Prospectus Edit and Strengthen

Possible Types and Sources of Data and Possible Analytical Strategies

Walden University

Writing a Quality Prospectus

Dr.

July 19, 2017

Instructor Comments:

test, ANOVA, and Chi-square are not rigorous enough for use in a doctoral dissertation.

Possible Types and Sources of Data and Possible Analytical Strategies

Problem statement

There is a growing interest in the effect of multigenerational workplaces on employee productivity. Studies indicate intersecting multigenerational values may lead to tension, employee dissatisfaction, and decreased individual and company productivity (Sudheimer, 2009). Companies emphasizing diversity in hiring to attract new talent and broaden company perspectives may simultaneously experience a decrease in productivity as older and younger workers clash. This is been viewed in workplaces populated by Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Millennials (Generation Y). The entry of Generation Z, children born after 1995, into the workplace may signal yet another shift in generational attitudes and pose another threat to productivity.

A typical workplace is likely to be multigenerational, with Millennials working side by side with Baby Boomers, and Generations X and Z (Rumbaut, 2004). Financial instability and increased longevity meant Baby Boomers remained in the workforce longer than their predecessors and subsequently experienced more multigenerational conflict with their younger coworkers and bosses. As Baby Boomers leave the workforce in the next 10 years, Millennials and Generation Xers will find themselves with another disruptive force in the form of Generation Z.

Regardless of which generations are present, managers must handle the challenges brought about by intergenerational conflict. Inability to do so will lead to worker dissatisfaction and reduced productivity. There are few codified effective strategies that organizations can use when managing the multigenerational workforce to increase productivity. The lack of such strategies means managing a multigenerational workforce requires costly and time-consuming trial and error to optimally reduce conflicts.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research paper is to review the factors that contribute to lowered productivity in multigenerational workforces by focusing on generational values associated with Generation Z. Specifically, the study would establish how the different generations understand and deal with conflict, and then come up with strategies that would incorporate the values of all those involved. Based on the findings of the study, recommendations will be made on possible measures to increase the productivity of multigenerational workplaces. By studying the factors causing lowered productivity in multigenerational workplaces, managers will be better equipped to minimize multigenerational conflicts. The anticipated result will be increased understanding and tolerance in the workplace, reduced conflicts, and improved productivity.

Background Section

The employment landscape is experiencing significant changes. Globalization and diverse hiring have altered the national, ethnic, racial, and gender makeup of formerly homogenous companies (Yogamalar & Samuel, 2016). In addition to this diversity, there is also the element of multigenerational divergence. As human lifespans increase and workplaces become more fluid, more populations of different ages will be brought together under a single employment roof.

There are four main categories of generations present in the workplace today (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, & Bergman, 2011). These are Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y, and Generation Z. Statistics show that the older Baby Boomers are delaying their retirement so they continue working well into their 70s (Hansen & Leuty, 2012). This means that the other cohorts of employees may have to work with this generation for another decade or so.

Studies have shown that the different generations of employees have divergent views on workplace values (Parry & Urwin, 2011; Twenge, 2013; Yogamalar & Samuel, 2016). This means managers are faced with distinct challenges for each generation. There are intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors that play a role in the thinking and decision-making process of each generation (Hansen & Leuty, 2012). Views of company loyalty, obedience to company hierarchy, the role of salary and promotion, and social/financial pressures vary significantly from generation to generation.

There also generational shifts in attitude towards work and priorities, such as younger generations being more concerned about work-life balance than older generations (Smith, Roebuck, and Elhaddaoui, 2016). For example, a Baby Boomer who sees a Generation X employee leaving at 5 PM every day may think that worker is lazy and not dedicated to the company. The Generation X worker prioritizes efficiently finishing the day so he can see his family instead of putting in long hours just to demonstrate dedication. In this context, managers need to maintain a working environment conducive to productivity while acknowledging valid differences in opinion.

To understand the generational differences and to provide possible solutions, it is important to understand the different generations. There are some scholars who like to start the generational classification with the traditionalists or silent generation which consists of people born before 1946. Statistics show that about 4% of the traditionalists are still in the workforce (Bursch & Kelly, 2014). The events of the Second World War significantly affected their childhoods. They were raised in nuclear families that were strict on discipline. Such individuals have a strong commitment to their families, communities, and country (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, & Bergman, 2011). They view work as a privilege having undergone The Great Depression of the 1930s (Mencl & Lester, 2014). The reason they are still in the workplace is that they are valued by employers for their loyalty. They bring to the table a strong work ethic and can persevere during hard times. Their nature makes them averse to conflict at the workplace and will often try to avoid disagreeing with others. They prefer managers who can issue clear and specific directions.

The Baby Boomers comprise of those born between 1946 and 1964 (Parry & Urwin, 2011). They have a strong work ethic motivated by the desire to move up the ranks and gain prestige and wealth (Mencl & Lester, 2014). They are loyal to their employers and are goal oriented. They tend to put process ahead of results to avoid conflict (Bursch & Kelly, 2014). They prefer managers who seek consensus and who value their input in the teams. HR departments can get the best from these employees by offering them flexible work arrangements. The current economic challenges, brought in part by the 2008 financial crisis, meant Baby Boomers remain in the workforce longer when their pensions and savings were wiped out. Simultaneously, improvements in healthcare have meant even financially solvent Baby Boomers choose to remain in the workforce if there are no impediments to doing so.

Generation X comprises of individuals born between 1964 and 1979 (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, & Bergman, 2011). These are often overlooked in favor of the more populous Baby Boomers and the more talked about Millennials. Bursch and Kelly (2014) notes that they were brought up in periods of uncertainty and crisis such as the AIDs epidemic, the Cold War, and the Chernobyl disaster (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, & Bergman, 2011). The women’s empowerment movement saw many of their mothers joining the workforce, leading to a generation of “latchkey children” who went home to empty houses instead of to their mothers. Rates of divorce also increased in part to no-fault divorce laws, causing more single parents and blended families. This forced the generation to learn how to be adaptable, resilient, and independent (Mencl & Lester, 2014). The generation prefers a “hands-off” management style and can be leery of authority. They are dedicated to their work if there are opportunities for growth through training or promotion (Hansen & Leuty, 2012).

The Millennials consist of people born between 1980 and 1995 (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, & Bergman, 2011). They were shaped by events such as the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the collapse of Enron, and Hurricane Katrina (Bursch & Kelly, 2014). However, the most essential element that has shaped this generation is the advent of the internet and the World Wide Web (Bursch & Kelly, 2014). These developments created numerous opportunities for this generation, allowing them to abandon some of the traditional aspects of the workforce. Their technical savviness has influenced the way they carry out research, communicate, and accomplish tasks (Hansen & Leuty, 2012). Their technical fluency may also bring them into conflict with older generations who are not familiar with newer technologies. Millennials reject the hierarchical nature of communication favored by the older generations and want their information immediately. However, the Millennials were raised under closer parental supervision than Generation X (Mencl & Lester, 2014). This means that they are more trusting of authority as compared to the previous generation.

Finally, Generation Z was born after 1995 and is just beginning to enter the workforce (Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak, 2000). They represent a significant demographic and ideological shift from their immediate predecessors. Compared to Millennials and Generation Xers, they are more racially diverse, comprised of more Hispanic and biracial individuals than prior generations, and more globally attuned, possessing greater awareness of multicultural history and attitudes (Turner, 2015). They are “digital natives” who have been immersed in Internet technology and social media from the time they could focus on a screen (Turner, 2015). They have never known a world without instant 24/7 communication and data access, preferring to multitask instead of focusing on a single item. While earlier generations experienced 9/11 as adults, Generation Z grew up in a world marked by terrorism and uncertainty. They similarly watched their families struggle with the financial turmoil of the great recession and have witnessed high levels of unemployment, fiscal uncertainty, and ballooning tuition debt (Bursch & Kelly, 2014). These difficulties during childhood have predisposed Generation Z to be more cautious, less optimistic, and potentially more conservative than prior generations. They may be more salary directed and less drawn to expensive higher education. They are also more entrepreneurial and prefer constant contact and feedback from their superiors.

In reviewing these different generations, the groundwork for solving the problem of managing multigenerational workforces has been laid. Thus, the research can establish findings that would support the development of feasible solutions to productivity issues associated with Generation Z.

Significance

This research is significant because it will provide new insight into a group that has not been extensively studied. It investigates the viewpoints of Generation Z, a population that is just beginning to enter them the workforce full-time. Only a handful of systematic studies have been conducted to examine the attitudes of Generation Z towards the workforce, including preferences for communication, areas of conflict, ideal job settings, and general values. There is little observational data, as most members are under 20, and instead most people extrapolate future performance from student behavior and survey answers.

This lack of data manifests in the contradictory attitudes of Generation Z’s future employers and recruiters. A 2014 Randstad survey found 52% of Generation Z preferred face-to-face communication with managers instead of email or texting; this is similar to generation Y at 51% (Randstad, 2014). 39% believed speaking in person is the most effective mode of communication, while email was 16%, phone was 11%, and social media contacts such as text messaging social networking or instant messaging were less than 25% combined (Ramstad, 2014). As before, these numbers were almost identical to the attitudes of Millennials. Yet popular wisdom is for employers to prepare for an influx of socially incapable, technologically savvy children who will not have a face-to-face conversation because they are so used to texting. These clearly different attitudes towards the same population need to be resolved before effective workplace communication can occur.

With this new data, management will be better able to identify and address issues that cause conflict in the multigenerational workforce. This will in turn allow increased productivity in multigenerational workforces containing Generation Z employees. The study also promotes appreciation of diversity in the management of talent drawn from various generations. Ideally, this will lead to better harmonization of the workforce, retention of employees, and overall business success.

Theoretical Framework

Generational theory forms the theoretical underpinning of this research study. A theoretical and sociological lens, the generational theory is based on the presumption that people are categorized within social strata that are characterized by specific qualities that influence the formation of identities and shared values within a particular group (Howe & Strauss, 2007). A single generational group will tend to share perspective, skills, knowledge, and attitudes more closely than similar individuals in a different generational group even when other demographic features, such as race, religion, or gender are taken into account.

Generational theory is based on the idea that historical events affect personal attitudes, values, and knowledge across a generation. These may be single events with long-lasting consequences, such as September 11th, or sweeping changes in technology or society, such as the advent of birth control pills or the invention of the World Wide Web. Changes in the economy, periods of relative conflict, demographic shifts caused by increased or decreased immigration or birth rates, etc. have somewhat predictable effects on the psychosocial development of children and their eventual behavior as adults. Observing prior generational responses to target events allows researchers to make somewhat informed predictions about future generations.

Shared generational values and shared attitudes find expression in the workplace leading to generational identities of duties and rights within the workplace. It needs to be noted that many studies of generational attitudes in the workplace are just as correlated with the age of the individual as the generation to which the individual belongs (Parry & Urwin, 2010). As a generation ages, their views may resemble those of prior generations’ age cohort. In other words, a Millennial’s views at 60 may look a lot like a Baby Boomer’s views do now based solely on life stage changes and maturation of the frontal lobe. On the other hand, clear and enduring differences in generational behavior have been noted by sociologists, which suggests this concern is overstated.

In the workplace, generational theory facilitates identification of generational differences, explores their causes, and most importantly, proposes targeted solutions to reduce conflict. Since each generation has grown up with different experiences, different interventions are needed to resolve different conflicts. A one-size-fits-all approach to improving productivity will not work when the motivations and priorities are different among workers.

Research questions:

The research study seeks to answer the following pertinent questions:

1. How do features of Generation Z influence their productivity and integration into the workforce?

2. How can existing hiring and retention strategies be augmented to attract and retain members of Generation Z?

3. How can employers reduce potential multigenerational conflicts as the first members of Generation Z enter the workforce full-time?

Nature of the Study and Research Methodology

Given the paucity of data on the performance of Generation Z in the workplace, this research paper will be based on primary rather than secondary materials. This will be a descriptive, observational cross-sectional study. The research questions on fact-finding, meaning the study will be a descriptive rather than experimental design. A descriptive research project allows for greater flexibility when designing and choosing study materials or populations. They also provide a large amount of collected data, with the caveat that it is not as rigorous as that collected by an experimental study. This is an observational study since the researchers will be unable to directly affect any aspect of the independent or dependent variables. Finally, this is a cross-sectional study since it looks at the characteristics of single groups at a discrete time point. Some elements of a retrospective study may be incorporated though that will be largely post hoc conjecture rather than statistical analysis

The study will be comprised of two portions. The first segment will look at employees perceptions of their role in the workforce, including motivation, confidence and abilities, communication, integration of technology, career trajectory, etc. For the segment, the independent variable is the generation of the participant and the dependent variable will be results on experimental batteries.

There will be four cohorts: Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z. Although the members of the Silent Generation aare still in the workforce, they represent such a small percentage that including them will skew data and cause loss of statistical power. indicators.

Existing batteries for assessing worker characteristics based largely on personality models such as the Big 5 Personality Inventory or Myers-Briggs exist and are extensively used, rightly or wrongly, in hiring. These might be appropriate to use when examining supposed characteristics of Generation Z. A Big Five Personality Inventory will be able to determine whether members of Generation Z are in fact less open and more cautious, meaning they could be a risk-averse set of workers closer to the aging out baby boomers than the more risk-taking Millennials a theory that has been proposed by several people in the field. These batteries will be scored and analyzed according to the parameters set forth by the manufacturer.

Since no similar standardized battery for workplace styles exists, a protocol similar to that used by the Ranstad Corporation in 2014 will be created for the study. Custom created testing batteries for this experiment will use a five-point Likert scale with responses ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. This will allow quantitative comparison mean scores via ANOVA and Students t-test as well as chi-squared statistics when examining percentages. In addition, a free-form survey section will be included so participants may expound on their answers if motivated to do so. The number of people who use this function from every generation will also be looked at; it is possible there will be intergenerational differences in the urge to add more than is already provided. The null hypothesis in the section is there will be no differences among the generations.

To control for the effect of age on generational studies, older generations will be asked questions regarding whether they believe their views have changed as they have aged. These may include the role of salary, external motivations, work life balance, use of and attitudes towards technology, and feelings on multitasking. The null hypothesis for this section is there are no significant differences in priorities and perceptions across a generations lifespan, while a positive finding will be statistically significant differences among responses.

The second portion of this research experiment will involve surveys sent out to human resources departments and managers. This sample would ideally contain small and large businesses, for-profit and nonprofit, and a variety of fields such as healthcare, education, production, and retail. To diversify the pool of potential respondents and avoid regional bias in business composition, surveys will be sent to businesses both proximal to the University and in other cities around the United States. While an international study would be interesting, it is beyond the scope of this project.

These surveys would investigate current practices in hiring, including diversity targeting, retention strategies, in-house successes and failures in motivation, organizational structure, and performance metrics. It will also ask what conflicts they have seen among workers and how their approaches have been to remedy them. Finally, the survey will look at what they have heard about Generation Z, what they have seen (if any) in full-time Generation Z workers, and what changes they are preparing to implement to accommodate the new generation of workers. Part of this will be assessing where they have obtained their information. Our they more likely to focus on data-driven surveys, impressions from people they know in the community, HR blogs, or other sources.

These surveys will be qualitative data. Categories of strategies, types of skills, sources of information, and overall percentage will be grouped and compared using chi-square. Businesses with a significant history, such as large corporations, educational facilities, or hospitals will have the opportunity describe the challenges that have occurred with every new generation. Smaller businesses may only be able to speak to the introduction of a handful of members of any generation at a given time. Part of the analyses will be describing the differences between fields and employer sizes based on US Department of Labor definitions.

Finally, these data will be compared with data from the first part to see if institutional perceptions of Generation Z match up with Generation Z’s perceptions of themselves. It will see if the possible challenges match up with actual experiences and whether existing strategies will be sufficient to address multigenerational needs.

References

Bergman, S. M., Fearrington, M. E., Davenport, S. W., & Bergman, J. Z. (2011). Millennials, narcissism, and social networking: What narcissists do on social networking sites and why. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(5), 706–711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.12.022

Bursch, D., & Kelly, K. (2014). Managing the multigenerational workplace.

Hansen, J. C., & Leuty, M. E. (2012). Work Values across Generations. Journal of Career Assessment, 20(1), 34-52. doi:10.1177/1069072711417163.

Mencl, J., & Lester, S. W. (2014). More alike than different: What generations value and how the values affect employee workplace perceptions. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(3), 257-272.

Parry, E., & Urwin, P. (2011). Generational differences in work values: A review of theory and evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews. Vol. 73. No. 1. pp 79-96. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00285.x

Rumbaut, R. G. (2004). Ages, life stages, and generational cohorts: Decomposing the immigrant first and second generations in the United States. International migration review, 38(3), 1160-1205.

Twenge, J. M. (2013). The Evidence for Generation Me and Against Generation We. Emerging Adulthood, 1(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696812466548

Yogamalar, I., & Samuel, A. (2016). Shared Values and organizational Citizenship Behavior of generational cohorts: Review and Future Directions. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 21(2), 249-271.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in Your Workplace. New York, N.Y.: American Management Association,

Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (n.d.). The next 20 years: how customer and workforce attitudes will evolve. Harvard Business Review, (July-August 2007), 41–52.

Parry, E., & Urwin, P. (2011). Generational Differences in Work Values: A Review of Theory and Evidence: Generational Differences in Work Values. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00285.x

Randstad US. (2014). Gen Z and millennials collide at work. Retrieved from http://experts.randstadusa.com/hubfs/Randstad_GenZ_Millennials_Collide_Report.pdf

Smith, D. N., Roebuck, D., & Elhaddaoui, T. (2016). Organizational Leadership and Work-Life Integration: Insights from Three Generations of Men. Creighton Journal of Interdisciplinary Leadership, 2(1), 54. https://doi.org/10.17062/cjil.v2i1.31

Sudheimer, E. E. (2009). Stories Appreciating Both Sides of the Generation Gap: Baby Boomer and Generation X Nurses Working Together. Nursing Forum, 44(1), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6198.2009.00127.x

Tulgan, B. (2013). Meet Generation Z: the second generation within the giant “Millennial” cohort. New Haven, CT: RainmakerThinking, Inc.

Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and Social Interest. Journal of Individual Psychology, 71(2), 103–113.