A multigenerational workforce is the current reality in all workplaces today. This variation in age groups will soon become more prominent as “for the first time in history five generations will be working together side by side” (Knight, R., 2014). Accordingly, motivating a workforce of various age groups and potentially various needs and requirements will be necessary.
Commitment
If one is to look at the leader’s role in dealing with multiple generations, as it applies to commitment, we must first understand the levels of commitment and how they are beneficial to a leader to know.
Normative Commitment is an employee’s belief that they have an obligation to stay with the organization (Eyre, 2015). We see employees at this level often have the unrealistic expectation that they must stay at an organization and often have a feeling of being “trapped.” Being “obliged” to stay at an organization because of intrinsic factors within one’s self is the basis for this level of commitment.
Continuance Commitment is that of an employee’s belief to stay at the organization for fear of loss (Neuwoudt, 2014). The belief that they need to stay is often based on financial means – they’re concerned with the loss of pay and benefits. This, similar to Normative Commitment, in that an employee can feel trapped. If an employee’s commitment is based on continuance, it has been shown to contribute to the highest degree of negative job satisfaction (Eric G. Lambert, 2012). Further, the employee’s overall life-satisfaction is low. Continuance Commitment is seen as a “red flag” for leaders to be aware of in their employees.
Affective Commitment is the employee has a love or desire to stay based on their inner beliefs – they have a strong desire to stay at an organization (Neuwoudt, 2014). Employees with an emotional attachment show an affinity for the organization, and in turn, have a perception of being treated fairly by supervisors.
Application
Knowing the concepts is helpful, but there are several concepts about commitment levels in general that leaders must consider. All the levels have been found to negatively relate to turnover, and that’s regardless of the type of commitment level.
Although turnover can still occur, Affective Commitment has been shown to highly correlate to a higher level of job satisfaction, as well as attendance and performance (Eric G. Lambert, 2012).
So, how do leaders and organizations get individual employees to a level of affective commitment? Is it in pay, meaning, or some other factors? Studies have shown that employees with lower pay but high affective ratings for their jobs are motivated and unconcerned with pay (Myers, 2013). So, benefits have little influence on affection for the organization. “Remember that people are more likely to develop Affective Commitment if they experience positive emotions” (Eyre, 2015).
Baby Boomers, born 1946 to 1964, stayed in jobs longer than most other generations – an average of 15 to 20 years. Boomers have stayed with regards to Normative and Continuance Commitment. The generation shows frustration when benefits packages are not commensurate with time of employment. Boomers see themselves as young and as a result often fail to perceive the multigenerational differences observed by Generations X and Y. Boomers are extreme competitors in the workplace and see competition as an effective tool to increase performance (Single Point, 2015). Interestingly, Boomers typically want to be part of a team and as such should be given opportunities to do so. Boomers are civically minded and are acutely aware of human rights, so any perceived injustice in the workplace will invoke emotional response from them.
Leaders that want Boomers to be affective towards their organization should build teams and provide areas for the teams to compete. Boomers should be recognized for their commitment to the organization and time enrolled. They should be included in technology discussions, and working with younger employees to assist them is a positive move for any leader (Mujtaba, 2007). Leaders that engage Boomers should be aware of their need to live the maxim, “feeling like a part of something larger” (Mujtaba, 2007).
Members of Generation X, born between 1965 and 1976, are typically at Normative Commitment levels but deeply desire an Affective Commitment to an organization (Single Point, 2015). They respond well to fairness based on work and not seniority, a departure from what Boomers typically exhibit. Members of Generation X want a job with meaning but understand the need for practicality first, thus the Normative trend before the search for Affirmative in a profession (Pink, 2012). Generation X are also considered “job hoppers” who believe that self-marketing will see them through. (Mujtaba, 2007). Often called the “Latch Key” generation, they come from divorced or working parents (Single Point, 2015). The generation believes in empowerment and social responsibility, which is seen in the workplace as well as the homelife.
Leaders who work with Generation X’ers can use the same concept with teams as Boomers but should be cautioned to lessen the competition aspects. The desire to have Affective Commitment should be exploited by leaders without losing sight that X’ers can jump jobs quickly. The Normative tendencies would appear to conflict with job changing, but can easily be explained to leaders as a maxim of “the grass being greener.” Leaders should integrate technology, as the group is willing to be introduced to new concepts. The group relates to younger employees and sees themselves as young. Leaders should be cautioned that other generations may not view Generation X equally (Single Point, 2015).
Members of Generation Y, born between 1977 and 1994, have a high degree of Affective Commitment to their organizations. They average 2.5 years in the same job and see changing jobs as a necessity to diverse resumes and skills (Artly, 2008). Members of Generation Y have a high affinity to be civic and socially minded, and they accept diversity in the workplace easily. This is not a competitive generation and the maxim “a trophy for every player” is beginning to show in the workplace. Interestingly, with the increase in technology, members of Generation Y see no issue with email, texts and calls at all hours. This is in high contrast to the Boomers who are a traditional 9 to 5 group. “Words like experienced, seasoned and veteran are being replaced by hungry, cutting-edge, and aggressive-minded” with this group (Fukuda, 2015).
Leaders interacting with Generation Y must be willing to adapt in order to include this highly skilled group. The use of technology is paramount to keeping interest. In order to feed the need for effectiveness, leaders must use meaningful tasks and duties to keep the interest of this generation. We are seeing workplace environments that transition from the desk and chair to standing tables and plenty of outside activities included within the workday. We’re also seeing flexible work schedules, hours, and meeting times and places. Leaders would be well-served to include civic and community service-oriented activities when including this group. This group does not follow blindly — they seek transparency (Fukuda, 2015). As a leader, the tough decisions need to be explained to this group. A decision that would be followed by a Boomer may need explanation to the Generation Y member. They may not like the decision; however, the openness and explanation will be seen. This generation needs to be a part of the bigger picture. Leaders should be aware and adjust accordingly.
Conclusion
Leaders should observe and take note of the type of commitment their employees display. By comparing this to the generations they come from, leaders can adjust leadership techniques accordingly. The need for leaders to analyze their individual employees is always present, but generational differences will play a role.
References
A Study of the Relationship Between Generational Group Identification and …Organizational Commitment. (n.d.).
Artly, J. (2008). Impact of Leadership practices on Gneration X Employee Commitmentin the Health Insurance Industry. Nova South Eastern.
Eric G. Lambert, B. K. (2012, November 12). The association of affective and continuance commitment. The Social Science Journal, p. 9.
Eyre, E. (2015). The Three Component Model of Commitment. Retrieved from MindTols.com: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/three-component-model-commitment.htm
Fukuda, M. (2015, May 11). 4 Things to Know to Effectively Lead Generation Y. Retrieved from Entrenpeneur.com: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/246028
Mujtaba, B. G. (2007). Coaching and Performance Management: Developing and Inspiring Leaders. ILEAD Academy, LLC.
Myers, D. (2013). Psychology 10th ed. New York: Worth.
Neuwoudt, A. (2014, January 22). 3 Key Types of Organisational Commitment. Effectory International. Retrieved from http://www.effectory.com/thought-leadership/blog/3-key-types-of-organisational-committment/
Pink, D. (2012). Drive: the Surprising Truth about what motivates us. New York: Canongate Books.
Single Point. (2015, April 20). Single Point.com. Retrieved from Single Point: http://singlepoint.com/mentoring-at-work/
Yukl, G. (2009). Leadership in Organizations 2nd edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
