Engagement/Culture
Employee Engagement in a Multigenerational
Workplace
Javeria Nazim, MILR 2017
Sabina Shibalayeva, MILR 2017
Jiayu Tao, MILR 2019
Justin Taylor, MILR 2018
Employee Engagement can be defined as ‘The state of emotional and intellectual involvement that motivates people to do their best work’, (Daryle
Roberts, Aon Hewitt). The Gallup organization defines engaged employees
as those who “are involved in, enthusiastic about, and committed to their
work and who contribute to their organization in a positive manner.”1
Many studies have found direct links between increased engagement and
better customer service, and higher revenue growth2. Unfortunately, companies have not been very successful in keeping their employees engaged.
Gallup reports that only 30% of US employees are engaged at work, and
only 13% of employees are engaged world-wide. Furthermore, according to
Deloitte University Press’s Global Human Capital Trends 2016 report,
“employee engagement is a headline issue throughout business and HR.”
Fully 85 percent of survey respondents ranked engagement as a top priority, yet only 46 percent reported that they were prepared to address engagement challenges. Overall, Gallup reports that disengagement costs the U.S.
around $500 billion annually.
Engagement becomes even trickier when companies try to engage employees who belong to multiple generations. Today, many workplaces are in the
position of having five generations working together, side-by-side. In response to the trend, there is one important consideration-making sure your
company’s new ways of thinking and working suit all your people, so you
can harness the full potential and power of your multi-generational workforce3.
High engagement
can lead to4:
Defining Generational Identities
The five generations populating the current U.S.
workforce of nearly 160 million span more than 70
years, from about 1945 until today. While it is well
understood that all employees seek meaningful and
flexible work, work/life balance, learning and development opportunities, and competitive compensation, each generation is characterized by unique
identifiers and behavioral traits. As younger generations work alongside more senior employees, some
conflict is to be expected. While each generation
has a different set of values and views, awareness
of these traits can help organizations optimize the
strengths each group brings to the workplace.
Generational Strengths and Weaknesses5
Born
Born
Born
Born
Born
Before 1945
1945-1963
1964-1980
1981-1995
After 1995
Baby Boomers
Generation X
Millennials (Gen. Y)
Generation Z
Traditionalists
 Loyal
 Hardworking
 Look to build a
 Highly productive
lifetime career with
one employer
 Want to make last-
ing contributions
 Believe in conform-
ity, authority, rules,
logic, discipline, and
strong morality
 Dislike conflict
 Detail oriented
 Might prefer working
fewer hours
 Effective
managers
 Achievement oriented  Great revenue
 Perfectionists
 Less proficient at
adaptability
 Excellent mentors
 Believe seniority
matters
 Strive to make a
difference
generators
 Strong adaptability,
problem-solving
and collaboration
skills
 Entrepreneurial
 Skeptical
 Prefer to work alone
 Harbor some
distrust
 Think they are
solely responsible
for determining
their career paths
 Deep knowledge
 Can leverage
opportunities
 Enjoy working
collaboratively
 Raised in an
environment in
which they were
recognized for
nearly every
accomplishment
 Seek development
opportunities
 Want to be
recognized for their
contributions
 Believe performance
should trump
seniority
 Entrepreneurs and
self-starters
 Pioneers
 Realistic
 May seem some-
what cynical
 Value honesty
 Well prepared
 Tech experts
 Multi-taskers
 Strive to boost their
people management
skills
Managing Engagement Across Generations
As already noted, employees belonging to different generations have different strengths and weaknesses, and require different things from their jobs. They also have different working styles. It can therefore be difficult for organizations to target their engagement initiatives at all the generations at the same time.
Even for organizations that are making significant investments in engagement-specific initiatives, the results are
not very fruitful and engagement scores remain low on average6. In addition, measurements of organizations’ ability to address the issues of engagement and culture has decreased by 14% compared to just last year, owing to the
work environment becoming more complex7. Therefore, it is clear that engagement efforts are not delivering results, and that there exists a need for organizations to go above and beyond traditional engagement strategies in
order to keep their employees committed and motivated, and to use that commitment to achieve business results.
This is where the concept of Employee Experience comes into picture.
Employee Experience
Employee experience is a relatively new phenomenon and has been gaining popularity over the past few years. In
its simplest terms, employee experience refers to the practice of putting employees at the center. So, instead of
forcing employees to change themselves to fit with the organization’s obsolete practices, employee experience
focuses on redesigning the organization to be in alignment with employees’ needs and re-quirements6.
Employee experience emphasizes on treating employees as internal customers and encourages organizations to
adopt similar practices that they do when dealing with customers 8. For instance, it is quite common for organizations to take customer feedback, or in many cases, work together with customers to come up with solutions that
best fit their needs. Similarly, companies focusing on employee experience should work together with their employees to know and understand their needs and then come up with organizational practices that best fulfil those
needs.
Another term that is commonly being used in relation to employee experience is design thinking, which is defined
as “a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer’s toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” Research shows that employee
experience can be better improved by the use of design thinking—by making use of technological interventions,
apps, and streamlined processes to make work more enjoyable for employees9.
8 out of 10 executives rate employee experience to be
very important (42%) or important (38%).
However, only 22% reported that their companies were
excellent at building a differentiated employee experience.
Source: Deloitte Human Capital Trends 2017
The Employee Experience Equation
Employee experience is not overly
complicated; it is shaped by three
factors, that are well-known to all
organizations in the contemporary
world:
Culture:
Organizational culture has been defined in many ways. It has been ex-
These are:
get things done. This could include
plained as “something to do with the 1. Sense of pride for the company
people and the unique quality and
2. Sense of community and belongstyle of an organization,”10 “the exing with colleagues
pressive non-rational qualities of an
3. Honesty and ethics in
organization,”11 or “the way we do
all the software, mobile apps, devic-
things around here.”12 However it is
When organizations focus on this
defined, culture is something that
employees ’feel’ at work; it is the
vibes that they get when they walk
into their workplaces, and the sense
of purpose that they feel while doing
their work. Even though culture isn’t
written, it is a critical element in the
design of employee experience.
While it may seem difficult to de-sign
a culture that would be favored by
multiple generations, it is actually
leadership
Another survey of 183,454 employ-
es, websites, etc. that organizations
made use of for different purposes
like promotions, internal/external
communication, work efficiency, etc.
aspect of the employee experience,
ees in 22 companies14 also mentions they need to ensure that the technoflexibility fit as a strong predictor of logical tools and devices that they
engagement for all generations.
Hence, if companies divert their attention to these aspects of their organizational culture, they are more
likely to engage employees
belonging to all generations.
Technology:
are utilizing are in line with the needs
and wants of their employees. Thus,
instead of focusing just on organizational needs, the needs of employees
also need to be taken into consideration.
All technology used should be user-
friendly and organizations should
An organization’s technological envi- take input from employees before
people belonging to different genera- ronment can refer to the tools and
implementing anything.
techniques that the company uses to
tions actually want very similar
not very hard. Research shows that
things from their organizational cultures. A study that surveyed around
230,000 employees belonging to
about 620 organizations13 re-vealed
that employees from all generations
want a few things from their organizations.
Organizations could take on several
tions (Y,Z) usually prefer open, inter-
approaches to managing technology active workspaces where they can
Company Case Studies
on Increasing Engagement
in line with generational needs. For
move about easily and communi-
instance, studies have shown that
cate with col-leagues. On the other
the younger generations prefer us-
hand, older generations (Gen Y, Ba-
Lockheed Martin noticed genera-
ing their smart phones, while the
by Boomers) are used to having
tional differences in learning styles
older ones are more comfortable
their personal desks/offices, that
when Baby Boomers were asked to
with their computers16. Organiza-
they can customize with mementos,
pass on their expertise to Millenni-
tions can, in such cases, provide
like family pictures17. Organizations
als. When the Boomers used Power-
flexibility or choice in the mode of
should hence communicate with
Point presentations, the Millennials
communication/technology that the and understand the needs of their
told them they could learn better
employees want to work on. So for
different employees. Then they
from more interactive methods. As
instance, they could introduce a
should make efforts to accommo-
a result, Lockheed offers workshops
smart phone app for, say, internal
date those needs. For instance, if
for managers on generational diver-
communication, but also a soft-ware the office setting is open and the
sity, emphasizing the ways learning
version of the same app to be used
older generations are having a hard
styles differ between generations.
on computers, so that the older em-
time concentrating on work because
ployees also feel comfortable using
they are used to quieter, private
the technology. Initiatives like this
spaces, companies could provide
can help companies deal effectively
sound-masking with white noise
with the challenge of managing the
(which is done in the New York
technological needs of multiple gen- Times building), to minimize distracerations.
tions for those employees. If space
Physical Workspace:
allows, organizations could also of-
The physical workspace of an organization includes the things that the
employees see around themselves;
their desks/offices, the office design, the wall paintings, cafeteria,
etc. While some organizations may
not think so, physical workspace
can play a big role in improving employee experience.
Employees belonging to different
fer multiple kinds of workspaces for
different employees, like a large
space for ’hoteling’ for younger employees, and more private office/
cubicle spaces for older ones. Re-
search has shown that while physical space requirements differ
among generations, all generations
value privacy and the virtual environment18; organizations just need
to involve their employees in the
generations prefer different kinds of workspace redesign to know and
workspaces. The younger genera
manage their preferences well.
Randstad USA offers training for
leaders on how to communicate
more effectively with younger generations. They report that this training has resulted in a reduction of
first-year turnover from 50 percent
to 30 percent.
At Kimberly-Clark, the consumer
products multinational based in Irving, Tex., senior leadership was
concerned that it didn’t have a glob-
al perspective on its top talent. To
remedy that, the company instituted a reverse mentoring program in
which millennials were teamed up
with senior executives to help them
understand what would best engage
their younger employees.
Additional Tips for Engaging Multiple Generations
In addition to employing the afore-mentioned practices of improving the employee experience, organizations could
also make use of some of the following tips19 for in-creasing engagement among employees from multiple generations.
1. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate: Communication is key to understanding differences and respecting
them, so make communication a priority in the organization.
2. Accommodate Different Learning Styles: Do not force one style on all employees; understand different needs
and work accordingly (e.g. PowerPoints/lectures for Gen X, interactive apps for Gen Y,Z).
3. Train for eliminating stereotypes: Hold training sessions to remove misconceptions about different generations
and in-creasing tolerance.
4. Be Flexible: When managing different generations, organizations should be ready to pro-vide multiple options
for employees to choose from, e.g. Multiple working options.
5. Facilitate Mentoring: This is one of the best ways to improve relationships among employees from different
generations since it encourages communication and teamwork.
Managing and Measuring your Engagement Initiatives
Because engagement can be a very personal thing, and not everyone will be engaged in the same way by the same
initiatives, it is important to measure and manage the impact of your engagement strategies. Implementing your
initiatives with analytical best practices in mind can help improve the fit and quality of your analytics later. It can
also greatly improve the future outcomes of your initiatives as you continue to refine your processes based on
meaningful findings.
As the cornerstone of building your engagement analytics, note that measures of employee engagement have low
to moderate incremental validity over existing individual measurement methods of job attitudes (such as job satisfaction, job involvement and organizational commitment) when predicting employee effectiveness.
Employee engagement measures also have low incremental validity over higher order constructs that combine the
aforementioned individual measurements.20 This suggests that measuring employee engagement is an effective
and concise predictor of higher level employee effectiveness. Keeping this in mind, you can save time and energy
in your quest for optimizing employee effectiveness by focusing on creating predictive engagement models rather
than searching for significant tests that assess individual job attitudes.
Best Practices: Engagement Measures and Performance Indicators
As you consider engagement measures that fit the
Now, measuring engagement has limited value if you
needs and nuances of your employee demographic
can’t create significant links between engagement and
21
mix, there are three key buckets to be mindful of
the performance you hope to gain from your engage-
when building your engagement model.
ment initiatives. So, begin with the end in mind and con-
Say: This bucket contains metrics that seek to determine if people are consistently speaking positively
sider the following four categories of performance indicators, as these will help you to determine the outcome
about the organization to co-workers, potential
variables to use when testing for statistical and predic-
employees, and customers. This scope is important
as the three measures ensure there is a focus on both
internal and external factors.
employee turnover, Customer metrics look at measures
Stay: These measure feelings of an intense desire to belong to the business, and should lead to predictions of
employee retention.
tive significance. People metrics capture outcomes like
like customer satisfaction, Operational metrics consider
important business process objectives like safety, and
Financial metrics include information like sales growth.
Not every category will be meaningful to your unique
business strategy, so keep in mind that this should only
Strive: This measures an employee exerting extra effort
function as an effective way to structure your thoughts
and engaging in behaviors that contribute to business
as you consider what success means to your business
success.
unit, and how you hope to benefit from increasing employee engagement.
Engagement Analytics Toolbox
Once you have an idea of what type of information you want to collect, and the outcomes you hope to influence
through your engagement initiatives, consider using the following measurement strategies as they fit within your
given situation and culture:
Quarterly Pulse Checks
The more recent your data is, and the faster
you are able to act on it, the more meaningful
your conclusions and effective your initiatives
will be. Pulse checks can be a good way to
reduce your data collection and process implementation turnaround time22.
Additional Considerations
Design Thinking
This approach can help spur
creativity and innovation in your
engagement strategy. It may
also uncover unasked questions, as you put yourself in the
mindset of the people you want
to impact.
Internal Digital Crowdsourcing
Traditional Printed Surveys
Less targeted and precise than static surveys
While many companies are
and pulse checks, internal crowdsourcing al-
moving away from paper sur-
lows for greater variation that may lead to
veys, these are still a viable
novel ideas and a more organic engagement
method of data collection.
strategy. There are many things to consider
Printed surveys are especially
when implementing this type of data collec-
effective among the less tech
tion strategy, however, so it should not be
savvy population, or those that
done haphazardly.
don’t always have access to
electronic and internet connected devices. However, remember
Live Focus Groups
that the frequency of interacSimilar to digital crowdsourcing, creating a
tion and intervention immediacy
live focus group can spur creativity as people
is key to using surveys as part
build on the ideas of others within the group.
of your engagement strategy,
This method can allow for more nuanced data
so make sure these papers
collection than online data collection as in-
don’t get filed away as a mana-
person interactions can reveal unspoken
gerial “to do” years down the
queues that you won’t be able to collect out-
road.
side of this context.
References
1. Gallup. (2013). ‘State of the Global Market Place: Employee Engagement Insights for Business Lead-ers Worldwide’. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/services/178517/state-global-workplace.aspx
2. Medallia Institute, “You Say You Want a Revolution: Build a Customer-Centric Culture”
3. Jeffrey, H. (2015). ‘Fast Take on Talent Innovation-Today’s Multi-generational Workforce’, PwC. Re-trieved from https://
www.pwc.com/us/en/people-management/assets/pwc-multi-generational-workforce.pdf
4. Jeffrey, J. (2015). ‘2015 Employee Engagement Landscape Study: Championing Greatness or Captur-ing Mediocrity’,
PwC. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/mt/en/publications/people-and-organisation/pwc-hrs-employee-engagement
-landscape-2015.pdf
5. Engage2Excel. (2016). ‘Embracing the Diversity of Today’s Multigenerational Workforce’. Retrieved from https://
www.engage2excel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/E2E_GenWorkforce_WP3.V3.0_EMAIL-3.pdf
6. Morgan. J. (2017). ‘3 Things to Know about Employee Experience’, SHRM. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/hrtoday/news/hr-magazine/0317/pages/3-things-to-know-about-employee-experience-.aspx
7. Bersin, J. et al. (2017). ‘The Employee Experience: Culture, Engagement, and Beyond—2017 Global Human Capital
Trends’, Deloitte. Retrieved from https://dupress.deloitte.com/dup-us-en/focus/human-capital-trends/2017/improvingthe-employee-experience-culture-engagement.html
8. Scott, R. (2017). ‘Employee Engagement vs Employee Engagement’, Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/
sites/causeintegration/2017/05/04/employee-engagement-vs-employee-experience/#129d95937883
9. Ammatuna, G. (2016). ‘The Employee Experience Takes Over’, Association for Talent Development. Retrieved from
https://www.td.org/insights/the-employee-experience-takes-over
10. Peters, K. and Lewis-Kulin, S. (2016). ‘How to Create a Culture that Works for All Ages’, Fortune. Re-trieved from http://
fortune.com/2016/06/28/company-culture-all-ages/
11. Pitt-Catsouphes, M. and Matz-Costa, C. (2008). ‘The Multigenerational Workforce: Workplace Flexi-bility and Engagement’, Community, Work & Family Journal, 11(2), pp.215-229.
12. Cahill, T.F. and Sedrak, M. (2012). ‘Leading a Multigenerational Workforce: Strategies for Attracting and Retaining Millenials’’, Frontiers of Health Services Management. 29(1), pp.3-15.
13. Zickuhr, K. (2011). ‘Generations and their Gadgets’, Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://
www.pewinternet.org/2011/02/03/generations-and-their-gadgets/
14. ‘Five Ways to Redesign Workforce for All Generations’. (2014). Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/
nextavenue/2014/04/09/5-ways-to-redesign-work-for-all-generations/2/#60336d7c5408
References, cont’d
15. Rothe, P. et al. (2012). ‘Work Environment Preferences—Does Age Make a Difference?’ Facilities, 30(1/2), pp. 78-95.
16. ‘How to Manage Different Generations’, The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://guides.wsj.com/management/
managing-your-people/how-to-manage-different-generations/
17. Mackay M. Allen J. Landis R. (2017) 'Investigating the Incremental Validity of Employee Engagement in the Prediction of
Employee Effectiveness: A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis', Human Resources Re-view, (27), pp. 108-120.
18. Roberts D. (2013). 'Using Engagement Analytics to improve Organizational Performance', Employee Relations Today.
19. Bell J. (2017) 'Take My Pulse', Workplace Rx. TD: Talent Development .
Additional Resource:
‘Engaging the Best Talent of All Ages—Transforming Multigenerational Workplaces into Intergenerational
Workplaces’, Metlife Mature Market Institute. Retrieved from
http://www.gu.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=EvG_frpZj6k%3D&tabid=157&mid=606