Leading Generation Y in Austria

(1)

Master Thesis

Leading Generation Y in Austria

Author: Patrick Graf

Supervisor: Mikael Lundgren Ph.D Examiner: Philippe Daudi Ph.D Academic term: 17VT

Subject: Leadership

(2)

Statutory declaration

I declare in lieu of an oath that I have written this Master thesis myself and that I have not used any sources or resources other than stated for its preparation. I further declare that I have clearly indicated all direct and indirect quotations. This Master thesis has both been submitted at the IMC Fachhochschule Krems and the Linnaeus University and has not been handed in elsewhere for examination pur- poses.

Krems, 30^thMay 2017 Patrick Graf

(3)

Acknowledgements

This thesis is dedicated to my family and friends who actively supported me throughout my studies.

I would furthermore like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Mikael Lundgren who supported me with his valuable insights and profound knowledge.

(4)

Abstract

Within the last years organizations are enriched by a further age cohort that is entering the working environment. The demands and backgrounds of generation Y have changed many aspects within the organizational environment especially in terms of employee retention. Research has provided insights into the values, backgrounds and beliefs of this cohort. Yet, the importance of requirements towards the leadership dimension of generation Y in Austria is not quite clear.

In order to sharpen the understanding of the leadership related perspective, a thorough literature review is provided. Afterwards a quantitative research study examined factors ascribed to generation Y employees.

The analysis of the gathered data outlined that the expectations and disfavoured behavioural patterns for generation Y in Austria are in line with other sources of research. Furthermore, existing differences between disfavouring certain factors and factors of demotivation could be identified. Also in terms of expectations and motivations such differences could be observed. The strong demand and depreca- tion of certain behaviours revealed that it is crucial for business leaders to understand the requirements of the generation Y age cohort, in order to foster motivation and commitment.

(5)

List of Figures and Illustrations

Figure 1: Company adaption based on Austrian Economic Chamber (2016) ... 10

Figure 2: Degrees of Austrian citizens based on Statistik Austria (2016) ... 20

Figure 3: Desired qualities of a leader based on HAYS (2013, p. 11) ... 31

Figure 4: Feedback as a crucial factor based on Parment (2013, p. 6) ... 35

Figure 5: Motivational factors based on Zukunftsinstitut (2013, p. 37) ... 36

Figure 6: Research process based on Kumar (2014, p. 37) ... 45

Figure 7: Participation in terms of generations (Author´s chart) ... 56

Figure 8: Working relationship of gen Y participants in Austria (Author´s chart) ... 56

Figure 9: Millenial participation regarding gender (Author´s chart) ... 57

Figure 10: Citizenship of gen Y participants (Author´s chart) ... 58

Figure 11: Education of working gen Y participants (Author´s chart) ... 58

Figure 12: Gross income of working gen Y participants (Author´s chart) ... 59

Figure 13: Family status of working gen Y participants (Author´s chart) ... 60

Figure 14: Comparison of expectations and motivations (Author´s chart) ... 61

Figure 15: Willingness to quit (Author´s chart) ... 63

Figure 16: Comparison of disfavor and demotivation (Author´s chart) ... 64

(8)

List of Tables

Table 1: Overview of generations based on Lamb et al., (pp. 111-113) ... 16

Table 2: Hypotheses (Author´s table) ... 49

Table 3: Cronbach´s Alpha expectations (Author´s table) ... 52

Table 4: Cronbach´s Alpha motivations (Author´s table) ... 52

Table 5: Cronbach´s Alpha disfavoring behavior (Author´s table) ... 53

Table 6: Cronbach´s Alpha demotivation (Author´s table) ... 53

Table 7: Paired sample statistics feedback (Author´s table) ... 66

Table 8: Significance of feedback (Author´s table) ... 66

Table 9: Paired sample statistics participative leadership (Author´s table) ... 67

Table 10: Significance of participatory leadership (Author´s table) ... 67

Table 11: Paired sample statistics intensive communication (Author´s table) ... 68

Table 12: Significance of intensive communication (Author´s table) ... 68

Table 13: Paired sample statistics being treated individually (Author´s table) ... 69

Table 14: Significance of being treated individually (Author´s table) ... 69

Table 15: Paired sample statistics work-life balance (Author´s table) ... 69

Table 16: Significance of work-life balance (Author´s table) ... 70

Table 17: Paired sample statistics easy tasks (Author´s table) ... 70

Table 18: Significance of easy tasks (Author´s table) ... 71

Table 19: Paired sample statistics shared information (Author´s table) ... 71

Table 20: Significance of shared information (Author´s table) ... 72

Table 21: Paired sample statistics respect (Author´s table) ... 72

(9)

Table 22: Significance of being treated with respect (Author´s table) ... 73 Table 23: Results of Hypotheses 1-5 (Author´s table) ... 77 Table 24: Results of Hypotheses 6-8 (Author´s table) ... 80

(10)

List of Abbreviations

Gen Y Generation Y

(11)

1 Introduction

The first chapter aims at providing an overview of the initial situation with reference to generation related leadership as well as an outline of the actual problem statement. Furthermore, the research gap and the objectives of the research will be identified throughout this chapter. Based on the problem statement and the given objectives, the research questions will presented.

1.1 Background Situation

The rise of today´s generation Y affects both, organizations and leaders. While Gen Y ploughs on to mature and enter workforce it is of interest for employers to develop an understanding towards all the employment facets this generation expects (Limsila & Ogunlana, 2008 as cited in Horeczy et al., 2011, p. 1).

The factor age is of specific interest, because today´s labor fource contains four different generations (Kyles, 2005, p. 53). Differences among generations include a diversity issue, which organizations have to identify and comprehend (Arsenault, 2004, pp. 124-126). To maintain the balance in between different groups of employees and to pander a harmonious working environment creates challenges for managers (Spiro, 2006 as cited in Srivastava & Banerjee, 2016, p. 148).

Misunderstanding differences of generational cohorts can have an impact on employee performance and the actual contenment. It is therefore crucial for managers to learn more about their staff as different generations coalesce in their work envrionment (Gibson, Greenwood & Murphy, 2010 ; Kaifi et al., 2012, as cited in Smith & Nichols, 2015, p. 40). Furthermore, it is imperative for businesses to understand generational differences (Barclays, 2017). These generational distinctions encompass a complex collocation of behaviors. Every generation posseses unique work ethics and perspectives but also preferences towards managing and being managed as well as a certain working style and viewpoints on loyalty and working times (Yeong Lin & Huang, 2008, p. 1).

(12)

The concept of generations itself bears a quite subjective factor in terms of the beginning and ending of birth dates. The generalizing factor can disguise important distinctions within the group itself (Kotler & Keller, 2012, p. 241). The idea of a generation can have more than a single meaning and therefore create confusion (Duane & McCammon, 2003, p. 25).

The sociologist Karl Mannheim (1952, p. 298) argues that sharing the same shaping experiences conduces to a unique frame of reference, which in order can be a very strong force in the life of an individual. Cantril (1941, p. 20) outlines that the term frame of reference implies a generalized point of view that guides interpreta- tions (as cited in Weick, 1995, p. 4). Starbuck and Milliken (1988, p. 51) suggest, that placing stimuli into the framework allows individuals “to comprehend, understand, explain, attribute, extrapolate and predict” and therefore accounts for an element of sensemaking (as cited in Weick, 1995, p. 4).

Ortega y Gasset (1933. p.15) even found that a generation “is the most important conception in history”. Despite the indeed subjective aspect of the concept itself, a further application, especially within the field of leadership, will broaden the understanding of generation Y and contribute to today’s theoretical body of knowledge.

Today´s rising generation Y has often been adressed as the subject of research within the last couple of years (Macky, et al., 2008, p. 857). Also in regards to the working environment, this age cohort has obtained incremental attention because it refletcs different values, beliefs and attitudes than preceding generations (Chou, 2012, pp. 71-72).

Both, organizations and leaders need to evolve insights on how to maximise the working contribution of generation Y. It is therefore necessary to deal with the expectations of this age cohort, also in terms of leadership. By adapting their own behavior, leaders have the possibility to strengthen the dedication of employees and also foster organizational productivity (Limsila & Ogunlana, 2008 as cited in Horeczy, et al., 2011, p. 1). A study by Koech and Namusonge (2012, p. 10) underlined the encouragement of subordinates through inspiration and the effects on problem solving skills. The study reflected a strong positive correlation between leadership behaviors like intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation,

(13)

individualised consideration and the actual organizational performance.

1.2 Problem Statement

For today´s businesses, the competition is no longer just about the number of customers, instead enterprises compete to amass a knowledged workforce that is able to sustain the organization. Several studies have outlined that job satisfaction is the primary indicator for the commitment of employees and their contemplation to change their actual job (Knight, Durham & Locke, 2001; Ingersoll, 2001;

Ingersoll, 2006 as cited in Hadijah & Badaruddin, 2015, p. 15).

Retaining staff in a corporate environment is a very essential issue. Losing talent can be very costly and unfavourable for the achievement of business goals as well as the competitive environment. Studies by Workforce Managament Solutions indicate, that surrogating an mid-level employee may result in total cost of 150% of the employees annual remuneration. Furthermore, the highest numbers of employee turnover were found among the generation Y age cohort. According to the research, only 17% of enterprises were conscious of the costs such changes created (Ingham, 2015). Research conducted by the Gallup organization (2016) underlines the job hopping habits of this age cohort. According to the research 21% of people born between 1980 and 1996 mentioned that they have changed their job within the last year. The percentage accounts for more than a threefold of other generations. Also the willingness to stay with the current job is lower. The findings of the Gallup research suggest that only 50% of this age cohort strongly agree that they are planning to work at their current company one year from now while 60% of other generations state the same.

To determine whether jop hopping is a matter of age or generation, the social business network LinkedIn Inc. (2016) investigated the job changes of several different age cohorts. The study included individuals who reported to work within one year after graduating from college with a Bachelor´s degree. The analysis of the data revealed that within the next five years after graduation the average number of enterprises, professionals worked for, has almost doubled between 1986 and 2010. Graduates between 1986-1990 had on average 1.60 jobs within

(14)

the first five years of their professional career, while graduates between 2006- 2010 accounted for an average of 2.85 jobs.

From a general perspective, generation Y employees are more likely to quit their job and it requires an extended skill set to actually manage this age cohort (Kadakia, 2014). Today´s and tomorrow´s top performer are also more pretentious and independent than its predecessors. Therefore, executives essentially need to enter cooperative relationships and possibly question their own leading behavior (Springer Professional, 2013).

The already existing diversity of employees demands leaders to adapt their leadership style. Leaders, who are able to understand the characteristics of their workforce, could provide managers with tools to keep their top employees. Such alignments will in turn create value to the enterprise (Sugansky & Ferri-Reed, 2009 as cited in Hadijah & Badaruddin, 2015, p. 15). According to Yeaton (2008), leaders have to pay attention to the development of new approaches rather than to offer a good salary or other benefits while straining employees with meticulous projects (as cited in Hadijah & Badaruddin, 2015, p. 15).

As a result, the leadership expectations as well as preferences of generation Y are important aspects that should be considered within today´s as well as tomorrow´s leadership environment. The identification of these factors will allow further analyses and provide supportive knowledge for the development of repsective approaches.

1.3 Research Gap

During the last years Generation Y has been quite often the subject to research (Macky, et al., 2008, p. 857). Several studies and books have looked at different leadership aspects of this age cohort.

Many of these studies have however focused on different national backgrounds or targeted specific leadership styles. Interesting aspects in terms of motivations and expectations towards leadership have therefore been limited and hence not considered sufficiently.

(15)

Horeczy et al., (2011, p. 9) discussed the preference of transformational over transactional leadership and the traits connected to the generational profile. The study showed that generation Y prefers determined and hardworking leaders that are competent and accountable of their action. According to the study, the mentioned characteristics matched the high preference for idealized impact under the transformational leadership style. The overall study focused however on particular leadership style attributes and was hence limited in terms of the perspective.

Salahuddin (2010, p. 5) researched the impact of generational differences on the leadership style. The study found that the admired characterstics of leaders do not only differ among the various age cohorts, but also on the characterization of the leadership style. Moreover, the existing generational differences can impact the organizational success. However, the conducted research used a different timeframe to define the age cohort of generation Y. Thus, this birth cohort was referred to as nexters.

The Institute of Leadership & Management and Ashridge Business School (2011, p. 4-5) within their survey targeted the expectations of nearly 2000 UK graduate employees, of whom a majority were gen Y members. The findings of the survey reflected a lacking understanding in terms of work expectations between gen Y and their superior managers but were limited to a UK perspective.

Hewitt and Ukpere (2012, p. 6003) investigated the length of employment and general leadership challenges that are associated with generation Y. Within their study, the targeted aspects included the management of communication and leadership support. The study then proposed a theoretical model for the tenure of generation Y employment. Despite the targeted aspects, the focus of the study was primarely based on South Africa.

While many parts of existing literature focused on certain leadership styles, the respective leaderhip behavior towards the motivation of generation Y have not been researched sufficiently. Wiggins (2016, p. 169) explored the effect of motivation on employee retention for generation Y cohort leaders. The focus was however merely based on the service industry and targeted the southwest of the

(16)

United States. Montana and Petit (2008, p. 35) examined the motivation factors of generation X and Y. Within the scope of the study, graduate as well as undergraduate students were asked to rank several factors they think of are most important in motivating them to perform their job as good as possible. While the results among both cohorts were very similar, the study did not really focus on the leadership perspective. Furthermore, the research targeted recent graduates. To gain a deeper understanding of the actual leadership expectations, the need to survey already working generation Y members arises. Srivastava and Banerjee (2016, p. 161) looked at the motivations, values and beliefs of gen Y and found that there is an existing connection between those factors. Therefore a model was proposed. Nevertheless, the conducted research also targeted graduates without any working experience. To deepen the understanding of what motivates generation Y from a leadership perspective, working experiences will nevertheless be a necessary factor to look for.

HAYS (2013, p. 16) targeted generation Y members to develop insights from a leadership perspective but also in terms of millennial expectations and motivations. The findings of the study included that, monetary compensation accounts for the most important motivational aspect of gen Y. However, the research was targeted towards generation Y in the US and reflected, in comparison to European sources, certain differences regarding motivational aspects. Martin (2005, p. 39) investigated the characteristics of generation Y and targeted the relationship between maintenance and productivity. While this research also included possible challenges from a managerial perspective, the chosen target group was primarily researched through workplace interviews from one single organization.

(17)

1.4 Research Questions and Objectives

Additionaly to the contribution to science, the expected insights will conduce to the understanding of generation Y´s leadership expectations and allow both leaders and organizations to receive valuable information in terms of requirements and motivational factors.

The delivered insights could be used to adapt organizational structures, company policies, align leadership behavior and positively affect the organizational commitment of the generation Y age cohort. Especially for leaders and managers the awareness of these insights might result in a more satisfied cohort of generation Y employees. Therefore, the empirical findings could favour an improved working environment which as a consequence impacts the employee retention rate and reduces costs.

The aim of this research is to shed light on the topic of generation Y´s expectations for leadership in Austria and to point out an eventual necessary shift in leadership towards this age cohort. Bearing in mind the afore mentioned challenges, leadership expectations of generation Y shall be investigated, analyzed and described to pave the way for future research. After reading this master thesis the following research questions should be answered:

RQ: Which leadership behavior does the Austrian generation Y expect from today´s business leaders?

Sub RQ: Which leadership behaviors have a positive impact on the perceived working motivation of Generation Y?

RQ: Which leadership behavior does the Austrian generation Y deprecate from today´s business leaders?

Sub RQ: Which leadership behaviors have a negative impact on the perceived working motivation of Generation Y?

(18)

2 Austria´s Demography

To gain a general understanding of the importance for enterprises to address the requirements of Austria’s generation Y, this chapter looks at the current demographic developments. Furthermore, the resulting demographic influence on Aus- tria´s job market will be discussed and the taken measures from a company’s perspective outlined.

2.1 Demographic Situation

Located in the heart of Europe, Austria is divided into nine different provinces and home to 8.7 million inhabitants (Statistik Austria, 2016). Within the last couple of years the Austrian demographic structure has seen some changes. As for many other western countries, these changes include the appearance of lower birth rates that directly effect the superannuation of the population. The often-expected decrease of Austria’s population will however not eventuate within the medium- dated future. On the contrary, the total population is forecasted to face growth until 2025 (Austrian Institute for Family Studies, 2005).

According to Harnika (2004, p. 21) Austrian birth rates will nevertheless face a further decrease. The reasons for the decline can be traced back to the weaker parental generation. In other words, the total number of potential mothers in Austria is decreasing. While in 2001 1.73 million women were aged between 15 and 45 years, in 2030 only 1.45 million women will be within that range (as cited in Austri- an Institute for Family Studies, 2005). The superannuation of Austria´s population will therefore have major impacts on infrastructure, economy as well as the job market (Austrian Institute for Family Studies, 2005).

2.2 Immigration

Another factor that has impacted the demographic situation in Austria is immigration. The all time high of 8.7 million inhabitants can therefore also be tracked back to the developments in this regard. 14.6% of people living in Austria are foreign

(19)

citizens. Despite the fact that 101.343 persons were moving abroad, the population increased. In particular 214.410 migrants contributed to a positive migration balance, which accounts for 98% of total population growth (Matzenberger, 2016).

Regarding the migration of refugees, several nationalities including Syria and Af- ghanistan used the so-called Balkan route to arrive in Austria. Migrants from Africa on the other hand, mainly crossed Italy. There has been a constant migration of people from Afghanistan, which results in 2015 for a total of 20.300 Afghan people in Austria. People from Africa account for a total of 47.000 (Berger, et al., 2016, p.

3).

The total percentage of foreign citizens in Austria has increased over the last years. As already outlined 14.6% of Austria´s population in 2016 were non- Austrian citizens. This percentage accounts for a total of 1.27 million people. In 2015 this figure accounted for 13.3%. 48.7% of the non-Austrian citizens were immigrating from other countries within the European Union. The biggest part in this regard is from Germany. Non-EU citizens account for 51.3 % of the overall immigration to Austria. The largest growth ratio here are people from Syria followed by Afghanistan and Iraq. Regarding the gender of these countries immigrants, a male surplus can be identified. Only 33% of Syrian immigrants are women, followed by 29% of female Afghan immigrants and 20% of female Iraqi nation- als (Die Presse, 2016).

From an economic perspective, it is also necessary to not only consider the persons who are coming to Austria, but also take into account that not all asylum seekers are refugees in terms of to the Geneva Convention. Hence, there are also refugees who will as subsidiary protected individuals leave Austria again. Further- more, some immigrants are finding help in Austria before continuing the way to Germany or the Scandinavian region (Berger et al., 2016, p. 3).

2.3 Impacts on the Job Market

For the Austrian economy the impacts of the demographic developments are already quite noticeable. Especially on the job market the ramifications become

(20)

visible. Harnika (2004, pp. 24-25) points out a significant decrease in labor force.

In the long run, the age group of employed people between 15 and 60 will face a decline of 10%. Simultaneously to this development, the average age of Austria´s population will rise from today´s 40 years to 48 years (as cited in Austrian Institute for Family Studies, 2005, p. 4).

Already from a current perspective, the demographic change makes itself felt in terms of the available human resources. The Austrian Public Employment Service (2015) issued, that the non self-employed workforce below the age of 25 has dropped by 7% between 2008 and 2014.

The Austrian Economic Chamber (2017) exemplified several impacts of the demographic developments for Austrian enterprises. These developments also lead a change in the workforce structure. While the proportion of older employees is going to rise significantly, the acquisition of younger staff is going to prove even more difficult. To stay competitive Austrian companies are especially adapting their personnel policies. The focus throughout most policies can in particular be found on the younger workforce.

Figure 1: Company adaption based on Austrian Economic Chamber (2016) 85%

45%

49%

44%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Train younger staff Intensively train older staff Endeavor in recruiting

graduates Career models for older staff

Recruitment marketing

Focus on old staff Focus on young staff

(21)

According to the Austrian Economic Chamber (2016), 85% of companies further train their younger staff while at the same time only 44% of older employees receive further training. Moreover, 11% of enterprises are developing career models for their older workforce while on the other hand 45% endeavor in the recruitment of graduates or young professionals. These figures seem to indicate, an adaption towards higher investments for young employees and graduates. A total of 49% of companies engaging in recruitment marketing activities seems to further sharpen the existing picture.

It can therefore be concluded, that especially the investments of Austrian companies in younger employees and graduates are quite significant. To foster a certain sustainability within their investments, companies should however also consider the retention of these employees and not only focus on their acquisition.

According to the study by Workforce Management Consulting, 52% of all labor turnovers appear within the first year of work. Since millennials show the highest numbers in terms of employee turnover, this age cohort should be of specific interest for companies (Ingham, 2015).

(22)

3 The Concept of Generations

The following chapter looks at the cornerstones of the generational concept by using a theoretical framework and defining the used approach of the concept. Fur- thermore, a precise look at generation Y is taken in general before outlining and identifying the respective leadership aspects and motivational facets.

3.1 Defining Generations

The concept of generations includes more than one legitimate meaning. First of all, the term generation is a kinship term that relates to the relationship between individuals who share a common ancestor. A generation consists therefore of a single timeframe or degree in the natural line of ancestry. Hence, in regard to family, the concept of generations is quite precisely defined (Duane & McCammon, 2003, p. 25).

A different meaning of generation refers to individuals who are born during the same period of time and hence experience historical events at the same time. This point of view was influenced by Mannheim who used the expression to refer to the exceptional impacts of historical locations in terms of development for shared meaning of events or experience (Duane & McCammon, 2003, p. 25).

The potential confusion of meanings includes the usage of the term birth cohort to what others point out as generations in a historical meaning. From a rather general perspective, a cohort is a group of individuals who share some vital experience during the same timeframe. Every cohort is defined by a common event or experience and many sociologists use the actual year of birth as the event to define a cohort (Duane & McCammon, 2003, p. 26). Therefore, the main point of reference used when describing generations, age cohorts or birth cohorts throughout this thesis will be the year of birth.

The term “birth cohort” dates back to the year 1863 and was used by Emile Littre, a French sociologist (Howe & Strauss, 1991 as cited in Hadijah & Badaruddin, 2015, p. 16). Belonging to a birth cohort implies sharing a social history, more pre-

(23)

cisely the historical events, opportunities and compulsions constructed by society at that time. Also in terms of the life cycle birth cohorts share common denomina- tors. Birth cohorts grow together through childhood and reach adolescence together, they undergo early adulthood and reach maturity at the same time. A further factor accounts for the experience of the cohort itself. Aspects like size or education are special and unique to that very cohort. The undergone experiences last and mark a birth cohort throughout all their lives (Duane & McCammon, 2003, p. 26).

Also Kotler and Keller (2012, p. 241) define generations as age cohorts, which are influenced by the times during which they grew up. The respective influences can be described as music, movies politics or imprinting events. The shared experiences in terms of culture, politics and economy are therefore the same and the resulting values and outlooks similar.

According to Spahiu (2016, p. 74) the social concept of generations can be a help- ful tool to receive richer and more methodical information in terms of societal transformation via the substitution of cohorts. However, the concept itself also bears certain difficulties since it suggests rather theory than being analytically practical. Nevertheless, the concept is deep in content and has been applied in academics for different fields. Narrowing the concept down to foster the development of a consistent base of theory is challenging because there are many defini- tions to it.

Being born in a specific place at a specific time refers to the biological and se- quential component and therefore to the location of a generation. The specific connection, which does not refer to the facing of one another but instead follows a collective take between the various generational members, draws on the generation as actuality. Based on the related socio-historical environment while growing up, a reference to the shared common fortune of the historic and social construct occurs. Because of different possibilities to process the content of the gained experiences, a generation may also be segmented into smaller groups, so called entities. These generational entities are socially reciprocal cohorts who have collective directions in society, which are based on the similarly shared social and

(24)

time-wise gathering with the social setting (Spahiu, 2016, p. 75). Hence, there are often useful smaller groups within the different generations (Pew Research Center, 2015, p. 4). In order to receive a deeper understanding, the methodological part of this master thesis will therefore focus on a more narrow segmentation of generation Y. In particular, Austrian gen Y members who have already started working will be put to the center of attention.

The factor age indents two crucial components of an individual. In particular, it re- veals information about the stage of an individual’s life cycle as well as the mem- bership of a group in terms of the timeframe of birth. “An individual´s age is one of the most common predictors of differences in attitudes and behaviors” (Pew Re- search Center, 2015, p. 1).

Age cohorts enable researchers to analyze shifts in viewpoints. By doing so, a possibility to understand how shaping experiences interact with the life cycle and senescence, and therefore impact the worldview is granted. A further benefit of age cohorts allows researchers to go beyond the viewpoints of a specific moment.

Since younger and older individuals might show differences in their perspectives at a defined moment, research can also analyze the perception of a distinct issue on the basis of previous viewpoints. Elderly’s can be asked how they perceived something when they were younger. The concept also allows characterizing the trajectory of various viewpoints from different age cohorts (Pew Research Center 2015, p.1).

In terms of the respective timeframe, the generational concept usually refers to a 15-20 year stage. Taking into account the political developments, societal conven- tions and the economic state over a considerable lapse of time, it is possible that individuals of a cohort are making other shaping experiences. There are several factors that are affiliated with these generational differences. The life cycle refers to distinctions between individuals, which are mainly based on the stage of the cycle. In other words, a low engagement in politics at a young age may change over time and the involvement in political issues might rise. Another factor, called period effect describes events and conditions like wars, economic upturns or downturns, scientific achievements or social powers. The resulting effects have a

(25)

bearing on every individual and might even affect a total population without taking age into account as a necessary factor (Pew Research Center, 2015, pp. 1-4).

The cohort effect addresses differences among generations. A peerless historic occurrence experienced by a specific age cohort might especially produce distinctions over the time where opinions are shaped. Sometimes a cohort effect can even be the outcome of a period effect. The impact of cohort effects, which hap- pen during crucial points in the life cycle like young adulthood can be quite significant because identities and values are molded throughout that period. To comprehend what stimulates generational differences, fosters the ability to comprehend how public attitudes are formed. Hence, a change in viewpoints can impose a pivotal altering which is relevant for all generations, but also be just focused on a specific generation and their structure of shaping experiences (Pew Research Center, 2015, p. 5).

But there are also other critical viewpoints to the concept. It is argued that with missing published research on generational distinctions “the generational approach may be more popular culture than social science” (Giancola, 2006, p. 33).

Despite possible differences, the indication of the concepts importance seems to remain yet persistent. “Individuals who came of age in similar environments and who experienced similar historical events should have similarities in their value systems, even after accounting for socialization at the microlevel” (Noble &

Schewe, 2003, p. 980). Also PricewaterhouseCoopers (2011, p. 3) agrees that some behaviors and characteristics can be explicated by the actual age or even missing liabilities and of course behavior and precedencies might align throughout ones life. To reject the overall issues however on this behalf is argued to be an error.

Another main argument indicates that clustering individuals reduces intricacy.

Clustering generations provides some sort of guidance but does not possess the ability to comprehend individual behavior. Hence, belonging to a generation im- poses to be a pivotal approach but does not have the capability to constitute a explanatory model for thinking and bearing. Also other factors including gender and origin are equally important. Despite these limitations, generations can be charac-

(26)

terized through values. These values are conceptions about the quality of actuality and impact the range of alternative actions (Parment, 2013, p. 17).

Especially for businesses the generational factor should not be underestimated.

According to Kyles (2005, p. 53) today´s labor force contains four generations.

Meister and Willyerd (2009) even outline the phenomenon of five generations working together. An occurrence, which according to the authors, has not been experienced before.

Lamb, Hair, and McDaniel (2008, pp. 111-113) describe and characterize several different age cohorts. The table below reflects a brief overview of the latest three generations as well as the respective timeframe regarding birth. Furthermore, a short characterization is given.

Table 1: Overview of generations based on Lamb et al., (pp. 111-113) Name Years of birth Characterization

Generation Y 1979 – 1994 Grew up during “a family-focused time”

Generation X 1965 – 1978 First cohort of “dual-career households”

Baby Boomers 1946 – 1964 Less than 20% estimate to cease working

The lasting demographic developments are already noticeable for today’s businesses. A mixture of generations allows for beneficial diversity but also challenges human resource management. At the core of this issue lies the collaboration between different age cohorts with different attitudes towards work as well as social graces (Austrian Economic Chamber WKO, 2015, p. 1).

Of specific interest for companies is hereby the generation Y age cohort. Pricewa- terhouseCoopers (2011, p. 3) argues that this generation matters because it is entering the labor market in enormous numbers and will impact the working environment in future. Furthermore, this generation is comprised of a considerable size, accounting only in the US for 25% of overall labor force. In India it is even

(27)

representing more than 50% of total population. Also from a global perspective the size is quite significant. By 2020 this age cohort will account for 50% of global labor force (PricewaterhouseCoopers 2011, p. 3).

What actually defines and characterizes the gen Y cohort from a general and a leadership perspective and which impacts can be found on the working environment will be outlined in the following parts.

3.2 Generation Y

3.2.1 Definition

The first time, the term generation Y was used, can be followed back to the year 1993 in the journal Ad Age (Ad Age, 1993, p. 16). There are many different opinions on how to actually define generation Y. Kotler and Keller (2012, p. 241) suggest, that this age cohort was born in between 1979 and 1994. Armutat (2011, p.

9) outlines that generation Y was approximately born in between 1980 and 2000.

A different point of view from Parment (2013, p. 3) describes gen Y as born between 1984 and 1994. Furthermore, the expression of millennials is often used to describe the same age cohort. PricewaterhouseCoopers (2011, p. 3) for example refers to millennials as born between 1980 and 2000.

Donnison (2007, p. 1) also underlines the different possibilities in terms of inter- preting who in fact appertains to generation Y. In this regard, the vast number of appraisals is outlined, which tries to describe the respective birth dates. Moreover, an abundance of labels is mentioned.

The afore mentioned perspectives already indicate the complexity of clustering individuals by their age. There might be no such thing as a clear line that distin- guishes between the precise behavior of one generation or the other. Individuals whose year of birth does not match the specific generational pattern of gen Y might still behave like them (Parment, 2013, p. 5).

To simplify the understanding, demarcate the used concept and ease the process of reading, the generational concept of Kotler and Keller will be used throughout

(28)

this thesis. Therefore, generation Y will be defined as born between 1979 and 1994 (Kotler & Keller, 2012, p. 241).

3.2.2 Background

During the formative phase of generation Y, the Internet and digital media played a crucial role. In the beginning years of the Internet the main focus was centered by the desire to receive information on a global scale. With the help of social media a shift towards networking and participation occurred (Parment, 2013, p. 22). Gen- eration Y has been growing up with technology by navigating through the Internet, instant messaging as well as the usage of mobile phones (Kotler & Keller, 2012, p.

241). According to Windisch and Medman (2008, p. 36) a person in his or her early twenties has on average sent and obtained 250000 mails, texts and instant messages, has used the mobile for 10000 hours, spent 5000 hours with computer gaming and passed 3500 hours of time online in social networks. Since generation Y is the first generation to grow up in a digitalized environment, this age cohort is often referred to as digital natives and driven by a technological oriented lifestyle, which fosters new behavioral patterns in terms of socialization (Zukunftsinstitut, 2013, p. 15).

In comparison to other age cohorts gen Y has been growing up during rather sta- ble times but is nonetheless equipped with the awareness for the threats of their time like financial crisis, terrorism and environmental issues. Their parents worked hard for prosperity and showed both diligence and endurance to develop economic resilience. By doing so, examples of ambition and dedication have been set from generation Y´s early days on (Allihn, 2013, p. 20).

Globalization has played a huge impact on the childhood of this age cohort. Mar- ket developments influenced by the entrance of developing countries reflect one example here (Allihn, 2013, p. 20). On a European level, the threats of globalization lead the European Union to the development of a particular strategy. This strategy is realized through a methodic shift of trade from third countries towards landlocked states. Furthermore, the created European Globalization fund absorbs social consequences of globalization (Breuss , 2008, p. 561). The economical per-

(29)

spective is of interest because the commercial stagnation had an impact on the public attitude of Europeans (Stokes, 2015). According to the Pew Research Cen- ter (2014), 77% of Europeans are not content with the way things are going in their country. The millennial age cohort is hereby no exception. Only 6% of Greeks and 7% of Spanish age cohort members claim to be satisfied with the national direction. A more positive climate among millennials can be found in the UK where 53%

argue to be satisfied with their country’s direction. Also in Europe’s strongest economy, the numbers show a more positive characteristic. Yet, 66% of German cohort members claim to be satisfied.

A further influence to the background of this age cohort is choice. A couple of decades ago, there were fewer choices in everyday life. One would buy the same car brand for many years and visit the same regional supermarket. Comparisons via the Internet were simply not possible and loyalty played an important role. In the beginning of the 1980s these things changed. Globalization accounted for a big factor in international trade and more favorable transportation options (Parment, 2013, p. 34). Generation Y is used to have plenty of choices. A respective survey revealed that only 2.8% of all gen Y participants saw selection options as negative factors, which result in uncertainty and frustration. On the other hand, 31.8% per- ceive choices as positive and appreciate the ability to choose different options (Parment, 2013, p. 5). However, the amount of available choices has not only positive effects on generation Y. The huge number of possibilities intensifies the feeling of being disoriented. Whether the choices are tailored products and ser- vices or have a societal or educational nature, the contingencies have become bigger (Armutat, 2011, p. 13). The width of possibilities is therefore also seen as blessing and curse at the same time (Parment, 2009, p. 18).

3.2.3 Education

Also in terms of job and education the possible options have become broader. Cul- tural education and the command of foreign languages are nowadays almost inevi- table to compete on the global job market. Because of the broad variety of options in terms of education, generation Y is required to make target oriented decisions, which will impact their future (Allihn, 2013, pp. 20-21).

(30)

The educational developments can also be recognized on a national level. In 2000, Austria´s percentage of university graduates amounted for 14% within the range of 25 to 34 year old individuals. In 2011, already 39% of the same ranged individuals enjoyed an academic education (Oesterreichische Universitätenkonferenz, 2014). Referring to the Registerzählung 2011 from Statis- tik Austria, the Austrian University Conference (2014) mentions that in Austria 648.500 individuals are graduates from tertiary institutions. Also with vocational school as highest education, a strong increase can be observed.

The following graph shows the ordinary received degrees of Austrian citizens at public universities between 2000 and 2015. The respective timeframe was chosen on behalf of the afore mentioned definition of gen Y from Kotler and Keller (2012, p. 241).

Figure 2: Degrees of Austrian citizens based on Statistik Austria (2016)

Figure 2 indicates that between 2000 and 2013 the total number of Austrian graduates from public universities has more than doubled. Also the overall trend shows a clear increase within the given period and seems therefore to underline the rising possibilities for higher education. Schwaiger (2014) even argues that formally,

13.754 15.003

17.897 18.950 22.924

25.149

27.316 29.178

26.075

0 5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000

(31)

generation Y is the best-educated generation yet to exist. Acquiring a full reper- toire of skills or abilities to boost the attractiveness on the job market and to posi- tion oneself strategically is for that reason a common goal of employability (Ruthus, 2014, p. 12).

3.2.4 Attitudes and Characteristics

With the rapid growth of different choices and possibilities a new attitude towards options has been created. Nowadays it is rather difficult to make easy or self- explanatory decisions but instead every individual has to determine how to navi- gate through a world full of different choices (Parment, 2013, p. 31).

Unlike the behavioral pattern of disassociation which was connected to other cohorts, the individual freedom of choice is something really essential for generation Y. Being able to connect to a favorable peer group is therefore of higher rele- vance. Because of the fact that the sense of belonging is most often freely chosen and can be amended anytime, self-expression accounts for a crucial cultural role.

Hence, a core driver of generation Y is individual creativity. But also openness in terms of the worldview accounts for an important aspect. This openness includes topics like freedom of religion and same-sex marriage but is also directed towards the understanding of access in terms of an organizational perspective. Possible demands may therefore also include open data or open government (Zukunftsinstitut, 2013, p. 15).

Within the last decades, shifting values and striving for independency have enabled the rise of individualism. However, individualism does not automatically mean egoism in this regard. It is rather an individualism of values, which lead to putting people at the center of values and deciding about their own destiny. Popular culture based events have supported the rise of generation Y´s individualism. Espe- cially reality TV with its given possibilities to chase a career from a public stage enabled people to do jobs that seemed before beyond reach. Through TV series like Sex and the city, which was watched by millions of female gen Y members, aspects like urbanization, emancipation and individualism have made a dent (Parment, 2013, pp. 32-33).

(32)

From an Austrian perspective, Heinzlmaier and Ikrath (2012, p. 43) found that today’s idea of self-realization is interpreted as taking advantage of existing chances within society. These opportunities should bear the chance to live a happy life but also to develop one´s own personality. The entire interpretation is therefore targeted towards individual freedom, detachment and projected to oneself in the sense of a life, which is not restricted by the demands of other individuals or religion, phi- losophy and politics.

The Zukunftsinstitut (2013, p. 15) indicates, that from a sociological perspective, gen Y is also returning to collective forms like communities and networks which are important to this age cohort because institutions and their respective rules are not taken for granted by implication. However when asked for the desirable and important things in life a sweeping majority of 89% agrees that being independent and able to decide about one´s own life, is something worth striving for. 87% see a fulfilling and meaningful job as extremely important and 85% agree with education as a crucial factor in their life. Another 76% acknowledge the importance of start- ing a family and 58% desire to be able to afford a lot as well as to travel frequently to foreign countries (Zukunftsinstitut, 2013, p. 19).

In terms of the underlying characteristics, there are many different opinions on how to actually describe the age cohort of generation Y. Enderle (2008, p. 12) points out that one of gen Y´s classical characteristics is self-confidence. The choice related disorientation as characteristic has already been afore mentioned (Armutat, 2011, p. 13). Other ascribed traits include “entitled, optimistic, civic minded, close parental involvement, value work-life balance, impatient, multitask- ing, and team oriented” (DeVaney, 2015, p. 13). In comparison to other generations the attributed differences become clearer. Generation X for example is char- acterized as “self-reliant, resourceful, entrepreneurial adaptable” (DeVaney, 2015, p. 13).

Other generational comparisons targeted psychological traits. Referring to a study from Twenge (2000), which gathered data from more than 1.4 million US Ameri- cans to compare certain psychological aspects like narcissism and anxiety, Macky et al. (2008, p. 859) outline the utilization for companies. In particular the resulting

(33)

outcomes are of interest for management and human resources because these characteristics posses the potential to have a severe influence on the employment behavior.

“Of particular note are the observed higher levels of narcissism, anxiety and depression for Generation Y, combined with lower needs for social approval and a stronger external locus of control.” (Macky et al., 2008, p. 859)

Further characteristics like ambition, the willingness to learn, moving up through an enterprise but also the willingness to leave an organization if expectations are not met demand the attention of employers (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2011, p. 3).

3.2.5 Generation Y in an Working Environment

Rarely has a new generation had such a strong impact on the overall economy, the working environment as well as talent management as generation Y. With high expectations towards the employer, the actual importance of a thoughtful personnel strategy and employer branding for companies is rising (Parment, 2013, p. 3).

Gen Y´s desired approach towards work is a flexible one that includes feedback on a regular basis as well as encouragement. Further aspects include the appreci- ation of the actual work as well as its desirability. All of these factors can be delib- erately targeted from an employer’s perspective. Companies that have shown their ability to recruit talented generation Y members often possess an innovative business spirit and do not necessarily follow past procedures. Examples in this regard include Apple or Google. For gen Y members these enterprises are appealing in terms of culture and recruitment and retention strategies, despite not particularly being aimed at them (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2011, p. 3).

The demanding job requirements from generation Y can be recognized in several ways. Quoting a recruiter Caraher (2015, p. 27) mentions that:

“Every younger candidate I have ever talked with in the last five years thinks they are full of potential, and have so much to contribute right now. It is not a question of whether or not they are right for the job, it is a question of is the job right for them”. (Caraher, 2015, p. 27)

(34)

One of the most crucial aspects in terms of employer attractiveness is staff development (Ruthus, 2014, p. 11). Applicants research and check organizations and their communication carefully to avoid being later on neglected a promise. This behavior is especially of importance when finding more truthful possibilities at competitor companies (Armutat, 2011, p. 16).

The crucial importance of staff development for generation Y is also underlined by a survey from PricewaterhouseCoopers (2011, p. 10). According to the survey 52% percent of millennials argued that opportunities for career progression make an organization attractive to work for. With 44% wages and financial incentives accounted for the second largest factor of attractiveness. But also the values of the corporation seem to play an important role. 15% of participants saw a match of personal and corporate values as a factor of attractiveness and 10% referred to the overall employer brand.

To foster the interest as well as the attention, creating an attractive employer brand is of major importance. However, an employer brand is not developed to fill vacancies on behalf of a required target group through job portals or to offer an interesting company website. It is rather about creating a holistic strategy for personnel marketing, which links to the crucial circumstances of the human resource policy and is target driven in terms of resources (Ruthus, 2014, pp. 17-18).

Because gen Y has been growing up in a marketing and brand related environment, organizations have the opportunity to establish the employer brand or brand personality within the mindset of the age cohort. A special factor is hereby the so- called creative placement, which aims at telling stories about the employer. These stories are later on integrated into the actions like TV spots, fairs or presentations.

A benefit of creative placement is that employees with a positive attitude towards the organization can be included and through the precise integration the whole endeavor is not salient. Celebrity placements represent another possibility to communicate or place the employers brand. Incorporating celebrities into management decisions accounts for one feasibility here. A possible example is Earth Biofuels, Inc., which decided for famous individuals including Morgan Freeman and Julia Roberts. It is however important, that the employer’s brand reflects the

(35)

reality within the actual working environment. Therefore, organizations should carefully choose celebrities on behalf of the corporation’s values. Furthermore, the drawn employer picture should be legitimate and not reflect a different reality than the experiences of actual employees (Parment, 2013, pp. 110-111).

Work accounts for a growing part of generation Y´s own identity. Hence both, employer and job are self-determinated decision factors which are similar to con- sumption. For leadership and communication, a company’s identity has become of rising importance. A clearly defined corporate identity is affecting goals, market strategies and recruitment policies. To connect the actual product brand to the employer’s brand is of advantage because it offers some sort of image transfer from an applicant’s perspective. An enterprise with emotional products is likely to be also associated as emotional place to work. With reference to the overall perception of the company, individuals are developing levels of aspiration in order to measure divergences between the organizations communication and past experiences of employees. Existing discrepancies call for a corporate identity that is strongly connected to corporate culture (Parment, 2013, pp. 121-122).

To address generation Y with an employer brand efficiently, the attention should also be directed to the appropriate channels. In this regard new ways of communication can be tested and rather traditional paths left. Gen Y´s preferences for communication channels include employees of the organization and forums to gather information about an eventual employer (Parment, 2013, p. 133). But also channels like the career section of the corporate website and social platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube and Xing play a relevant role (Klaffke & Parment, 2011, p. 16).

Being able to win high-qualified staff therefore requires interesting personnel policy related offerings. Just spotlighting the employer’s brand for potential future employees is not sufficient. Because of that, the communicated areas have to be made available to employees. The high grade of transparency, which is often based on social networks, has enabled the research on employers through employer evaluation sites and allows for the comparison of compliance towards marketing related promises (Olesch, 2012, p. 68).

(36)

In terms of made promises, there is a distinct gap between perception and reality.

Especially when it comes to promises related to diversity and work-life balance. In order to keep attraction generation Y cohort members, organizations ought to reflect on their sent messages and compare them with the perception or reality of the employee’s experience (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2011, p. 24).

With the willingness to change jobs if things are not going according to their expectations, generation Y is challenging organizations because these changes oc- cur more rapidly than staff retention programs need to take effect. Furthermore, the priorities of gen Y are also subject to fast changes. A possible reason might be a flood of information, which leads to doing many things at the same time but rarely anything on a thorough basis (Armutat, 2011, p. 13).

A different reason for the expressed level of loyalty can be found in the economic slowdown. When asked about the number of employers throughout their lives in 2008, 75% of participants estimated to have between two and five labor relations.

In 2011 only 54% argued the same while more than a quarter think they will have six or more labor relationships. Back in 2008 this proportion accounted only for 10% (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2011, p. 4).

From an organizational perspective it is necessary to communicate with potential employees in terms of expectations but also about the companies offerings. This also includes reward approaches and generation Y motivations. Also the customi- zation of benefits is a relevant factor in this regard (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2011, p. 24).A study concluded by the recruiting expert HAYS (2013, p. 9) identified the five most attractive rewards and benefits for generation Y members. Ac- cording to the research 53% see the base salary as crucial factor when looking for a job. Another 51% look for the possibility to work flexible hours and 37% define the option to work at home as an attractive benefit. This perspective is shared by Armutat (2011, p. 15), who mentions that private tasks are done during office hours but on the other hand weekends and evenings are also used for doing work related things. Depending on the task and client contact the importance of working hours or attendance times is therefore losing its significance. What actually matters is the output and performance. The underlying expectation to be granted to

(37)

manage the own time flexible is therefore combined with the commitment to work hard and reliable.

The requirements of the now workplace entering generation Y are creating challenges for both leaders and HR. Existing procedures, programs, measures and structures are therefore scrutinized and altered if necessary (Armutat, 2011, p.

21).

3.3 Generational Aspect of Leadership

Every generation reflects its unique characteristics towards value systems, work ethics as well as priority traits and the alignment in terms of power, loyalty and work culture (Spiro, 2006 as cited in Srivastava & Banerjee, 2016, p. 148).

The width of different age cohorts that are working together is illustrating the big differences between them and the resulting potential for conflict and issues if no mutual measures are taken. Many of these issues include the areas of communication, relationships and leadership. A high percentage of managers are leading in forms of their own natural understanding. For members of the same age cohort or generation this behavior might be successful. However, when addressing different generations with this specific leadership behavior, tensions between teams or age cohorts might be a possible result. In order to resolve these issues, it is necessary to foster interactions with proficiency and generational ingenuity (Warner &

Sandberg, 2010, p. 8).

“As with any diversity effort, the key to building bridges between people with different worldviews is sharing perspectives, communicating openly, spend- ing quality time together, real listening, honesty, mutual respect, and valuing one another. Building relationships takes time, skill and strong leadership and it cannot be forced.” (Warner & Sandberg, 2010, p. 8)

Theory and practice of enterprises are pervaded and structured by leadership.

Therefore, the concept of leadership also impacts the manner and comprehension of the character of organized action as well as opportunities. Due to the deep roots

(38)

of the leadership concept in terms of popular thought, a lack of leadership can be perceived as a lack of organization (Smircich & Morgan, 1982, p. 257).

Leadership is executed throughout a process that allows the construction of reality for other individuals. This can be achieved by a single individual but also by more persons. Especially in not structured group circumstances, the natural development of leadership becomes obvious (Smircich & Morgan, 1982, p. 258).

Furthermore, leadership is attributed with many different emotions, which may actually reflect a positive but also a negative characteristic. Because of the vast number of possibilities to look at leadership itself, there is no distinct or clear definition of the concept (Neuberger, 2002, p. 2). It is therefore suggested not to look at leadership as a clear and impermeable term but rather to see it as some sort of ambivalent construct (Neuberger, 2002, p. 3). Hence, the term leadership needs to be set into context to enable a more narrow perspective (Von Rosenstiel &

Comelli, 2003, p. 75).

The used perspective for this research will be directed towards leadership in an organizational environment. In other words, the leadership of individuals rather than strategic leadership of organizations will be at the center of attention. Leading individuals can include structures like a specific technical environment but also behavior in terms of verbal and non-verbal communication. Leadership communication plays therefore a major role in what employees are doing and is of pivotal importance for how they are doing it (Von Rosenstiel & Comelli, 2003, pp. 76-77).

In this regard, leadership could be defined as exerting social influence on employees through the behavior of a leader as well as the method of defining goals, motivational practices, monitoring goals and targeting them towards the success of an organization (Von Rosenstiel & Comelli, 2003, p. 77). De Pree (2004, p. 12) likes to think of a leader as a servant who owes the organization he or she takes part in.

These serving factors include maturity, rationality as well as freedom of space to exert skills and foster diversity (De Pree, 2004, pp. 15-17).

For De Pree (2004, S. 13) people have to be put at the core of leadership otherwise there is no use for leaders. In terms of generational leadership there are

(39)

crucial subtleties and specific generational requirements that need to be identified.

Nevertheless, there are also many similarities that may prove to be useful to unite colleagues with different generational backgrounds, including team play and collaboration (Building Movement Project, 2010, p. 2).

The signs of magnificent leadership might at first instance be recognized among followers in terms of accomplished goals, learning progress managed conflict and exploited potential (De Pree, 2004, p. 12).

One key question that derives when managing intergenerational teams is how to make use of the present diversity. Age diversity bears certain benefits and includes several aspects. The transfer of knowledge accounts for only one factor among them. Older employees can share experiences and knowledge with younger employees and vice versa. Furthermore, a change in perspectives ena- bles to look at certain issues from different angles and can have a positive influence on the final output. But also for customer service a multigenerational workforce bears advantages. Clients have different requirements and appreciate consulting relationships with similarly aged individuals. Being advised by older staff is therefore of value for older customers. For the development of social competences a multigenerational environment offers also possibilities, which might be of interest for society too. This is mainly because the mix of generations also exists outside the organizational boundaries (Weber, 2013, p. 7).

Self-evidently a multigenerational workforce also bears challenges. Existing differences in terms of generational values might have an impact on work ethics or work attitudes and therefore also influence the quality of the output. Another factor that bears defiance’s is communication. Different age cohorts often have different ways of communicating. Hence, it might sometimes be challenging for an interlocutor from a different generation to comprehend what is actually being said. But also concerning the use of technology, challenges can arise. As already outlined before generation Y has been growing up with technology and makes use of modern technologies also with regard to work and communication (Weber, 2013, p. 8).

According to Weber (2013, p. 8) these challenges can become even more severe, if stereotypes and generalizations of age cohorts are used. Also resisting change

Leading Generation Y in Austria

Master Thesis