%20-%20https://sketch.com%20--%3e%3ctitle%3e3ECBBF50-FD08-412A-943D-2CFC5E025A16%3c/title%3e%3cdesc%3eCreated%20with%20sketchtool.%3c/desc%3e%3cg%20id='Stylesheet'%20stroke='none'%20stroke-width='1'%20fill='none'%20fill-rule='evenodd'%3e%3cg%20transform='translate(-926.000000,%20-668.000000)'%20id='BUTTONS'%3e%3cg%20transform='translate(100.000000,%20597.000000)'%3e%3cg%20id='BTN-/-RIGHTS'%20transform='translate(816.000000,%2065.000000)'%3e%3cg%20id='ICON-/-Rights'%20transform='translate(10.000000,%206.000000)'%3e%3cpath%20d='M13.5752841,0%20L1.34943182,0%20C0.59375,0%200,0.586666667%200,1.33333333%20L0,22.6666667%20C0,23.4133333%200.620738636,24%201.34943182,24%20L17.6505682,24%20C18.40625,24%2019,23.3866667%2019,22.6666667%20L19,5.36%20L13.5752841,0%20Z%20M13.5752841,1.89333333%20L17.0838068,5.36%20L13.5752841,5.36%20L13.5752841,1.89333333%20Z%20M1.34943182,22.6666667%20L1.34943182,1.33333333%20L12.1988636,1.33333333%20L12.1988636,5.36%20C12.1988636,6.10666667%2012.7926136,6.69333333%2013.5482955,6.69333333%20L17.6235795,6.69333333%20L17.6505682,22.6666667%20L1.34943182,22.6666667%20Z'%20id='Shape'%20fill='%23595959'%20fill-rule='nonzero'%3e%3c/path%3e%3ccircle%20id='Oval'%20stroke='%23595959'%20stroke-width='1.5'%20fill='%23595959'%20cx='9.5'%20cy='13.5355339'%20r='5.5'%3e%3c/circle%3e%3cpolyline%20id='Path-2'%20stroke='%23FFFFFF'%20stroke-width='1.5'%20transform='translate(9.500000,%2013.035534)%20rotate(45.000000)%20translate(-9.500000,%20-13.035534)%20'%20points='8%2016.0355339%2011%2016.0355339%2011%2010.0355339'%3e%3c/polyline%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Bennett, Misty M.
Beehr, Terry A.
and
Ivanitskaya, Lana V.
2017.
Work-family conflict: differences across generations and life cycles.
Journal of Managerial Psychology,
Vol. 32,
Issue. 4,
p.
314.
Rudolph, Cort W.
and
Zacher, Hannes
2017.
Leading Diversity in the 21st Century.
p.
243.
Cox, Cody B.
Young, Friederike K.
Guardia, Adrian B.
and
Bohmann, Amy K.
2018.
The Baby Boomer bias: The negative impact of generational labels on older workers.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
Vol. 48,
Issue. 2,
p.
71.
Radford, Katrina
Chapman, Geoffrey
Bainbridge, Hugh T. J.
and
Halvorsen, Beni
2018.
Work and Identity.
p.
39.
Weiss, David
Perry, Elissa L
and
Wang, Mo
2019.
Implications of Generational and Age Metastereotypes for Older Adults at Work: The Role of Agency, Stereotype Threat, and Job Search Self-efficacy.
Work, Aging and Retirement,
Costanza, David P.
Finkelstein, Lisa M.
Imose, Ruth A.
and
Ravid, Daniel M.
2020.
The Cambridge Handbook of the Changing Nature of Work.
p.
20.
Standifer, Rhetta L.
and
Lester, Scott W.
2020.
Actual Versus Perceived Generational Differences in the Preferred Working Context: An Empirical Study.
Journal of Intergenerational Relationships,
Vol. 18,
Issue. 1,
p.
48.
Weiss, David
and
Zhang, Xin
2020.
Multiple Sources of Aging Attitudes: Perceptions of Age Groups and Generations From Adolescence to Old Age Across China, Germany, and the United States.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
Vol. 51,
Issue. 6,
p.
407.
Brink, Kyle E.
and
Zondag, Marcel M.
2021.
Examining Job Attribute Preferences Across Three Generational Cohorts.
Journal of Career Development,
Vol. 48,
Issue. 1,
p.
60.
2025.
Although we agree with Costanza and Finkelstein (Reference Costanza and Finkelstein2015) that current research has failed to find consistent evidence of actual generational differences and that this research is limited methodologically, we suggest that at least some of these limitations could and should be addressed by future research before any firm conclusions are drawn. Further, the authors make an important but empirically untested assumption that generational stereotypes exist. We discuss why it is important to rigorously test this assumption. Finally, the authors assert that generational stereotypes are being “sold” as business strategy to organizations and managers and that that they should be neither sold nor used in the workplace. However, the authors’ recommendation is based on the premise that individuals acquire stereotypes from others and that they can easily suppress the use of their stereotypes. This advice runs counter to what research suggests about stereotypic processes. We more fully discuss each of these three points next.
Could There Be a There, There?
Despite the theoretical, conceptual, and methodological problems that characterize the existing, although limited, research on generational differences that the authors highlight, there are some potentially fruitful research avenues that should be explored before we conclude that there is no basis for generational differences. First, the authors note that there is little theoretically compelling evidence for generational differences and that they would “welcome a comprehensive theory of generations, or even a minimally sound theoretical rationale for proposed differences.” However, such frameworks exist and should be empirically tested. For example, Dencker, Joshi, and Martocchio (Reference Dencker, Joshi and Martocchio2008) proposed a theoretical framework for linking generational “memories” to workplace attitudes and behaviors, drawing on Mannheim's (Reference Mannheim1952) sociological work on generational identity. Egri and Ralston (Reference Egri and Ralston2004) postulated that generational differences emerge as part of national subculture encapsulating the nature of cultural change that has taken place in a country during particular time periods. Other researchers propose explanations aligned with lifestage theory (Levinson, Reference Levinson1978), suggesting that people's values, attitudes, and preferences change as they move through different stages in the developmental human lifecycle. Surprisingly, we have seen little empirical work that has applied these theoretical frameworks to explore generational differences.
Second, two important methodological problems characterize much of the current research on generational differences at work. The authors rightly point out that existing evidence is largely U.S.-centric, and thus generalizations “that individuals worldwide should all be grouped into common generations based on events experienced only by those in the United States is nonsensical.” To the extent that U.S.-defined generational cohorts are applied to non-U.S. samples in other countries, research results related to generational differences or lack thereof are suspect. Further, research conducted only in the United States using U.S.-defined cohorts is unlikely to generalize to the experiences of employees in other countries. As a result of these internal and external validity problems, it is premature to conclude that current research finds no evidence of generational differences. We suggest that qualitative research would be helpful to better understand the defining historical periods of generations across different countries. This research avenue has remained largely underinvestigated to date. A second methodological problem is related to the difficulty of separating out the effects of age, period, and cohort in research designs attempting to unearth real generational differences at work. We suggest that previous researchers may not have found generational differences in part because they did not control for both country/culture and lifestage in their research designs. Mannheim's (Reference Mannheim1952) seminal work on generational identity suggests that people within a certain cohort or of a certain age, in a similar location, react differently to experiences based on their lifestage (e.g., marriage, parenthood). Cogin (Reference Cogin2012) recently found empirical evidence of generational differences in work attitudes when the effects of lifestage and culture were considered. It makes intuitive sense that people of a certain age or cohort, who grew up in a similar time period, in the same country, might react differently to events or have different needs based on their lifestage. Future research should consider “generation” as a multidimensional construct, examining the interaction of age, cohort, period, country/culture, and lifestage over time.
Finally, although there is a growing body of research investigating generational differences, the majority of it is based on self-report data on work values (e.g., autonomy, working conditions) and work attitudes (e.g., job satisfaction, organizational commitment). Consequently, there is a dearth of research exploring actual work outcomes and behaviors. We suggest that future research that examines generational differences in objective performance-related data (e.g., productivity, turnover) would provide a fuller understanding of the potential impact of generational membership in organizations and help researchers combat the problem of self-report bias.
Are There Generational Stereotypes?
The authors assert that “stereotypes about generational differences in the workplace abound.” We contend that there is in fact limited empirical evidence for this assertion (Perry, Hanvongse, & Casoinic, Reference Perry, Hanvongse, Casoinic, Burke, Cooper and Field2013). As the authors point out, academic research has tended to focus on exploring actual differences between generations. In fact, relatively little research attention has been given to the existence of perceived generational differences (Perry et al., Reference Perry, Hanvongse, Casoinic, Burke, Cooper and Field2013). The authors’ assumption that generational stereotypes exist, although perhaps intuitive, is problematic. Based on the limited research that has been done to date, how do we know that generational stereotypes exist? How do we know that they are clearly differentiated from what are likely to be highly correlated age stereotypes? How do we know that generational stereotypes (rather than other types) “guide practice and strategies at work” and are potentially wreaking havoc for the targets of such stereotypes? The simple answer is that we do not yet know this. Consequently, we suggest that it is important to establish that generational stereotypes exist before the authors or other industrial–organizational psychologists conclude that these stereotypes result in potentially discriminatory or otherwise problematic employment-related decisions for employees.
Only very recently has academic research begun to explore generational stereotypes. One of the only examples of this type of research of which we are aware is a study by Perry et al. (Reference Perry, Hanvongse, Casoinic, Burke, Cooper and Field2013). This study attempted to determine whether people have generational stereotypes that are distinct from age stereotypes, and if so, what the contents of these generational stereotypes are. The authors’ research took a three-prong approach. First, they reviewed the practitioner literature to see how members of different generations were typically described. Second, they examined the academic literature to determine whether there was any empirical basis for the claims of the existence of generational stereotypes made in the practitioner literature. Third, they conducted an exploratory study measuring generational stereotypes in the workplace using a sample of graduate students. Finally, the authors assessed the extent to which the generational stereotypes they explored were distinct from age stereotypes. The authors concluded that the academic research that has been conducted to date cannot address the issue of whether there are generational stereotypes. This is because this literature has focused on actual generational work values and attitudes rather than stereotypes per se. The authors’ own research provides preliminary evidence for the existence of generational stereotypes. However, a comparison of these stereotypes with those discussed in the practitioner literature suggests that practitioners endorse generational stereotypes for which there is limited empirical support. Finally, the authors conclude that although there is overlap between age stereotypes and generational stereotypes (particularly between Baby Boomers and older worker stereotypes), there are also important differences.
We suggest that additional research on generational stereotypes is important so that we can better understand the content of such stereotypes and the ways in which they are similar and different from age stereotypes. We must establish that generational stereotypes are not just another label for what are in effect age stereotypes. To the extent that generational and age stereotypes are de facto the same, what might appear to be generational discrimination may instead be age discrimination. This is an important distinction as there is legal protection for discrimination based on age but not generational membership. Only after we more fully understand the content of generational stereotypes can we begin to understand the implications of using these stereotypes for employment-related decisions and outcomes. Although there may be negative implications of activating generational stereotypes as the authors suggest, there may also be positive implications. For example, Perry et al. (Reference Perry, Hanvongse, Casoinic, Burke, Cooper and Field2013) found that aspects of the Baby Boomer stereotype that were not shared with the older worker stereotype include competitive, achievement oriented, and career driven traits. This leads us to wonder whether an individual who is described as a 60-year-old might experience different and possibly less positive work outcomes than if he or she were instead described as a Baby Boomer. A better understanding of generational stereotypes may also help us to understand situations in which stereotype threat is more and less likely to operate. For example, an individual who identifies him or herself as an older worker (who is typically perceived in less positive terms with respect to performance-related traits) may be more likely to experience stereotype threat than when the same person identifies him or herself as a Baby Boomer (who is typically perceived in relatively more positive terms on these traits). Our point is that the negative implications of using generational stereotypes is an empirical question not, as the authors suggest, a forgone conclusion.
Can We Simply Tell People To Stop Using Stereotypes?
The lack of evidence of actual generational differences may suggest, as the authors contend, that perceptions of generational differences (i.e., generational stereotypes) are inaccurate and their use is potentially problematic. However, the authors’ suggestion that these stereotypes not be sold to or used by organizations and managers is unlikely to be effective for three reasons. First, research suggests that the activation and application of stereotypes is a largely automatic phenomenon that can occur without conscious awareness, particularly when these stereotypes are chronically accessible or salient (Bodenhausen & Macrae, Reference Bodenhausen, Macrae and Wyer1998). The ubiquity of talk about generational differences in the workplace, especially in American society, may serve to continually prime these generational stereotypes and make them readily available for use, even if organizations engage in deliberate attempts to counter or correct them. Therefore, it is unlikely that advice to avoid using generational stereotypes will allow organizations to put the genie back in the bottle any time soon.
Second, research suggests that telling individuals to stop stereotyping is a potentially ineffective strategy that may backfire under certain conditions or produce a rebound effect that makes these stereotypes more likely to be used in the longer term (e.g., Wegner, Reference Wegner1994). For example, individuals who are cognitively busy, as individuals and decision makers in the workplace often are, may in fact stereotype more when instructed not to do so than those who are less cognitively busy (Kulik, Perry, & Bourhis, Reference Kulik, Perry and Bourhis2000). In addition, actively inhibiting or suppressing generational stereotypes in particular instances may result in their greater availability later, with negative implications for the targets of these stereotypes (Macrae, Bodenhausen, Milne, & Jetten, Reference Macrae, Bodenhausen, Milne and Jetten1994). Research suggests that effective strategies for suppressing or inhibiting stereotypes may instead include training individuals to develop nonstereotypic associations to particular categories (e.g., Boomers are good with technology; Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen, & Russin, Reference Kawakami, Dovidio, Moll, Hermsen and Russin2000), encouraging self-focus and self-regulation during organizational decision making (Macrae, Bodenhausen, & Milne, Reference Macrae, Bodenhausen and Milne1998), and developing and rewarding organizational norms and goals related to fairness, accuracy, or accountability (Perry & Finkelstein, Reference Perry and Finkelstein1999). We suggest that strategies aimed at decreasing our reliance on generational categories should be based on this research.
Finally, the authors suggest that generational stereotypes are being “sold” as a business strategy to organizations and managers and that these transactions should be stopped. Research suggests that individuals develop stereotypes in various ways, only one of which requires them to be conveyed explicitly or intentionally. Stereotypes are also acquired through cultural consensus and evolution (Martin et al., Reference Martin, Hutchison, Slessor, Urquhart, Cunningham and Smith2014) and through firsthand experience with members of a particular stereotyped group (i.e., generation). Thus, even if we could put a stop to the “sale” of these stereotypes, this will not prevent them from developing and influencing workplace judgments and decision making.
Conclusion
At this juncture, we simply do not know enough about actual generational differences and generational stereotypes in the workplace to make some of the broad, sweeping conclusions that the focal article makes. Employment-related generational issues and differences continue to be a topic of great discussion and concern; however, the academic research has not kept pace. Additional academic work is needed to close the gap between what practitioners think they are seeing and experiencing and what we know based on more rigorous research (Rynes, Giluk, & Brown, Reference Rynes, Giluk and Brown2007). At least then our discourse, understanding, and associated interventions will be more empirically and theoretically driven.