This appendix describes the committee’s strategy for gathering and reviewing the business management and behavioral science literature on generational attitudes and behaviors in workforce management and employment practices. The committee’s primary objective was to identify and take stock of this body of literature: its size, the types of research questions examined, the types of research designs, and any agreement on findings among researchers. Our initial search of the literature uncovered a number of literature reviews that had already been conducted on this body of work, and our focus turned to understanding what these reviews had found. It was clear that there was much debate on the quality and value of research in this area. We found that where efforts had been made to synthesize findings across studies, the conclusions drawn were inconsistent, and there was disagreement on whether effect sizes on “generation effects” were significant enough to be meaningful and whether observed effects were even related to generations or had other explanations. The committee’s findings and conclusions that resulted from looking at the debates in the literature are discussed in Chapter 4. This appendix outlines the particular articles the committee reviewed and gives readers a sense of where the literature can be found, what topics are covered, and what primary research designs were used.
Through the National Academies Research Center, the committee conducted electronic searches in Scopus and ProQuest (see the search syntax in Box A-1). We supplemented our electronic searches with suggestions made by committee members and invited presenters and citations of relevant articles in the previously published literature reviews on this topic identified
during our search. We classified a long list of references by their research designs. Further, we reviewed and discussed the observations, findings, and conclusions of previously published literature reviews. Additionally, we conducted a small pilot review of a subset of the articles identified in our electronic search to appreciate the issues discussed in earlier critiques of this literature.
We conducted the first electronic search at the beginning of the study (March 2019) to identify articles published after 1979 in the United States and internationally. This search resulted in 306 articles (96% of which were published after 1999). Of these, we found 57 to be irrelevant to our study or duplicative. To ensure that we considered other work-related articles on generational attitudes and behaviors without attention to differences, we conducted a second electronic search in August 2019 for articles published after 1999 using the same databases and similar search syntax, but without the search terms for “differences” or “effect.” This second search resulted in another 121 articles.
Among the articles were 15 previously published literature reviews on this same body of research, each of which reflects a different approach. We categorized the reviews into four types: (1) meta-analyses (reviews that quantitatively compare findings across studies by calculating the effect sizes or other metric to quantify the relationship between generational membership or age- and work-related outcomes, values, or attitudes); (2) systematic or structured reviews (reviews that descriptively identify and synthesize information about findings across empirical studies); (3) sector-specific reviews (reviews that descriptively identify and synthesize information about findings from empirical studies focused on specific employment sectors); and (4) commentaries and methodological validations (articles that explore methodological, analytical, and/or theoretical issues in the literature). Table A-1 summarizes the methods, major findings, and conclusions from these reviews. An additional 16 articles were also flagged as literature reviews, as opposed to empirical studies, but the authors of these articles were less systematic or structured in their reviews relative to the reviews described in Table A-1, which were designed to reflect the state of the evidence.
To finalize our list of generational literature, we compared our initial list with articles identified by other reviews, recording another 188 articles. We screened the titles and abstracts of these articles to ensure that they focused on generational attitudes and behaviors in the workforce and to determine their research designs where possible. In some cases, we relied on the assessment of other reviews to determine research designs, while in other cases we screened the full articles.
TABLE A-1 Summary of Methods, Major Findings, and Conclusions from Meta-Analyses and Structured Reviews
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Systematic or Structured Reviews|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
|Commentaries and Methodological Validations|
|Sources||Methods, Major Findings, Conclusions|
a Captures the difference in standard deviations between two groups (d = 0.20 = small; d = 0.50 = moderate; and d = 0.80 = large).
b The committee observes that “dramatically” is too strong given a d of –.13. Most would call that less than a small effect. If the confidence interval includes 0, then one cannot reject the idea that d = .00.
The studies identified through the above search process are quite international in scope, with more than 25 countries represented among samples and authors; however, most of these studies use U.S. generational categories. A range of industries, from counseling to transportation, are represented—one to three articles each except for nursing and the hospitality industry, for which there are significantly more studies (see the listing of cross-sectional studies later in this appendix). The following list identifies journals with five or more articles regarding generations and work-related outcomes:
- Career Developmental International
- Employee Relations
- Industrial and Commercial Training
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice (special issue on this topic in 2015)
- International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management
- International Journal of Hospitality Management
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Journal of Business and Psychology (special issue on this topic in 2010)
- Journal of Intergenerational Relationships
- Journal of Managerial Psychology (special issue on this topic in 2015)
- Journal of Nursing Administration
- Journal of Nursing Management
- Work, Aging and Retirement (special issue on this topic in 2017)
The following are examples of topics/constructs covered in the articles:
- age and perceptions of hiring, earnings inequality, ageism in young workers, reverse ageism;
- anticipated and perceived organizational support;
- balance in work–family and work–leisure, conflict and synergy;
- communication styles, knowledge sharing;
- distress and negative social environments, mistreatment;
- employee engagement and motivation;
- generational identities;
- leadership styles and preferences;
- social contracts, psychological contracts;
- values—organizational, work, career;
- work satisfaction, burnout, turnover;
- research methodology, analysis, and theory for studying generations;
- millennials and stereotypes, archetypes, employee development and commitment, turnover factors, managers’ perceptions of, leading millennials, characteristics of, health care motivations of, sense of entitlement; and
- generation Y and female leaders, employee expectations, tenure in hospitality industry, nursing, preference for place of residence, empowerment, competencies, and satisfaction.
The committee’s pilot review was conducted on 14 articles (listed in Table A-2) selected randomly from our first set of articles (306 articles minus 57 of those identified as irrelevant to this study) as follows:
Round 1: Every 7th article out of the 249 articles, sorted alphabetically by first author, dated 2000 or later, generating 35 articles for Round 2. Round 2: Every 3rd article out of the subset of 35, sorted by date from oldest to newest, yielding 11 articles. In this draw, there was only 1 article with a research design that aimed to separate cohort effects from age or period effects (i.e., other than a cross-sectional or qualitative design). We added 3 articles to oversample articles using other statistical methods. The final draw resulted in 14 articles.
Based on our understanding from previous reviews, as well as our own knowledge of studies in this area, we believed the sample of articles generated for our pilot review allowed us to appreciate the different research designs used in this literature and a mix of conclusions with regard to generational differences. Cross-sectional designs were prominent (eight studies). We were initially surprised that eight studies were conducted outside of the United States but have come to appreciate that a large percentage of the generational research is conducted in other countries. Many of these international studies use the U.S. generational labels (e.g., baby boomers and millennials) to categorize their groups. These articles acknowledge the limits of these labels, often with a note recognizing that people in their countries would have had different experiences at different times.
For our pilot review, we developed a coding scheme. Two members of the committee and two National Academies staff manually coded the following characteristics of each article: (1) author(s) and publication year, title, and source; (2) country/countries in which the study was conducted; (3) data source (primary versus secondary data) and type (quantitative or qualitative); (4) sampling strategy (nonprobability, probability); (5) sample type (e.g., student or working adult) and associated industry if relevant;
TABLE A-2 Articles in the Committee’s Pilot Review
|Antonczyk, D., DeLeire, T., and Fitzenberger, B. (2018). Polarization and rising wage inequality: Comparing the U.S. and Germany. Econometrics, 6(2), 1–33.||The study examines wage inequality in the United States and Germany using nationally representative survey data from 1979 to 2004 (probability samples) and an approach developed by MaCurdy and Mroz (1995) to separate age, time, and cohort effects.|
|Cennamo, L., and D. Gardner (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organisation values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891–906.||The study is cross-sectional and based on self-report data, limiting the generalizability of findings. A total of 504 Auckland employees representing a range of industries completed an online questionnaire.|
|Danigelis, N. L., Hardy, M., and Cutler, S. (2007). Population aging, intracohort aging, and sociopolitical attitudes. American Sociological Review, 2(5), 812–830.||The article examines attitude change in the U.S. population using data from the General Social Survey, 1972–2004, but the focus is not work-related or generational.|
|Heritage, B., Breen, L., and Roberts, L. D. (2016). In-groups, out-groups, and their contrasting perceptions of values among generational cohorts of Australians. Australian Psychologist, 51(3), 246–255.||The study examines and compares self-ratings and out-group perceptions of the importance of the four overarching clusters of values in Schwartz’s circumplex model by generation. A convenience sample of 157 participants completed an online survey of self-rated values and perceptions of another generation’s values.|
|Krajcsák, Z., Jonás, T., and Henrietta, F. (2014). An analysis of commitment factors depending on generation and part-time working in selected groups of employees in Hungary. Argumenta Oeconomica, 33(2), 115–144.||The study is cross-sectional, based on data from 661 respondents to a questionnaire designed to analyze factors related to employee commitment.|
|Lyons, S.T., Duxbury, L., and Higgins, C. (2007). An empirical assessment of generational differences in basic human values. Psychological Reports, 101(2), 339–352.||This cross-sectional study assesses generational differences in human values as measured by the Schwartz Value Survey among a combined sample of Canadian knowledge workers and undergraduate business students (N = 1,194).|
|Raineri, N., Paillé, P., and Morin, Denis. (2012). Organizational citizenship behavior: An intergenerational study. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 25(3–4), 147–177.||The authors use social exchange theory to investigate whether membership in the baby boomer versus generation X group influences the relationships of organization- and colleague-directed support and commitment with organizational citizenship behavior, and uses structural equation modeling to analyze data from voluntary survey responses (N = 943).|
|Singh, U., and Weimar, D. (2017). Empowerment among generations. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(4), 307–328.||This cross-sectional study investigated differences in people’s attitudes toward empowerment by generation and other demographic variables using survey data from a convenience sample (N = 492).|
|Soni, S., Upadhyaya, M., and Kautish, P. (2011). Generational differences in work commitment of software professionals: Myth or reality? Abhigyan, 28(4), 30–42.||This cross-sectional study examined generational differences for five types of work commitment. A total of 250 respondents working in software industries were administered a questionnaire.|
|Takase, M., Oba, K., and Yamashita, N. (2009). Generational differences in factors influencing job turnover among Japanese nurses: An exploratory comparative design. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(7), 957–967.||The purpose of the study was to identify specific work-related needs and values of nurses in three generations. The study was conducted in three public hospitals in Japan. A convenience sample of 315 registered nurses participated. A survey was used to collect quantitative and qualitative data.|
|Trzesniewski, K.H., and Donnellan, M.B. (2010). Rethinking “generation me”: A study of cohort effects from 1976–2006. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 58–75.||This is a study of cohort effects using large samples of U.S. high school seniors from 1976 to 2006 from the Monitoring the Future program (total N = 477,380). The goal of the study was to test the strength of cohort effects on 31 psychological constructs.|
|Twenge, J M., Konrath, S., Foster, J.D., Keith Campbell, W., and Bushman, B.J. (2008). Egos inflating over time: A cross temporal meta-analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality, 76(4), 875–902.||This was a cross-temporal meta-analysis with time-lagged data from 85 samples of American college students who completed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory between 1979 and 2006 (N = 16,475).|
|Baker Rosa, N.M., and Hastings, S.O. (2018). Managing millennials: Looking beyond generational stereotypes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(4), 920–930.||The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine managers’ perceptions of millennial employees in organizations. In total, 25 interviews were conducted with managers in the hospitality industry.|
|Milner, S., Demilly, H., and Pochic, S. (2019). Bargained equality: The strengths and weaknesses of workplace gender equality agreements and plans in France. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 57(2), 75–301.||This study evaluated a sample of 146 workplace agreements and plans on gender equality submitted in 2014–2015, in 10 sectors, and involved in-depth interviews in 20 companies. The study examined “generational effects” in terms of process change and not differences among workers.|
(6) respondent demographic characteristics as reported (e.g., age groupings, men/women, and race/ethnicity); and (7) study design. Two articles (Danigelis et al., 2007; Milner et al., 2019) were determined to be irrelevant for our task.
There were no disagreements among the four reviewers on the nature of the publications, just opportunities to clarify what we were observing among the reviewers, as well as with the larger committee. Initially, we attempted to capture authors’ definitions of generation, proposed antecedents to hypothesized differences, and theoretical approach, but this effort proved to be unsatisfactory. None of the authors provides an antecedent, that is, defining events or a set of experiences that would have influenced generations. With some exceptions, they generally point to earlier sociological theories on generational change and assume that generational influences would be responsible for observed differences. All authors use birth cohorts to define generations, and most use popular generational terminology (e.g., baby boomers, millennials) to label groups of workers.
Most of the quantitative studies are cross-sectional, having used convenience samples to collect primary data from self-reports on questionnaires, and in some cases through interviews. Several of the studies utilized snowball sampling (e.g., Krajcsak et al., 2014). Most of these studies examined work-related attitudes/values, with a noticeable focus on “commitment” (e.g., Raineri et al., 2012). Many of the pilot articles break findings down by men and women. Only one article notes that most of the sample was Caucasian; otherwise, the race/ethnicity of the samples is not considered. Notably, a few studies measure educational attainment, employment status, and/or life stage (e.g., have children). The findings, whether age or generation effects, across this pilot sample are mixed, with some authors reporting that their findings indicate differences among generation groups and others finding no differences on the measured values/attitudes. One study (Trzesniewski and Donnellan, 2010) used secondary, nationally representative data and cohort analysis to test the plausibility of previously reported cohort effects on psychological constructs. These authors found little evidence for significant distinctions among generations.
SAMPLE OF GENERATIONAL LITERATURE
The following list of references is intended to illustrate the types of empirical studies the committee found in assembling the literature related to generational attitudes and behaviors in the workforce. The list is organized by research design and then alphabetically by first author. For a full list of articles identified for this report, visit https://nas.edu/workforcegenerations.
Multilevel Models Applied to Nested Datasets (APC Models)
Multilevel models are a family of statistical tools appropriate for studying databases in which some observations are nested within others, such as when multiple individuals provide data in different years, as in the case of cross-sectional studies repeated across multiple years. Statistically speaking, individual responses then are nested within each year. Likewise, nesting can occur in longitudinal studies when the same people are observed repeatedly over time. In this case, observations on different occasions are nested within people.
Donnelly, K., Twenge, J., Clark, M., Shaikh, S., Beiler-May, A., and Carter, N. (2016). Attitudes toward women’s work and family roles in the United States, 1976–2013. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(1), 41–54.
Jürges, H. (2003). Age, cohort, and the slump in job satisfaction among West German workers. Labour, 17(4), 489–518.
Kalleberg, A. L., and Marsden, P.V. (2019). Work values in the United States: Age, period, and generational differences. Annals of the American Academy, 682(1), 43–59.
Koning, P., and Raterink, M. (2013). Re-employment rates of older unemployed workers: Decomposing the effect of birth cohorts and policy changes. Economist (Netherlands) 161(3), 331–348.
Kowske, B., Rasch, R., and Wiley, J. (2010). Millennials’ (lack of) attitude problem: An empirical examination of generational effects on work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 265–279. [Data from employees in the United States.]
Cross-temporal meta-analyses entail extracting descriptive statistics (often measures of central tendency, such as sample means) from studies conducted at different points in time. These descriptive statistics are combined using meta-analytic techniques and usually weighted for precision by the number of observations available for each time point. The objective is to test whether aggregated estimates vary because of when the data were collected.
Campbell, S.M., Twenge, J.M., and Campbell, W.K. (2017). Fuzzy but useful constructs: Making sense of the differences between generations. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 130–139.
Twenge, J.M., and Campbell, W.K. (2001). Age and birth cohort differences in self-esteem: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 321–344.
Twenge, J.M., and Campbell, S.M. (2008). Generational differences in psychological traits and their impact on the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 862–877.
Twenge, J.M., Freeman, E.C., and Campbell W.K. (2012). Generational differences in young adults’ life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation, 1966–2009. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(5), 1045–1062.
Other Studies Comparing Samples over Time1
Hansen, J.I.C., and Leuty, M.E. (2012). Work values across generations. Journal of Career Assessment, 20(1), 34–52.
Krahn, H.J., and Galambos, N.L. (2014). Work values and beliefs of “Generation X” and “Generation Y.” Journal of Youth Studies, 17(1), 92–112.
Leuty, M.E., and Hansen, J.I.C. (2014). Teasing apart the relations between age, birth cohort, and vocational interests. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(2), 289–298.
Lippmann, S. (2008). Rethinking risk in the new economy: Age and cohort effects on unemployment and reemployment. Human Relations, 61, 1259–1292.
Smola, K.W., and Sutton, C.D. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(SPEC. ISS.), 363–382.
Teclaw, R., Osatuke, K., Fishman, J., Moore S.C., Dyrenforth, S. (2014). Employee age and tenure within organizations: Relationship to workplace satisfaction and workplace climate perceptions. Health Care Manager, 33(1), 4–19.
Trzesniewski, K.H., and Donnellan, M.B. (2010). Rethinking “generation me”: A study of cohort effects from 1976–2006. Perspectives on Psychological Science 5(1), 58–75.
Twenge, J.M., Campbell, S.M., Hoffman, B.J., and Lance, C.E. (2010). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117–1142.
Cross-sectional research designs compare groups of people of different ages using an instrument (e.g., a survey) administered to a single sample at a single point in time. The following list includes 46 of the more than 300 cross-sectional studies the committee identified—those cited in the main text of this report, notably the studies for particular types of jobs.
Andrews, D.R. (2013). Expectations of millennial nurse graduates transitioning into practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 152–159. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/NAQ.0b013e3182869d9f.
Anthony, M.K., Tullai-McGuinness, S., Capone, L., and Farag, A. (2008). Decision making, autonomy, and control over practice: Are there variations across generational cohorts? Journal of Nursing Administration, 38(5), 211.
Carver, L., and Candela, L. (2008). Attaining organizational commitment across different generations of nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 16(8), 984–991. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00911.x.
Chung, S.M., and Fitzsimons, V. (2013). Knowing generation Y: A new generation of nurses in practice. British Journal of Nursing, 22(20), 1173–1179.
1 These studies vary in their approach to measuring variance in work values in groups of people over time. One is longitudinal in that the authors collected data from the same people at different points in time. Others analyze data from different groups of similar participants (usually by age) collected at different points in time on the same constructs. Three of these use data from nationally representative surveys (Current Population Survey, General Social Survey, and Monitoring the Future); others use survey data from smaller samples.
Clendon, J., and Walker, L. (2012). “Being young”: A qualitative study of younger nurses’ experiences in the workplace. International Nursing Review, 59(4), 555–561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-7657.2012.01005.x.
Crowther, A., and Kemp, M. (2009). Generational attitudes of rural mental health nurses. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 17(2), 97–101. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2009.01044.x.
Farag, A.A., Tullai-Mcguinness, S., and Anthony, M K. (2009). Nurses’ perception of their manager’s leadership style and unit climate: Are there generational differences? Journal of Nursing Management, 17(1), 26–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00964.x.
Hamlin, L., and Gillespie, B.M. (2011). Beam me up, Scotty, but not just yet: Understanding generational diversity in the perioperative milieu. Journal of Perioperative Nursing, 24(4), 36–43.
Hendricks, J.M., and Cope, V.C. (2013). Generational diversity: What nurse managers need to know. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(3), 717–725. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06079.x.
Hu, J., Herrick, C., and Hodgin, K.A. (2004). Managing the multigenerational nursing team. Health Care Manager, 23(4), 334–340. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00126450-200410000-00008.
Keepnews, D.M., Brewer, C.S., Kovner, C.T., and Shin, J.H. (2010). Generational differences among newly licensed registered nurses. Nursing Outlook, 58(3), 155–163. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2009.11.001.
Lavoie-Tremblay, M., Trépanier, S.G., Fernet, C., and Bonneville-Roussy, A. (2014). Testing and extending the triple match principle in the nursing profession: A generational perspective on job demands, job resources and strain at work. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(2), 310–322. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12188.
Leiter, M.P., Jackson, N.J., and Shaughnessy, K. (2009). Contrasting burnout, turnover intention, control, value congruence and knowledge sharing between baby boomers and generation X. Journal of Nursing Management, 17(1), 100–109. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00884.x.
Leiter, M.P., Price, S.L., and Spence Laschinger, H.K. (2010). Generational differences in distress, attitudes and incivility among nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(8), 970–980. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01168.x.
LeVasseur, S.A., Wang, C.Y., Mathews, B., and Boland, M. (2009). Generational differences in registered nurse turnover. Policy, Politics, and Nursing Practice, 10(3), 212–223. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1527154409356477.
Nelson, S.A. (2012). Affective commitment of generational cohorts of Brazilian nurses. International Journal of Manpower, 33(7), 804–821. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/01437721211268339.
Santos, S.R., and Cox, K. (2000). Workplace adjustment and intergenerational differences between matures, boomers, and xers. Nursing Economic$, 18(1), 7–13.
Shacklock, K., and Brunetto, Y. (2012). The intention to continue nursing: Work variables affecting three nurse generations in Australia. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(1), 36–46. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05709.x.
Sparks, A.M. (2012). Psychological empowerment and job satisfaction between baby boomer and generation X nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 20(4), 451–460. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2011.01282.x.
Takase, M., Oba, K., and Yamashita, N. (2009). Generational differences in factors influencing job turnover among Japanese nurses: An exploratory comparative design. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(7), 957–967. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2007.10.013.
Thompson, J.A. (2007). Why work in perioperative nursing? Baby boomers and generation Xers tell all. AORN Journal:The Official Voice of Perioperative Nursing, 86(4), 564–587. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aorn.2007.03.010.
Tourangeau, A.E., Thomson, H., Cummings, G., and Cranley, L.A. (2013). Generation-specific incentives and disincentives for nurses to remain employed in acute care hospitals. Journal of Nursing Management, 21(3), 473–482. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2012.01424.x.
Tourangeau, A.E., Wong, M., Saari, M., and Patterson, E. (2015). Generation-specific incentives and disincentives for nurse faculty to remain employed. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 71(5), 1019–1031. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jan.12582.
Wakim, N. (2014). Occupational stressors, stress perception levels, and coping styles of medical surgical RNs: A generational perspective. Journal of Nursing Administration, 44(12), 632–639. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0000000000000140.
Warshawski, S., Barnoy, S., and Kagan, I. (2017). Professional, generational, and gender differences in perception of organisational values among Israeli physicians and nurses: Implications for retention. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 31(6), 696–704. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13561820.2017.1355780.
Wilson, B., Squires, M., Widger, K., Cranley, L., and Tourangeau, A. (2008). Job satisfaction among a multigenerational nursing workforce. Journal of Nursing Management, 16(6), 716–723. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2008.00874.x.
Arendt, S.W., Roberts, K.R., Strohbehn, C., Arroyo, P.P., Ellis, J., and Meyer, J. (2014). Motivating foodservice employees to follow safe food handling practices: Perspectives from a multigenerational workforce. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 13(4), 323–349. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2014.888505.
Barron, P., Leask, A., and Fyall, A. (2014). Engaging the multi-generational workforce in tourism and hospitality. Tourism Review, 69(4), 245–263. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-04-2014-0017.
Bednarska, M.A. (2016). Complementary person-environment fit as a predictor of job pursuit intentions in the service industry. Contemporary Economics, 10(1), 27–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.196.
Chen, P.J., and Choi, Y. (2008). Generational differences in work values: A study of hospitality management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), 595–615. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110810892182.
Choi, Y.G., Kwon, J., and Kim, W. (2013). Effects of attitudes vs experience of workplace fun on employee behaviors: Focused on Generation Y in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(3), 410–427. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111311311044.
Goh, E., and Lee, C. (2018). A workforce to be reckoned with: The emerging pivotal generation Z hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 73, 20–28. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.01.016.
Gursoy, D., Chi, C.G.Q., and Karadag, E. (2013). Generational differences in work values and attitudes among frontline and service contact employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 32(1), 40–48. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.002.
Kim, M., Knutson, B.J., and Choi, L. (2016). The effects of employee voice and delight on job satisfaction and behaviors: Comparison between employee generations. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 25(5), 563–588. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2015.1067665.
King, C., Murillo, E., and Lee, H. (2017). The effects of generational work values on employee brand attitude and behavior: A multi-group analysis. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 66, 92–105. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.07.006.
Kong, H., Sun, N., and Yan, Q. (2016). New generation, psychological empowerment: Can empowerment lead to career competencies and career satisfaction? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(11), 2553–2569. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2014-0222.
Kong, H., Wang, S., and Fu, X. (2015). Meeting career expectation: Can it enhance job satisfaction of generation Y? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(1), 147–168. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-08-2013-0353.
Lu, A.C.C., and Gursoy, D. (2016). Impact of job burnout on satisfaction and turnover intention: Do generational differences matter? Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 40(2), 210–235. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348013495696.
Lub, X.D., Blomme, R.J., and Matthijs Bal, P. (2011). Psychological contract and organizational citizenship behavior: A new deal for new generations? Advances in Hospitality and Leisure, 7, 109–130.
Lub, X., Bijvank, M.N., Bal, P.M., Blomme, R., and Schalk, R. (2012). Different or alike?: Exploring the psychological contract and commitment of different generations of hospitality workers. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(4), 553–573. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09596111211226824.
Lub, X., Bal, P.M., Blomme, R.J., and Schalk, R. (2016). One job, one deal…or not: Do generations respond differently to psychological contract fulfillment? The International Journal of Human Resource Management 27(6), 653–680. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2015.1035304.
Maier, T.A. (2011). Hospitality leadership implications: Multigenerational perceptions of dissatisfaction and intent to leave. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 10(4), 354–371. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2011.588503.
Park, J., and Gursoy, D. (2012). Generation effects on work engagement among U.S. hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1195–1202. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.02.007.
Supanti, D., and Butcher, K. (2019). Is corporate social responsibility (CSR) participation the pathway to foster meaningful work and helping behavior for millennials? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 77, 8–18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.06.001.
Tsaur, S.H., and Yen, C.H. (2018). Work–leisure conflict and its consequences: Do generational differences matter? Tourism Management, 69, 121–131. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.05.011.
Zopiatis, A., Krambia-Kapardis, M., and Varnavas, A. (2012). Y-ers, X-ers and boomers: Investigating the multigenerational (mis)perceptions in the hospitality workplace. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12(2), 101–121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358412466668.
The 13 articles marked with an asterisk are focused more on understanding one generation and do not compare generations.
Abdul Malek, M.M., and A.R. Jaguli. (2018). Generational differences in workplace communication: Perspectives of female leaders and their direct reports in Malaysia. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 28(1), 129–150.
Andrews, D.R. (2013). Expectations of millennial nurse graduates transitioning into practice. Nursing Administration Quarterly, 37(2), 152–159.*
Baker Rosa, N.M., and S O. Hastings (2018). Managing millennials: Looking beyond generational stereotypes. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(4), 920–930.*
Bone, Z., and K. Tilbrook (2015). Women as bosses: A snapshot from a generational perspective. International Journal of Organizational Diversity, 15(3), 13–24.
Boyd, D. (2010). Ethical determinants for generations X and Y. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(3), 465–469.
Brown, E., Thomas N., and Bosselman, R. (2015). Are they leaving or staying: A qualitative analysis of turnover issues for Generation Y hospitality employees with a hospitality education. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 130–137.*
Chillakuri, B., and Mogili, R. (2018). Managing millennials in the digital era: Building a sustainable culture. Human Resource Management International Digest, 26(3), 7–10.*
Clarke, M. (2015). Dual careers: The new norm for Gen Y professionals? Career Development International, 20(6), 562–582.*
Clendon, J., and L. Walker (2012). Being young: A qualitative study of younger nurses’ experiences in the workplace. International Nursing Review, 59(4), 555–561.*
Feyerherm, A., and Vick, Y.H. (2005). Generation X women in high technology: Overcoming gender and generational challenges to succeed in the corporate environment. The Career Development International, 10(3), 216–227.*
Foster, K. (2013). Generation and discourse in working life stories. British Journal of Sociology, 64(2), 195–215.
Gale, D. (2013). Career resumption for educated baby boomer mothers: An exploratory study. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 11(3), 304–319.*
Goh, E., and Lee, C. (2018). A workforce to be reckoned with: The emerging pivotal generation Z hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management 73, 20–28.*
Gursoy, D., Maier, T., and Chi, C. (2008). Generational differences: An examination of work values and generational gaps in the hospitality workforce. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), 448–458.
Haapala, I., Tervo, L., and Biggs, S. (2015). Using generational intelligence to examine community care work between younger and older adults. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(4), 457–473.
James, L. (2009). Generational differences in women’s attitudes towards paid employment in a British city: The role of habitus. Gender, Place and Culture, 16(3), 313–328.
Kultalahti, S., and Viitala, R. (2015). Generation Y—Challenging clients for HRM? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(1), 101–114.*
Lee, S. (2014). Korean mature women students’ various subjectivities in relation to their motivation for higher education: Generational differences amongst women. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33(6), 791–810.
Lyons, S.T., and Schweitzer, L. (2017). A qualitative exploration of generational identity: Making sense of young and old in the context of today’s workplace. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 209–224.
Matthews, M., Seguin, M., Chowdhury, N., and Card, R. (2012). Generational differences in factors influencing physicians to choose a work location. Rural and Remote Health, 12(1).
Patel, J., Tinker, A., and Corna, L. (2018). Younger workers’ attitudes and perceptions towards older colleagues. Working with Older People, 22(3), 129–138.
Price, S., McGillis Hall, L., Murphy, G., and Pierce, B. (2018). Evolving career choice narratives of new graduate nurses. Nurse Education in Practice, 28, 86–91.*
Pritchard, K., and Whiting, R. (2014). Baby boomers and the lost generation: On the discursive construction of generations at work. Organization Studies, 35(11), 1605–1626.
Sanders, M.J., and McCready, J. (2009). A qualitative study of two older workers’ adaptation to physically demanding work. Work, 32(2), 111–122.*
Singh, V. (2013). Exploring the concept of work across generations. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 11(3), 272–285.
Stone-Johnson, C. (2014). Not cut out to be an administrator: Generations, change, and the career transition from teacher to principal. Education and Urban Society, 46(5), 606–625.*
Urick, M.J., Hollensbe, E.C., Masterson, S.S., and Lyons, S.T., (2017). Understanding and managing intergenerational conflict: An examination of influences and strategies. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 166–185.
Whitmer, M., Hurst, S., and Prins, M. (2009). Intergenerational views of hardiness in critical care nurses. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing, 28(5), 214–220.
Williams, G. (in press). Management Millennialism: Designing the new generation of employee. Work, Employment and Society. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017019836891.
Gardiner, S., Grace, D., and King, C. (2013). Challenging the use of generational segmentation through understanding self-identity. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 31(6), 639–653.
Gordon, P.A. (2017). Exploring generational cohort work satisfaction in hospital nurses. Leadership in Health Services, 30(3), 233–248.
Kwiek, M. (2017). A generational divide in the academic profession: A mixed quantitative and qualitative approach to the Polish case. European Educational Research Journal, 16(5), 645–669.
Van Rossem, A.H.D. (2019). Generations as social categories: An exploratory cognitive study of generational identity and generational stereotypes in a multigenerational workforce. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(4), 434–455.
Weeks, K.P., and Schaffert, C. (2019). Generational differences in definitions of meaningful work: A mixed methods study. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(4), 1045–1061.
Zimmerer, T.E. (2013). Generational Perceptions of Servant Leadership: A Mixed Methods Study. (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University).