Research on Millennials is inconsistent. This inconsistency exists in the range of birth years used to define this cohort, as well as the findings that report work related values and characteristics that these individuals encompass. We need to continue to try and understand this generation, but to do so we must continue to conduct thorough research with individuals in the cohort. Until we have conclusive results, I find it somewhat concerning that organizations are spending large amounts of money on a phenomenon that we have yet to fully comprehend.
Another perspective is that perhaps this generation is part of a bigger phenomenon that is taking place in society. During the 1950’s Karl Mannheim conceptualized a theory of generations from a sociological framework. He suggested that generations have the ability to create or modify culture by moving the process of social change forward. Perhaps, we should view the Millennial generation phenomenon (and all that encompasses) as a tipping point in society towards a paradigmatic shift in our perceptions and beliefs of work and the role it can and should serve in our lives. For example, an abundant amount of research suggests that that Millennials are seeking out meaningful work and work-life balance. These concepts are not exclusive to this generation. In fact, Nancy Morse and Robert Weiss conducted a study in 1955 and they found that work served more of a purpose for employees than just an economic means. Similarly, research has shown throughout the decades that our view of work, work values, and what motivates us at work has continued to evolve. However, what have not continued to evolve are organizational practices and policies. Many organizations are still implementing practices and policies that were designed during the industrial revolution. We must ask ourselves if these policies and practices are still relevant and effective in 2017. I would suggest that based on the increase of job dissatisfaction and turnover that many are not and need to be re-visited. Employees have voiced their concerns of work-related practices for years. While these concerns contributed to the need and momentum for change, the effort was not yet strong enough for organizations to be forced to take notice. The size of the Millennial cohort, their ability to voice their opinions extensively, and the hype created by the media has all served to establish this phenomenon as the tipping point to push the cause forward for improved workplace conditions and environments.
My recommendation to companies trying to reduce turnover and increase happiness is not to assume that just the entry of Millennials into the workforce is the root of their organizational problems. A generational approach to existing problems only provides one lens, or perspective, into the multi-faceted and complex notion of work. Using only one lens to inform our policies and practices is relying too heavily on generalization, assumptions, and stereotyping. An organization is a complex, living system. If a system does not evolve then it gets left behind. We have to think about how increased turnover rates and happiness can possibly be the consequence of more systemic problems. The Millennials are just one voice calling for improved workplace conditions. We need to elicit as many voices as possible to understand the various perspectives of work and how to best address the problems that leadership and employees are facing in their organizations. I recommend that organizations spend their resources on trying to understand all of their individual employees (across all generations and positions) within their organizational context/culture. What works in one organization may not work in another. Instead of implementing one-size-fits all policies and practices on employees, organizations should take the time to conduct a thorough up-front analysis with them. Interventions should then be designed and developed based on these findings, and then continuously assessed and evaluated.
Organizations should seek to understand how their employees view work, how they define it, and what is important to them in their job. They should understand what these concepts really mean and look like to their employees as differences can stem from individual responsibilities and priorities. These recommendations can help create a more holistic perspective of the organization so that problems can be appropriately and systemically addressed. The ultimate goal should be to design structures, jobs, programs, and policies that help develop all employees and increase organizational effectiveness. By doing so, we will create dynamic, innovative, and sustainable organizations that are flexible and adaptable to the changing nature of work and our evolving relationship to it. Then maybe we can decrease turnover and increase overall happiness at work among all employees.
References:
Mannheim, K. (2000). The problem of generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.) Essays on the sociology of knowledge: Collected works (Vol. 5, pp. 276-320). New York: Routledge. (Original work published 1952).
Morse, N. C., & Weiss, R. S. (1955). The function and meaning of work and the job. American Sociological Review, 20(2), 191-198.