4 minutes
Assumptions about employees of different generations can cause rifts in the workplace. Focusing instead on common values fosters a culture of inclusion.
There are a few cultural facts about the workplace that can be considered universally true. First, labeling your food in a shared office fridge only sometimes stops that container of delicious Sunday night leftovers from mysteriously disappearing. Second, the passive-aggressive note in the break room that directs co-workers to clean up after themselves will not prevent a few dishes with legacy stains from being left in the sink for days. Third, generational gaps in the workplace can be bridged by focusing less on assigned age characteristics and traits and more on the level of psychological safety each individual feels.
These workplace “truths” reflect not only cultural behaviors and norms but also the level of psychological safety within an organization. A simplified definition of psychological safety is an individual’s ability to be their true authentic self. For individuals to be their authentic self, they need to feel psychologically safe when engaging or expressing themselves, which in turn increases an individual’s sense of inclusion and belonging. Our true authentic self often does not align with the assumptions and stereotypes typically assigned to race, gender and age. Although we cannot solve every employee-related workplace challenge, we can mitigate the negative impact by focusing on psychological safety, especially regarding the challenges associated with having multiple generations in the workplace.
Generations as a Social Construct
A big challenge with having a cross-generational workforce relates to how each generation is defined and the characteristics and behaviors that are assumed and applied to each generation.
Views on a generation’s birth years and the characteristics assigned to each generation vary among different sources. The reason for these differences is due to the fact that generations are a social construct. Without credible scientific evidence to support generations, some would argue that generations do not exist and—dare it be said—that the concept of generations is simply a way to make stereotyping more palatable.
However, suppose for a moment we indulge in positive stereotyping. In that case, we can first identify five generations that simultaneously exist in the workforce: The Silent Generation (born between 1928 and 1945), baby boomers (born from 1946-1964), Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980), millennials (born between 1981 and 996) and Generation Z (born between 1997 and 2012). Let’s remember that there are members of a microgeneration known as Xennials (born between 1977 and 1983) that also exist in the workforce.
Perceived Values and Beliefs
Emphasis is routinely placed on the different perceived values and beliefs of a generation. For example, the Silent Generation is said to value loyalty and tend to remain with their employer until retirement. In contrast, millennials value meaningful work and will seek out multiple employment opportunities that align with this value. On the surface, the values of these two generations appear to be opposing, but if we examine these values through an alternative lens, the sense of belonging emerges as a common denominator. There is a strong correlation between the sense of belonging and loyalty; it’s the object of that loyalty leads us to assume that these two generations are starkly different. The object of loyalty for the Silent Generation is the organization, and for millennials, the object of loyalty is the work they do for the organization. Regardless of the object, loyalty is attached to the sense of belonging, contributing significantly to an organization’s culture. Similarly, inclusion is a cultural necessity for an organization.
Inclusion presents differently for baby boomers and Generation X. Team orientation is cited as a core value of baby boomers, whereas Generation X values independence. Once again, if we adjust our lens, the commonality between the two groups is related to how both generations prefer to contribute their efforts within an organization. An inclusive culture encourages collaboration; therefore, the ability to contribute to shared goals and outcomes resonates with baby boomers. On the other hand, a culture of inclusion empowers employee independence, and the acceptance of autonomy connects Generation X to the organization. By adjusting the lens, we use to view and identify generational values, inclusion and belonging materialize as connectors.
The Role of Psychological Safety
Whether you believe that psychological safety is the precursor to a culture of inclusion and belonging or you believe that inclusion and belonging is a means of establishing psychological safety, one fact that is less than debatable is that creating psychological safety is an approach to bridging generational gaps in the workplace. If truth be told, intergenerational management requires interpersonal relationships, and healthy interpersonal relationships’ purpose, benefits and outcomes are deeply rooted in and influenced by psychological safety. If less emphasis is placed on the different values affiliated with generations and we instead pivot to building organizational policies, practices and leadership mindsets that focus on the components of psychological safety—inclusion and belonging—it is then that we can make incredible strides toward fostering a culture where all generations are seen, heard and valued in the workplace.
CUES member LaToya S. Pryce is culture and inclusion officer at $5 billion Visions Federal Credit Union, Endicott, New York.
Attend a Related Learning Event
