Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T04:26:18.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Are the Benefits of Focusing on Generation-Based Differences and at What Cost?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2015

David M. Cadiz ,
Donald M. Truxillo  and
Franco Fraccaroli
David M. Cadiz*
Affiliation:
Oregon Nurses Foundation, Tualatin, Oregon
Donald M. Truxillo
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Portland State University
Franco Fraccaroli
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento-Polo di Rovereto
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David M. Cadiz, Oregon Nurses Foundation, 18765 SW Boones Ferry Road, Suite 200 Tualatin, Oregon 97062. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We agree with and expand on the points made by Costanza and Finkelstein (2015) regarding the definition of “generation” and its measurement, the lack of theory in this area; the harmful effects of propagating generationally based differences to organizations, society, and individuals; and the future directions to make this line of research more applicable to organizations and the workplace. Examining age differences at work through the lens of well-established within-person changes in physical ability (e.g., Maertens, Putter, Chen, Diehl, & Huang, 2012), cognition (e.g., Schaie, 1994), motivation (e.g., Kooij, De Lange, Jansen, Kanfer, & Dikkers, 2011), personality (e.g., Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006), and lifespan development theories (e.g., Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999) would likely be more productive than using loose, relatively atheoretical generational stereotypes to understand age differences at work.

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 356 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (Eds.). (1990). Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Böhm, S. A., Kunze, F., & Bruch, H. (2014). Spotlight on age‐diversity climate: The impact of age‐inclusive HR practices on firm‐level outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 67 (3), 667–704.Google Scholar
Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54, 165–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costanza, D. P., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2015). Generationally based differences in the workplace: Is there a there there? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8 (4), 308–323.Google Scholar
Finkelstein, L. M., Ryan, K. M., & King, E. B. (2013). What do the young (old) people think of me? Content and accuracy of age-based metastereotypes. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22, 633–657.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 96–107.Google Scholar
Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams, and task performance: Changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1029–1045.Google Scholar
Häusler-Gross, K. (2013). Hybride Heimat: Changing concepts of Heimat and identity post-Wende stories of Zonekinder and Wendkinder. In Eichmans, G. & Franke, Y. (Eds.), Heimat goes mobile: Hybrid forms of home in literature and film (pp. 122–145). Newcastle, United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Iweins, C., Desmette, D., Yzerbyt, V., & Stinglhamber, F. (2013). Ageism at work: The impact of intergenerational contact and organizational multi-age perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22, 331–346.Google Scholar
Kooij, D. T., De Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G., Kanfer, R., & Dikkers, J. S. (2011). Age and work‐related motives: Results of a meta‐analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 197–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 139–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maertens, J. A., Putter, S. E., Chen, P. Y., Diehl, M., & Huang, Y. (2012). Physical capabilities and occupational health of older workers. In Hedge, J. W. & Borman, W. C. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of work and aging (pp. 215–235). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mattes, R. (2012). The “Born Frees”: The prospects for generational change in post‐apartheid South Africa. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47 (1), 133–153.Google Scholar
Ryder, N. B. (1965). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. American Sociological Review, 30, 843–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Walton, K. E., & Viechtbauer, W. (2006). Patterns of mean-level change in personality traits across the life course: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaie, K. W. (1994). The course of adult intellectual development. American Psychologist, 49, 304–313.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In Austin, W. G. & Worchel, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Group faultlines a review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management, 38, 969–1009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Truxillo, D. M., Cadiz, D. M., Rineer, J. R., Zaniboni, S., & Fraccaroli, F. (2012). A lifespan perspective on job design: Fitting the job and the worker to promote job satisfaction, engagement, and performance. Organizational Psychology Review, 2, 340–360.Google Scholar
von Hippel, C., Kalokerinos, E. K., & Henry, J. D. (2013). Stereotype threat among older employees: Relationship with job attitudes and turnover intentions. Psychology and Aging, 28 (1), 17–27.Google Scholar
Vorauer, J., & Kumhyr, S. (2001). Is this about you or me? Self- versus other-directed judgments and feelings in response to intergroup interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 706–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar