace
settings. Add to that the observation that our workplace is dominated by two generations
(Boomers and Generation X)—one of whom tends to be supervising the other—and the
repeated generationally-based conflicts are going to attract attention.
The “how” comes out in many different forms. For example, Boomers and Generation Xers
often clash over the topic of benefits. Baby Boomers, with their own retirement looming, often
place emphasis on retirement benefits, 401(k) contributions and the like. Generation Xers, on
the other hand may be focused on dependent care and parental leave. The challenge in
organizations is to provide benefits (and particularly communicate changes in them) that
address both generations’ needs.
Where these conflicts become especially difficult, however, is when one they move away from
mere interest-based differences and into negative generational stereotypes. For instance,
when Boomers see their Generation X colleagues’ lack of interest in retirement, they
sometimes develop a conclusion that Generation Xers are apathetic or only that they only care
about instant gratification. These negative stereotypes make communication difficult and can
sap productivity and morale in many different ways. As one author describes it,
“In a nutshell: Boomers see Xers as disrespectful of rules, scornful about paying dues and
lacking employer loyalty. They "couldn't care less" is a phrase boomers often use to describe
them. Xers, of course, have a different view of themselves—and why they act the way they do.
"You have to remember that we entered the working world in the post-job-security, post-
pension-security era, in the wake of downsizing" says Tulgan [an author on generational
differences, and a member of Generation X]. "That means traditional notions of loyalty and dues
paying aren't really applicable. That kind of career model isn't even available to us. That doesn't
mean we're disloyal. In fact, we're capable of a new kind of loyalty, which managers can easily
earn by forging a new workplace bargain based on relationships of short-term mutual benefit."
(Flynn 1996, p. 88)
Now What?
Responding to these generational differences and conflicts requires the same skills needed to
deal with other diversity issues: awareness, communication, and the ability to manage conflict
productively.
Awareness of the generalized differences among the generations (summarized above) can
help all employees work more productively with each other. Knowing in advance how each
generation can be triggered, either positively or negatively, can help organizations develop
balanced policies and can help indiivudal managers and employees structure their work
interactions in ways that benefit all types of people.
Effective communication strategies enable employees and managers to avoid the whirlpools of
bad morale and lost productivity that accompanies the use of negative stereotypes. There are
simple processes and frameworks for having difficult conversations that allow people from all
generations to effectively explore the assumptions and behaviors that underlie negative
stereotypes.
Communication skills are also the foundation of effective conflict resolution skills. While
negotiation skills enhance one’s ability to understand the root causes of conflict and generate
creative solutions, they all rely on the ability of the individuals involved to communicate clearly
around difficult, often emotionally charged subjects.
Developing employees’ awareness of inter-generational issues and enhancing their skills in
conflict resolution and communication should contribute to increased effectiveness in the
workplace. But developing skills should be the higher priority for organizations who want to
better deal with generational diversity. Awareness of generational trends is helpful, but it also
carries the danger of reinforcing stereotypes—either positive or negative. Remember that these
generational descriptions are based on rather imprecise data. Differences among individuals,
particularly at the edges where one generation “begins” and one “ends” may not be noticeable.
And generations change over time, so what is true for Generation Xers today may not be true in
ten or fifteen years.
An over-reliance on the detailed profiles of each generation will get organizations in trouble.
Instead, organizations should develop in their employees the skills to manage ALL
differences—including generational differences—in ways that promote respect and
empowerment for everyone.
Julie Norman Associates can help uncover those factors that will help you motivate all
employees of every generation. Contact us at (304) 546-5022.
Never before in the history of the American workplace are so many different age groups working
together in such close quarters. Mature-Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, GenXers and now the
Nexters (Millennials) are working shoulder to shoulder, cubicle to cubicle. Not only is
workspace reduced, but as organizations flatten out, there is less separation by job description.
At no time in American history have so many different generations with such diversity in world
views and work philosophies been asked to team up and work together.
There have been multiple generations working in organizations before, but they were usually
separated from each other by virtue of their job descriptions and a system of hierarchy. Senior
employees were mostly male, white, and were in command positions. Middle-aged employees
tended to be in middle management. And the younger workers were everywhere else. Their
contacts were mostly with their peers, or one level up, with their supervisor.
Historically, generational mixing was rare, or significantly structured by formality and protocol.
When senior employees made decisions, they were "handed down" and communicated to the
younger workers through the line supervisor. There was no sharing of how the decisions were
made, the strategy behind the order, or for that matter, any requests for input or feedback.
Today social and physical separations are minimized as barriers to generational mixing.
Sometimes, because of the post-industrial info-centered work world, the person in charge may
be younger than those he or she manages. As younger workers bring technological skills that
some seniors may not possess, they may find themselves supervising older employees.
As profitable businesses strive to run leaner and meaner, the diversity issues of people under
stress can slow down productivity, affect customer relations, increase employee turnover, and
cause retention of good employees to be a costly problem.
Merit is overcoming longevity in the deciding factors that contribute to promotion. This is not a
bad thing, after all. But as younger employees compete for the same jobs - and often get them -
as older senior employees, there is often strife in the workplace.
There are four generations working today, however, there are three very distinct and primary
generations vying for positions in a workplace of shrinking upward opportunity. The
Tradiationalists, the Baby Boomers, the Generation X, will soon be encountering the youngest
sector of the job force: the Nexters, or Generation Net or as some have called them, Millennials.
In a recent web poll taken by Fast Company magazine, 69% of respondents answered "yes" to
the question, "Does your workplace suffer from a generation rift?"
One respondent, in Montreal, said, "At 19, I am part of the younger crowd in my workplace. I,
nonetheless, take my job and professional development very seriously. I am upset at the
treatment I receive from many of my older co-workers ... No matter how hard we try, we will
always be the 'girls' or 'young ones' to them. It is demoralizing to be so disrespected when I put
so much of myself into my work."
On the other hand, another responded "no," representing 31% of respondents, and said, "Our
shared hunger for knowledge and the thrill of pooling our intellectual resources and discoveries
creates a climate where age has become irrelevant. Personally, I find a work environment
where I can learn from the 'seniors' and be pushed by the idealism and energy of the 'young
ones' to be the ideal place to grow and create." - "Greg," Orlando
One outcome of this generational blending can be creativity. People who come together from
different perspectives always have the potential to bring different thoughts and ideas to problem
solving. The potential for positive creative synergy is immense.
Unfortunately, another outcome of this generational mixing is intergenerational conflict
differences in values, world views, ways of working, ways of talking, thinking, even dressing,
which can set people in opposition to one another.
Here are some of the complaints overheard in the workplace:
"They have no work ethic. They're just slackers."
"I have a rule: I don't attend meetings after 5. I have a life."
"He's been here 6 months and he wants a promotion!"
"If the company isn't loyal to me, I'm not loyal to them."
"You can't tell them what to do. They have no idea about strategy."
"Just tell me what needs to be done. I want to run my own show."
Dealing with diversity in the workplace means understanding and relating effectively with
people who are different than you. The ability for a diverse group of people to build strength and
unity through their diversity is the power that propels organizations into new dimensions of
performance. Discussions of workplace diversity in the United States tend to start with the
topics of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and disability. Indeed, organizations that
want to thrive in the future will need to have employees and managers who are aware of and
skilled in dealing with differences along these identity lines.
Another slice of diversity that is not always included in typical diversity discussions, however, is
generational diversity. In any large organization, you are bound to find divisions, units, or work
teams where at least four distinct generations are working side by side. Sociologists,
psychologists, and everyday managers have identified important differences between these
generations in the way they approach work, work/life balance, employee loyalty, authority, and
other important issues. This presentation seeks to uncover some of the basic characteristics of
the generations in today’s workforce and discuss the relevance of these differences to
organizational performance. The intent is to prepare you for learning the many ways to motivate
all generations.
What Are the Generations?
A generation is a group of people defined by age boundaries—those who were born during a
certain era. They share similar experiences growing up and their values and attitudes,
particularly about work-related topics, tend to be similar, based on their shared experiences
during their formative years.
If this definition sounds vague (what constitutes formative years? How can millions of people
across the nation “share experiences” just because they are alive at the same time?), that is
because it is. Generations are fuzzy things. Their beginning and endpoints are approximations.
The variations within generations are expected to be large. But the generalized characteristics
of each generation do prove to be useful in managing diversity in the workplace, because they
help individuals understand their own and others’ assumptions about how organizations
should be run and how people should be treated.
Researchers have divided today’s workforce into four generations:
Generation Born: Approximate Age Now:
Matures-Traditionalists 1920–40 62–82
Boomers 1940–60 42–62
Generation X 1960–80 22–42
Millennials 1980–2000 <22
As mentioned above, the boundaries are relatively fuzzy. The dates provided above that
separate the generations are not set in stone. Generally speaking, matures are folks who grew
up during the depression and World War II (this generation is sometimes referred to as the
Veterans). The Baby Boomers (named after the boom in births following WWII) were those that
came of age in the 1960s. Generation X grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, and Millennials are,
frankly, still coming of age (but they are in the workforce!). The following table provides a
summary of current research about the characteristics of each generation group.
Matures- Traditionalists
This generation was born before World War II, and many of them grew up during (or at least
had personal memories of) the Great Depression in this country. As many Matures have
already retired, this generation only accounts for approximately 5% of the workforce today.
Those that are still working, however, are in senior positions and wield considerable power.
This generation is strongly influenced by family and religion. Education is viewed as a dream,
and leisure time is understood as a reward for hard work. This generation’s discomfort with
change and focus on stability and rules is often attributed to the painful upheaval associated
with the Great Depression and World War II. This generation is marked by the following core
values:
• Dedication
• Sacrifice
• Hard Work
• Conformity
• Law and Order
• Respect for authority
• Patience
• Delayed reward
• Duty before pleasure
• Adherence to rules
Boomers
The actual “boom” in births in this country is identified by demographers as 1946 through 1964,
but other experts say that the boomer generation is generally identified as those born between
1940 and 1960. This group grew up during a time of prosperity (1950s) turned into a time of
social upheaval (1960s and 1970s). Now aged between forty and sixty years old, the boomers
account for 45% of the workforce, more than any other generation.
This generation is often described as “self-absorbed.” They certainly tout the power of the
individual to accomplish whatever he or she sets out to. They applied their parents’ hard work
ethic more to the benefit of the individual, as opposed to the “company.” This generation began
to experience a transition in the stability of the family, however. Education was seen more as a
birthright than a dream. This generation is marked by the following core values:
• Optimism
• Team orientation
• Personal gratification
• Health and wellness
• Personal growth
• Youth
• Work
• Involvement
Generation X
The emergence of Generation X into the workforce coincided with the identification of
generational differences as important in the workplace. In the early 1990s articles started
appearing describing this generation as it moved into the workplace—with some suspicion and
frustration. Born between 1960 and 1980, Generation Xers are now between 20 and 40 years
old and number slightly fewer than the boomers, accounting for 40% of the workforce.
Generation X grew up during the 1980s and 1990s. In terms of workplace attitudes, Generation
X is known primarily as the first generation to enter the workforce after the first wave of corporate
downsizing. This affected Generation Xers’ approach to workplace loyalty and contributed to
their entrepreneurial spirit. Where their parents lived to work, Generation X works to live, and
work/life balance is also a hallmark of this generation.
Latch-key kids, often the children of divorced parents, change is more the rule for Generation
Xers than the exception. Unlike their parents who challenged leaders with an intent to replace
them, Generation Xers tend to ignore leaders. Their core values include:
• Diversity
• Thinking Globally
• Balance
• Techno-literacy
• Fun
• Informality
• Self-reliance
• Pragmatism
Millennials
The newest generation in the workforce, Millennials are those that were born after 1980. The
oldest individuals in this generation are only 22 years old, yet they still account for approximately
10% of the workforce.
We are still learning about this generation (I would hope so; my three-year-old is part of this
generation, and I am still learning about her!), but one of the clear defining characteristics is
around technology. This generation was raised on the internet. Generation Xers are no
strangers to technology, but Millennials have known nothing but PCs, email, and the internet.
They knew what the verb “to click” meant before they could read. This has made their
perspective more global, connected, and around the clock.
Millennials take the Generation X’s work/life balance one step further, to the point where leisure
is actually interwoven with work. They are known for their flexibility, and they are often at least
initially more comfortable with diversity than other generations. Their core values are being
identified as:
• Optimism
• Civic duty
• Confidence
• Achievement
• Sociability
• Morality
• Street smarts
• Diversity
So What?
The differences between generations may be interesting, but do they mean anything in the
workplace? The answer is yes, but the more important questions are “Why?” and “How?”
The why goes back to the lists of core values presented above. Values drive behavior, often in
ways that we don’t even notice. When people are working side-by-side and have largely
different values, conflicts tend to erupt, hampering productivity and morale in workplace
settings. Add to that the observation that our workplace is dominated by two generations
(Boomers and Generation X)—one of whom tends to be supervising the other—and the
repeated generationally-based conflicts are going to attract attention.
The “how” comes out in many different forms. For example, Boomers and Generation Xers
often clash over the topic of benefits. Baby Boomers, with their own retirement looming, often
place emphasis on retirement benefits, 401(k) contributions and the like. Generation Xers, on
the other hand may be focused on dependent care and parental leave. The challenge in
organizations is to provide benefits (and particularly communicate changes in them) that
address both generations’ needs.
Where these conflicts become especially difficult, however, is when one they move away from
mere interest-based differences and into negative generational stereotypes. For instance,
when Boomers see their Generation X colleagues’ lack of interest in retirement, they
sometimes develop a conclusion that Generation Xers are apathetic or only that they only care
about instant gratification. These negative stereotypes make communication difficult and can
sap productivity and morale in many different ways. As one author describes it,
“In a nutshell: Boomers see Xers as disrespectful of rules, scornful about paying dues and
lacking employer loyalty. They "couldn't care less" is a phrase boomers often use to describe
them. Xers, of course, have a different view of themselves—and why they act the way they do.
"You have to remember that we entered the working world in the post-job-security, post-
pension-security era, in the wake of downsizing" says Tulgan [an author on generational
differences, and a member of Generation X]. "That means traditional notions of loyalty and dues
paying aren't really applicable. That kind of career model isn't even available to us. That doesn't
mean we're disloyal. In fact, we're capable of a new kind of loyalty, which managers can easily
earn by forging a new workplace bargain based on relationships of short-term mutual benefit."
(Flynn 1996, p. 88)
Now What?
Responding to these generational differences and conflicts requires the same skills needed to
deal with other diversity issues: awareness, communication, and the ability to manage conflict
productively.
Awareness of the generalized differences among the generations (summarized above) can
help all employees work more productively with each other. Knowing in advance how each
generation can be triggered, either positively or negatively, can help organizations develop
balanced policies and can help indiivudal managers and employees structure their work
interactions in ways that benefit all types of people.
Effective communication strategies enable employees and managers to avoid the whirlpools of
bad morale and lost productivity that accompanies the use of negative stereotypes. There are
simple processes and frameworks for having difficult conversations that allow people from all
generations to effectively explore the assumptions and behaviors that underlie negative
stereotypes.
Communication skills are also the foundation of effective conflict resolution skills. While
negotiation skills enhance one’s ability to understand the root causes of conflict and generate
creative solutions, they all rely on the ability of the individuals involved to communicate clearly
around difficult, often emotionally charged subjects.
Developing employees’ awareness of inter-generational issues and enhancing their skills in
conflict resolution and communication should contribute to increased effectiveness in the
workplace. But developing skills should be the higher priority for organizations who want to
better deal with generational diversity. Awareness of generational trends is helpful, but it also
carries the danger of reinforcing stereotypes—either positive or negative. Remember that these
generational descriptions are based on rather imprecise data. Differences among individuals,
particularly at the edges where one generation “begins” and one “ends” may not be noticeable.
And generations change over time, so what is true for Generation Xers today may not be true in
ten or fifteen years.
An over-reliance on the detailed profiles of each generation will get organizations in trouble.
Instead, organizations should develop in their employees the skills to manage ALL
differences—including generational differences—in ways that promote respect and
empowerment for everyone.
Julie Norman Associates can help uncover those factors that will help you motivate all
employees of every generation. Contact us at (304) 546-5022.