Using Workforce Inter-Personnel Diversity to Alleviate Generational Differences



The history of the American workplace has been predicated on a variety of generations of employees working together to meet organization goals. The systems within the organizations usually were designed around seniority when there were unions in many workplaces. Unions are very infrequent in the American work system and seniority is not valued as it had been in the past. Intergenerational differences are great within organizations when the generations cooperate with each other and the system does not reward seniority over skill. This theme is not suggesting that seniority or generational differences are bad. It is just focusing on solving some of the problems by using workforce inter-personnel diversity to increase the skill levels of all employees and providing recognition of these differences. To achieve success through generational differences, comprehensive workforce changes are needed. As the baby boomers retire and many young people have left rural communities for urban areas, understanding generational differences in the workplace has become much more important. The use of workforce inter-personnel diversity can help organizational leaders shift their focus from employee ages and toward employee performance.


  1. Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A., & Buckley, M. R. (2017). What works for you may not work for (Gen) Me: Limitations of present leadership theories for the new generation. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, J. (1984). Manpower strategies for flexible organizations. Personnel Management, 16(8), 28–31.Google Scholar
  3. Babbage, C. (1835). On the economy of machinery and manufacturers. London, UK: Frank Cass.Google Scholar
  4. Banks, C. H. (2002). A descriptive analysis of the perceived effectiveness of Virginia Tech’s faculty development institute. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(08) (UMI No. 3102585).Google Scholar
  5. Banks, C. H. (2006). A descriptive analysis of the perceived effectiveness of Virginia Tech’s faculty development institute. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 3(2), 195–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beltrán-Martín, I., Roca-Puig, V., Escrig-Tena, A., & Bou-Llusar, J. (2008). Human resource flexibility as a mediating variable between high performance work systems and performance. Journal of Management, 34, 1009–1044. Scholar
  7. Boudreau, J., & Jesuthasen, R. (2011). Transformative HR: How great challenges use evidence-based change for sustainable advantage. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  8. Branham, L. (2012). The 7 hidden reasons employees leave: How to recognize the subtle signs and act before it’s too late. New York, NY: AMACOM.Google Scholar
  9. Caligiuri, P., Phillips, J., Lazarova, M., Tarique, I., & Burgi, P. (2001). The theory of met expectations applied to expatriate adjustment: The role of crosscultural training. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12, 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, S. M., Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2017). Fuzzy but useful constructs: Making sense of the differences between generations. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 130–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conway, E., & Monks, K. (2017). Designing a HR system for managing an age-diverse workforce: Challenges and opportunities. In E. Parry & J. McCarthy (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of age diversity and work (pp. 585–606). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costanza, D. P., Badger, J. M., Fraser, R. L., Severt, J. B., & Gade, P. A. (2012). Generational differences in work-related attitudes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 375–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Costanza, D. P., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2015). Generationally based differences in the workplace: Is there a there there? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 308–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cotton, L., Bynum, D. R., & Madhere, S. (1997). Socialization forces and the stability of work values from late adolescence to early adulthood. Psychological Reports, 80(1), 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davis, L., & North, D. (1970). Institutional change and American economic growth: A first step towards a theory of institutional innovation. The Journal of Economic History, 30(1), 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DePillis, L. (2015). Why age discrimination is worse for women. Retrieved on October 31, 2015, from
  17. de Waal, A., Peters, L., & Broekhuizen, M. (2017). Do different generations look differently at high performance organizations? Journal of Strategy and Management, 10(1), 86–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elizur, D. (1984). Facets of work values: A structural analysis of work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erickson, T. J. (2008). Plugged in: The generation Y guide to thriving at work. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
  20. Erickson, T. J. (2010). The leaders we need now. Harvard Business Review, 88(5), 63–66.Google Scholar
  21. Finnegan, R. P. (2011). Rethinking retention in good times and bad: Breakthrough ideas for keeping your best workers. Hachette: Davies-Black. Google Scholar
  22. George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Experiencing work: Values, attitudes, and moods. Human Relations, 50, 393–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glendinning, P. M. (2001). Workplace bullying: Curing the cancer of the American workplace. Public Personnel Management, 30, 269–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Greenspan, A., & Wooldridge, A. (2018). Capitalism in America: A history. New York, NY: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hartenstein, A. (1999). The challenges of globalization and the HRD response. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 1(4), 83–87. Scholar
  26. Holbeche, L. (2009). Aligning human resources and business strategy (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  27. Hom, P. W., Griffeth, R. W., Palich, L. E., & Bracker, J. S. (1999). Revisiting met expectations as a reason why realistic job previews work. Personnel Psychology, 52(1), 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hughes, C. (2010). “People as technology” conceptual model: Towards a new value creation paradigm for strategic human resource development. Human Resource Development Review, 9(1), 48–71. Scholar
  29. Hughes, C. (2012). Valuing people and technology in the workplace: A competitive advantage framework. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hughes, C. (2014, Spring). Conceptualizing the five values of people and technology development: Implications for human resource management and development. Workforce Education Forum, 37(1), 23–44.Google Scholar
  31. Hughes, C., & Stephens, D. (2016). Use value and HRD and HRM flexibility: Implications for HRD practice. In C. Hughes & M. Gosney (Eds.), Bridging the scholar-practitioner gap in human resource development (pp. 181–199). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Irving, P. G., & Meyer, J. P. (1994). Reexamination of the met-expectations hypothesis: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 937–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Irving, P. G., & Meyer, J. P. (1995). On using direct measures of met expectations: A methological note. Journal of Management, 21, 1159–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Irving, P. G., & Montes, S. D. (2009). Met expectations: The effects of expected and delivered inducements on employee satisfaction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, 431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kalleberg, A. L. (1977). Work values and job rewards: A theory of job satisfaction. American Sociological Review, 42(1), 124–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. King, C., Murillo, E., & 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. (2002). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lawler, E., & Worley, C. (2006). Build to change: How to achieve sustained organizational effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  39. Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Lengnick-Hall, C. A. (2003). Human resource management in the knowledge economy: New challenges, new roles, new capabilities. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  40. Lengnick-Hall, M., Lengnick-Hall, C., Andrade, L., & Drake, B. (2009). Strategic human resource management: The evolution of the field. Human Resource Management Review, 19(2), 64–85. Scholar
  41. Lu, L., Lu, A. C. C., Gursoy, D., & Neale, N. R. (2016). Work engagement, job satisfaction, and turnover intentions: A comparison between supervisors and line-level employees. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28, 737–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S139–S157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maidique, M. A., & Hayes, R. H. (1984). The art of high-technology management. Sloan Management Review, 25(2), 17–31.Google Scholar
  44. Marcoulides, G. A., & Heck, R. H. (1993). Organizational culture and performance: Proposing and testing a model. Organization Science, 4, 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marcus, J., & Leiter, M. P. (2017). Generational differences: Effects of job and organizational context. In M. R. Olivas-Lujan & T. Bondarouk (Eds.), Age diversity in the workplace: An organizational perspective (pp. 65–94). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Maurer, T. J., & Rafuse, N. E. (2001). Learning, not litigating: Managing employee development and avoiding claims of age discrimination. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(4), 110–121.Google Scholar
  47. Mintzberg, H. (1987). The strategy concept I: Five P’s for strategy. California Management Review, 30(1), 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mitchell, T. (1974). Expectancy models of job satisfaction, occupational preference and effort: A theoretical, methodological, and empirical appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1053–1077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morgan, J. (2017). The employee experience advantage: How to win the war for talent by giving employees the workspaces they want, the tools they need, and a culture they can celebrate. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  50. Morgan, J. (2018). 3 things to know about employee experience. Retrieved on November 10, 2018, from
  51. Nord, W. R., Brief, A. P., Atieh, J. M., & Doherty, E. M. (1990). Studying meanings of work: The case of work values. In A. P. Brief & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Meanings of occupational work: A collection of essays. Issues in organization and management series (pp. 21–64). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  52. Nova, A. (2018). Maine is offering student loan assistance to people who live and work in the state. Retrieved on October 15, 2018, from
  53. Olson, V. D. (2008). Generational diversity: Implications for healthcare leaders. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 6(11), 27–32.Google Scholar
  54. Papavasileiou, E. F. (2017). Age-based generations at work: A culture-specific approach. In E. Parry & J. McCarthy (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of age diversity and work (pp. 521–538). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Journal of Management, 80, 151–176.Google Scholar
  56. Ramsey, M. (1986). The super supervisor. Greensboro, NC: Positive Presentations.Google Scholar
  57. Rodgers, D. T. (2014). The work ethic in industrial America 1850–1920 (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roscigno, V. J., Mong, S., Byron, R., & Tester, G. (2007). Age discrimination, social closure and employment. Social Forces, 86, 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sadler-Smith, E., & Smith, P. J. (2004). Strategies for accommodating individuals’ styles and preferences in flexible learning programmes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35, 395–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Smola, K., & Sutton, C. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sutton, G., & Griffin, M. A. (2004). Integrating expectations, experiences, and psychological contract violations: A longitudinal study of new professionals. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Therkelsen, D. J., & Fiebich, C. L. (2004). The supervisor: The linchpin of employee relations. Journal of Communication Management, 8(2), 120–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Thiel, P. A. (2014). Zero to one: Notes on startups, or how to build the future. New York, NY: Crown Business.Google Scholar
  64. Urick, M. J., Hollensbe, E. C., & Fairhurst, G. T. (2017). Differences in understanding generation in the workforce. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 15(3), 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. US Department of Labor. (n.d.). Age discrimination in employment act of 1967 (ADEA). Retrieved on July 14, 2018, from
  66. Walton, R. E. (1985). From control to commitment in the workplace. Harvard Business Review, 63(2), 77–84.Google Scholar
  67. Wanous, J. P., Poland, T. D., Premack, S. L., & Davis, K. S. (1992). The effects of met expectations on newcomer attitudes and behaviors: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(3), 288–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wood, S., & Albanese, M. T. (1995). Can we speak of a high commitment management on the shop floor? Journal of Management Studies, 32, 215–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yohn, D. L. (2018). 2018 will be the year of employee experience. Retrieved on November 10, 2018, from
  70. Zedeck, S. (1997). Commentary on diversity and work-family values. In P. C. Earley & M. Erez (Eds.), New perspectives on international industrial/organizational psychology (pp. 319–322). San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations