Workplace Leaders: Abstain from Declaring Five Generational Presence. Such Claim is Unsubstantiated.
Some organizations like to claim they have multiple generations in their workforce. However, this statement can be misleading. If an individual at the age of 60 works for Company B, then employees of ages similar to their parents, grandparents, children, and even grandchildren should also be employed there. This is truly five generations within a workplace.
When businesses declare having five generations, they often mean including workers under five age categories: Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z, also known as generational labels. However, these categorizations are not based on actual generations but rather on arbitrary timeframes that lack any scientific or sociological basis.
Generational Labels: Rise and Fall
In a controversial article, Dr. Daniel Jolles, a Research Officer in Behavioral Science at The Inclusion Initiative at the London School of Economics and Political Science, discussed the usage of generational labels. He argued that these labels were initially initiated by the Pew Research Center, and later popularized through social media. Despite their widespread use, concerns about their lack of scientific rigor and potential negative impact on workplace culture have arisen.
The Pew Research Center conducted a study due to mounting pressure, concluding that the labels lack substantive scientific foundation and are often misused. In response, the Center revised its approach in May 2023, warning readers about the oversimplification and stereotyping inherent in label usage and the importance of highlighting similarities across age groups instead of focusing on differences.
Avoidance of Age Labels
Understanding the risks associated with age labels is crucial for fostering a stronger work culture.
- Age labels perpetuate the spread of negative stereotypes, which in turn can lead to age-related biases, workplace conflicts, reduced productivity, and increased employee absenteeism and turnover.
- Labels can cause unnecessary separation in the workplace, weakening teamwork and productivity.
- The oversimplification and stereotypical references used in labeling have led to the rise of self-proclaimed generational experts, who employ these flawed narratives to sell consulting packages to businesses hoping to improve employee satisfaction and attract younger talent. Despite their claims, no empirical research has shown that generational differences require differential training.
Alternatives to Age Labels
Before integrating age into any internal or external communication (written or spoken), ask if it is essential. If you would not include race or gender in the same reference, then age might not be necessary. If age is relevant to include, make sure it is consistently represented in a specific and objective manner (e.g., 15-25, 26-35, etc.).
There are cases where age might be a relevant consideration. For instance, companies measuring diversity representation across various dimensions, such as pay equity for the same types of jobs, can benefit from considering age. However, age references should be employed with caution to avoid perpetuating stereotypes or fueling age-related biases.
Bobby Duffy, a Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Policy Institute in London, challenges societal perceptions of generations, society, and human behavior. He argues that there is not a significant shift in the needs and priorities of incoming cohorts and suggests four alternatives to increase workplace inclusion:
- Emphasizing the success of teams with diverse ages.
- Encouraging a focus on shared values and objectives to build a positive workplace culture.
- Emphasizing individual strengths, regardless of age.
- Promoting mentorship opportunities across generations.
By avoiding age labels and fostering workplace inclusivity, organizations can capitalize on the synergies that stem from diverse age groups, leading to the formation of best-in-class workplaces for all generations. Overall, understanding the distinction between age labels and actual generations is crucial for promoting more authentic communications and avoiding age hype.
- Organizations that claim to have multiple generations in their workforce, including individuals of various ages like a 60-year-old and their relatives, are truly operating within a multigenerational workplace.
- The use of generational labels, such as Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z, while popular, lack a scientific or sociological basis and can lead to oversimplification and stereotyping in the workplace.
- To avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes and age-related biases, businesses should consider the potential risks of using age labels and explore alternatives, such as focusing on shared values, individual strengths, and mentorship opportunities.
- By promoting workplace inclusivity and avoiding the use of age labels, employers can create an environment that fosters synergies among various age groups, ultimately leading to the formation of a best-in-class workforce for all generations.
