Filed under: Employee Communication, Employee Retention, Research, Talent Management
Millennials have become a topic of interest, since they are the newest population to enter the workforce. However, this interest is accompanied by many stereotypes about how Millennials differ from other generations and that they have different needs to be successful in the workplace. Much of the attention has been on the negative: some suggest that we are more narcissistic,1 have a loose work ethic,2 and need to get off our parents’ couches4 and take the next bus to North Dakota if we need work.
As a member of the Millennial generation, it can be annoying to be stereotyped as part of a group that is “going nowhere4” but expects to be promoted5 within a year. I definitely agree that there are many lazy people in my generation as well as individuals who expect instant success after graduation. However, there are many of us who are hardworking, yet realistic, and would like to be treated as individuals rather than members of a certain group that need extra care in order to be successful.
What does the scholarly research say about Millennials? Let’s start with a recent article cited often in the current blog-o-sphere.
Jean Twenge and colleauges at San Diego State University recently published an article on differences in values and opinions between Baby Boomers and Millennials.6 The study was conducted over the course of 40 years with a freshman survey for entering college students.
Their research concluded that Millennials entering college place higher value on wealth and fame than the Baby Boomers did when they were entering college in the 1960’s and 70’s. While much of the popular literature suggests Millennials are more socially conscious and intrinsically motivated, Twenge and her colleagues found the opposite to be true. Based on their findings, Millennials are actually more similar to Generation X, and less intrinsically motivated than the Baby Boomers were at the same age. Sidenote: Jean Twenge is the author of The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement and is often cited by columnists who believe Millennials have a major problem.
A caveat to these findings (that popular blogs and articles fail to mention) is that it is based on research conducted on college students and does not provide any evidence on how Millennials behave once they make it to the workplace. In a different study, Ng and colleagues7 found that college students closer to graduation have more realistic salary expectations than college freshmen. These findings indicate that the beliefs and values of young adults change throughout college hence it cannot be assumed that data gathered when they enter college will remain constant once they enter the workforce.
Researchers have also pointed out some of the differences that existed between Baby Boomers and previous generations, giving way to the idea that much of the differences we note between Millennials and older generations are simply age-related.8
- For example, Millennials are believed to have no organizational loyalty and are willing to move between organizations. Thus it has been concluded that job security is not a major factor in a Millennial’s decision on where to work. Is this a generational difference or just an age difference? Forty years ago, younger workers did not list job security as a reason for satisfaction and were more likely to move between jobs than older generations.8 Given that younger workers are less likely to have financial and family commitments, they are more likely to switch jobs. This seems to be a more rational explanation for why Millennials frequently move between organizations as opposed to the popular argument that we watched our parents get laid off and thus have no organizational loyalty.
- Boomers also wanted work that provided more meaning and autonomy. Sound familiar? Theories about meaningful work being the key to satisfaction have been around since the 1960’s and 1970’s, when some Boomers were beginning to enter the workforce. If we look at the classic motivation literature by Hackman and Oldham9, employees want meaningful work (significance, variety, and identification), autonomy, and knowledge of results. When these conditions are met employees will be intrinsically motivated to do their jobs. Based on the popular literature about Millennials, not much has changed (although the press would love for you to believe everything is changing).
Many of the other studies primarily focus on what Millennials want, and give reasons for why. For recruiting purposes, it is important to understand what today’s employee needs in order to be engaged at work. Ng and colleagues7 determined that the most important workplace attributes for Millennials were opportunities for advancement, good co-workers, quality supervisors, and training and development opportunities. Whether this significantly differs from what employees of other generations want is up in the air. Two issues exist: studies conducted today cannot control for the difference in age and experience among generations and studies conducted longitudinally (where all workers sampled were young) cannot control for the changing times. Thus, only speculations can be made on whether differences truly exist.
We can conclude that Millennials want many of the same workplace attributes that have been desired for years: meaningful work, autonomy, good co-workers, good supervisors, feedback, and advancement. As a Millennial employee, I have no problem voicing to my organization that these factors must be present. Perhaps that is what makes our generation different: we are not afraid to speak up about what we need to be engaged.
What are your thoughts on the Millennial generation?
Do you see any major differences between Millennial employees and other generations? Is it because of how they grew up, or a result of being young?
Amanda Harms | Associate Consultant
References:
- http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/05/navarrette.millennials.jobs/index.html
- http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-26/business/ct-biz-1226-millennials-20111226_1_millennials-new-poll-older-workers
- Erickson, T.J. (2009). Gen Y in the workforce. Harvard Business Review Case Study, February 2009.
- http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/11/opinion/sunday/the-go-nowhere-generation.html
- http://www.thelearningcafe.net/downloads/MillennialGeneration.pdf
- Twenge, J.M., Campbell, W.K., & Freeman, E.C. (2012). Generational differences in young adults’ life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation, 1966-2009. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Online First Publication, March 5, 2012.
- Ng, E.S.W., Schweitzer, L., & Lyons, S.T. (2010). New generation, great expectations: A field study of the Millennial generation. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 281-292.
- Wesner, M.S., & Miller, T. (2008). Boomers and Millennials have much in common. Organization Development Journal, 26, 89-96.
- Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Customer satisfaction survey results are often a key component of a multi-unit organization’s corporate bonus structure. Such programs ensure that customer satisfaction remains top of mind for managers at all levels within a company. While the decision to link survey results and employee rewards must ultimately be made by each individual organization, it is certainly worth investigating. If your company decides that such a bonus program is right for you, it is important to give serious consideration to the approach you will take and to be mindful of the possible risks and complications.
What Works
Quarterly bonus payments work well for many organizations. They offer a nice compromise in that they occur often enough to maintain interest but are spaced far enough apart to give managers an opportunity to impact their scores. Compensation plans with a tiered pay out are often very effective. With a tiered pay out, most participants can achieve the lowest level of compensation, while the very highest level of compensation is reserved for only the best performers. These payments work well when they are based on two criteria:
1. Progress towards a corporate goal- Managers at or above their goal should be motivated to stay at that level. It’s easy for customer satisfaction to slip without continuous effort.
2. Demonstrated improvement over last quarter- This is also a good time to identify strong performers and set them up as mentors for those who missed the mark.
Inherent Risks
While data integrity is always of great importance in any research effort, the connection of compensation to customer satisfaction survey results on this sort of program heightens the potential for fraudulent activity. However, there are ways to establish customer feedback systems that reduce the risk of this occurring.
Take, for instance, the data integrity associated with using Interactive Voice Response (IVR) as a means of collecting customer feedback. This is a commonly used method for collecting feedback among organizations with multiple locations. Customers call a toll-free number and use their telephone keypad to input answers to questions about their experience with a product or service. Unfair survey practices using IVR data collection are noticeable in some fairly common ways:
As we look for signs of better things to come, will we see a super hero streaking across the sky? Making a connection between business recovery and a fictional crime fighter might seem improbable, unlikely or even silly.
In fact, we often find ourselves “looking up” for guidance…especially to the most highly respected companies that seem to outperform all others, year-after-year. Yes, we want to know who’s on top but we REALLY want to know why. We want to know what companies that are succeeding in today’s new economy have done in the recent past to maintain their top position. We also want to know what they are planning to do in the near future.
Questar took a look at what their clients did over the last several years. We found that those clients that fit into the category of top companies (market leaders, or runner up position in their industry), had not abandoned their leadership and talent development efforts in favor of short-term pressures. While spending in 2009 was down 20% across the board, at no point did the discussion of organizational development ever fall off the table. What we saw was that top companies remained steadfast in their focus of developing talent, in part to retain them but mostly because it was simply a part of their organizational DNA. (more…)