Managerial Motivation Across Generational Cohorts

The Strauss–Howe Generational Theory

Commended by Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker, and Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States, among other national leaders, Howe and Strauss's work titled Generations (1991) has received acclaim as a wide-ranging — if slightly alarming — review of the direction the nation is headed. The authors suggest that the country's history may be understood as a string of generational profiles, commencing from the year 1584 and extending to the present day. They boldly theorize that all generations may be regarded as belonging to one of four recurring types, sequentially repeated in a set pattern. Their framework enables one to chart a recurrent cycle within the nation's history — characterized by secular challenges and religious revivals — from the colonial era to the 21st century. The book is both an uplifting historical account and an insightful reordering of how history informs people's expectations about the current century.

The aforementioned book covers what came to be known as the Strauss–Howe generational theory, which delineates a theorized repetitive generational cycle within the history of the nation. The theorists established the basis for their hypothesis in a book that presents US history as a succession of generational profiles dating back to 1584. A later work, The Fourth Turning (1997), expands the generational theory by paying attention to the nation's traditional fourfold generational cycle and its repetitive mood periods. Since then, the theorists have used various publications to elaborate further on their ideas.

Howe and Strauss's (1991) work combines prediction with historical fact. They provided historical detail on prior and current generations while making several predictions, many of which pertained to the Millennials — who were young children at the time the authors began their work. Consequently, the authors lacked adequate historical data concerning this generation. Their first work, Generations (1991), explains American history as a progression of generational profiles of Anglo-Americans between 1584 and the present. It hypothesizes a trend of four repetitive stages, generational forms, and a recurring cycle of secular challenges and religious revivals, from the colonial era to the 21st century.

According to the authors, the term "social generation" may be defined as the sum total of all individuals born across approximately two decades, or across the span of a single life stage out of four: childhood, youth, midlife, and later life. They identify generations by seeking cohorts of this duration that share the following conditions: First, people belonging to a generation share a common age location in history — that is, they experience important social developments and historical events while passing through the same stage of life. From this perspective, individuals belonging to a given generation are permanently shaped by the era they inhabit during childhood and youth, leading them to share particular behaviors and views. Cognizant of these shared characteristics and life experiences, individuals belonging to a given generation also display a sense of perceived belonging with their cohort (Strauss & Howe, 1991).

Howe and Strauss claim that their description of "generations" is grounded in the work of numerous social theorists and authors, including Ibn Khaldun, Polybius, and other early writers, as well as contemporary social theorists such as José Ortega y Gasset, John Stuart Mill, Karl Mannheim, François Mentré, Émile Littré, and Auguste Comte.

Given the above theory, one general strategy for motivating the workforce across generations could be to celebrate their secular and religious values and to build company values and benefit packages around them. Individual religious and secular values can thus be used to motivate all generational cohorts. For instance, religious festivities can be recognized through company holidays. In a corporate setting, managers can further design motivational packages based around historical events that were influential for particular generational cohorts, celebrating that history through themed office events. This approach can allow one generation to understand the perspectives of another, fostering a measure of respect and mutual understanding. Similar strategies can be applied to social events, especially when dealing with Generation X and Millennials. These two generations, though closely linked in age, can hold very different values regarding particular social events. Encouraging open discussion of different social events and viewpoints can build camaraderie and understanding across generational lines — though care must be taken to maintain a positive framework, as poorly managed discussions could deepen rather than bridge the divide.

Motivational Differences Among Generational Cohorts

Drawing on earlier research into inter-generational gaps, Katarzyna (2014) aimed to examine whether distinctions in motivational factors were, in fact, present across different generations within Irish organizations. Using data collected via a Motivational Factors Questionnaire, the researcher scrutinized cross-sectional differences among three clusters of the Irish workforce: Baby Boomers, Generation X, and Generation Y (Katarzyna, 2014). The findings do not fully support the generational stereotypes common in popular media and management literature. The examination revealed the existence of a few deep-seated differences between generational drivers, but age may account for these differences rather than generation per se. Despite being statistically significant, the distinctions may not present substantial practical challenges for management strategy overall (Katarzyna, 2014). Moreover, a review of existing literature reveals some incongruities, demonstrating that current studies do not always produce identical outcomes.

For a more detailed insight into the factors motivating Generation Y, Generation X, and Baby Boomers, the author examined the three generations against five motivational elements: leisure time, compensation, increased responsibility, ability to advance, and work atmosphere. Differences discovered, though statistically significant, do not appreciably affect the organization — perhaps owing to the various life stages exhibited within an age group. This does not, however, eliminate the reality that different age groups hold different perspectives shaped by the distinct social climates they were raised in and the diversity of experiences within their lives (Katarzyna, 2014). This may imply that while individuals within these groups differ from one another, they are relatively similar within the workplace setting. Katarzyna (2014) acknowledges that companies must cultivate an atmosphere of attentiveness and respect in order to bridge every age group toward developing and maintaining a productive workforce.

Tan, Rajah, and Wan (2014) discuss organizational justice as a mediator between generational diversity and motivation. While most empirical evidence and literature supports variation in generational preferences regarding motivation — and supports tailoring benefit packages to better fit each generation — awareness is needed of the fact that organizational justice may continue to shape outcomes. Improved understanding of motivation models and generational concerns may still not be sufficient to improve personnel productivity, since motivation packages are evaluated relative to what others receive, traversing social interactions in which equity is assessed. The scholars concluded that the perceived favorability of motivation packages typically determines subsequent performance.

Wong, Lang, Coulon, and Gardiner (2008) conducted a study to gauge whether gaps in motivational factors and personality traits are evident across Generation Y, Generation X, and Baby Boomers. The Motivation and Occupational Personality Questionnaires were employed to study cross-sectional motivational and personality factor disparities across the three generations. Study findings did not support the generational stereotypes widely cited by media and management literature. In particular, few meaningful distinctions were evident among the three studied generations, and the differences that were noted were associated more with age than with generation. A major limitation of Wong and colleagues' (2008) study was their use of cross-sectional data. The study's practical implications included highlighting the importance of dealing with individuals by attending to personal differences rather than relying on generation-based stereotypes, which may not be as influential as available literature suggests (Wong et al., 2008).