More Alike Than Different

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to extend generations research by investigating similarities and differences regarding the importance generations place on the presence of various workplace characteristics. We hypothesized (1) that similarities in the importance of workplace factors between generations would be more prevalent than differences and (2) that the importance of the workplace factors would have consistently similar or different moderating effects among generations on the relationships between employee perceptions of the factors at their organizations and employee attitudes. As expected, results showed the generations were similar on 7 of the 10 work values examined. Findings also revealed similarities and differences between the generations for the factors as moderators, although more differences than similarities were present from these analyses. Implications of these findings as well as directions for future research are discussed.

The Economic ABCsof Educating and Training Generations X, Y, and Z

“…Learning-and-development leaders need to realize that all employees within a generational cohort do not necessarily value the same things (Mencl & Lester, 2014;Wong et al 2008).…”

Our Quest for a Great Place to Work: Meaning in and at Work through the Fit Perspective

“…However, these characterizations of great places to work are confounded by a myriad other somewhat idiosyncratic suggestions at the individual, leadership, work group, and organizational levels. At the individual level, factors such as good physical workspace and compensation, recognition, caring human resource, learning and career development opportunities, flexibility, job satisfaction, challenging work, etc., have been suggested to characterize great places to work (Park et al, 2015;Mencl & Lester, 2014;Butler, 2014).…”

“…At the leadership level, it is suggested that great places to work have inspiring, authentic, and servant leadership (Henderson, 2011;Love & Singh, 2011;McGee-Cooper & Trammell, 2010). At the group level, factors such as team spirit, mutuality, cohesiveness, group focused processes, quality relationship, authentic behavior, collaboration, diversity are stated to signal great places to work (Park et al, 2015;Mencl & Lester, 2014;Crainer, 2014;Taskinen, 2011). Finally, at the organizational level, studies suggest that factors such as low levels of hierarchy, consistent assessment practices, autonomy, focus on employee wellness and engagement, worklife balance, safety orientation, fun work environment, transparency, accountability, civility and networking opportunities, focus on all stakeholders, corporate citizenship behavior, community oriented policies, social goals, and well laid out and easily accessible ethics statement are indicative of great places to work (Hoover & Pepper, 2014;Philipsen, 2014;Hinkin & Tracey, 2010;Bakker, 2010;Bernardi, Bosco & Vassill, 2006;DeCotiis, Sullivan, Hyatt, & Avery, 2004;van Marrewijk, 2004;Joyce, 2003).…”

“…With respect to the work, the factors that contribute to pride in the work (Butler et al, 2016), the challenge that the work offers (Mencl & Lester, 2014) and job satisfaction (Butler, 2014) are factors that make a place to work great. With respect to the supervisor, the important factors identified were visionary, authentic and inspiring (Henderson, 2011;Love & Singh, 2011) and/or servant leadership (McGee-Cooper & Trammell, 2010), committed to create a sense of community, to encourage employees to take pride in their work (Love & Singh, 2011), to include societal good in the organizations' mission (Henderson, 2011), to act as mentors (Philipsen, 2014), and to formulate people-first policies (van Marrewijk, 2004).…”

Conceptualizing Employer-Based Brand Equity and Employer Brand Pyramid

“…Hillebrandt and Ivens (2013) Found work life balance (WLB) as one of the factors affecting employer brand of the organization. Mencl and Lester (2014) In their studies differences emerged regarding career advancement opportunities, diversity climate, and immediate recognition and feedback, which were more valued by Generation Y.…”