1
Are Companies Ethically Obligated to Adapt to Gen Z Work Preferences?
Kyllien Winger
Alex Vite
Mia Desiree Battaglia
Edwin Vargas
Derek Perez
Department of Business, La Verne University
BUS 343: Foundations of Business Ethics
Dr. Zhen Zhang
March 22, 2026
2
Nature of the Problem
The modern workforce is experiencing rapid changes as organizations now employ
multiple generations working side by side. Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and
Generation Z increasingly share the same workspaces, and each generation has been shaped by
different social, economic, and technological experiences that influence how they work and
communicate. Generation Z, the newest generation to join the workforce, has characteristics and
expectations that many organizations are not used to accommodating. As more Generation Z
employees enter the labor market, companies are being pushed to reevaluate policies and
practices in response to these emerging preferences. At the same time, there is an ongoing debate
about whether it is the responsibility of organizations to adapt to younger workers or whether
new employees should conform to existing workplace norms.
Generation Z is generally defined as individuals born approximately between 1997 and
2013. This generation is unique because they have grown up with rapid technological
advancements, widespread smartphone use, social media, and significant social and economic
changes. These experiences have shaped how they approach work and professional
environments. Many members of Generation Z have specific expectations for communication,
flexibility, workplace culture, and the purpose of their work. Research indicates that flexibility is
one of the most important features younger workers look for in a job and that many view flexible
scheduling and hybrid work opportunities as essential parts of a positive work environment
rather than optional perks (Deskpass, 2024). Generation Z employees also want to feel that their
work has meaning and often prefer employers whose missions align with their values or who
they believe are making a positive difference in the world (Fromm, 2024).
3
In contrast, many workplaces have traditionally operated according to norms developed
before Generation Z entered the labor force. For decades, organizations commonly used strict
schedules, defined hierarchies, and formal communication channels. Employees were expected
to conform to the existing company culture, follow established procedures, and gradually gain
responsibility and respect through experience. Feedback from leadership was often periodic
instead of continuous, and workplace flexibility was limited. These long-standing practices still
shape how many companies operate and may conflict with the expectations of younger
employees.
The entrance of Generation Z into the workforce has created potential conflicts between
changing employee preferences and traditional workplace norms. Some organizations have
started to change policies to meet the demands of younger workers by allowing more flexible
schedules, emphasizing meaningful work, and improving communication and leadership
feedback practices. Other organizations resist such changes because they believe moving away
from traditional norms could reduce productivity or be unfair to employees from older
generations. As Generation Z continues to grow as a share of the workforce, organizations must
determine how to balance the expectations of newer employees with established practices. This
raises an important ethical question about whether companies are ethically obligated to adapt to
Generation Z work preferences or whether younger workers should adapt to existing workplace
norms.
Ethical Issues
A central ethical dilemma arising from generational differences in the workplace is
whether companies have an obligation to accommodate Generation Z as they enter the workforce
or whether Generation Z must adapt to conventional professional standards. Younger workers
4
often expect flexible schedules, open communication between managers and staff, work that
feels meaningful, and a stronger focus on work and life balance. Many organizations, however,
were designed around more traditional work styles associated with previous generations,
including fixed in office hours, top down management, and formal communication channels. The
difference in expectations creates an ethical challenge for organizations that are trying to balance
the needs of emerging employees with long standing workplace practices.
One important ethical question concerns the company’s responsibility for employee wellbeing. Generation Z employees increasingly view workplace flexibility and work life balance as
essential components of a healthy professional environment rather than optional benefits.
According to survey data, a large percentage of Gen Z employees consider flexibility and hybrid
work opportunities to be important factors when evaluating a job (Deskpass, 2024). Other studies
show that Gen Z employees are beginning to expect more flexibility in their schedules and want
a company culture that makes it possible to balance personal and professional responsibilities
(Fromm, 2024; Schroth, 2019). If organizations refuse to adjust workplace policies despite
growing concerns about employee well-being, ethical questions arise about whether companies
are adequately supporting the mental and physical health of their workforce.
At the same time, changing company policies specifically to accommodate one
generation raises ethical concerns about fairness. Employees from older generations often
entered the workforce under more rigid structures and may view new accommodations as
unequal or preferential treatment. They may perceive flexible schedules, remote work options, or
more frequent manager check ins as benefits they did not receive at similar stages in their own
careers. This leads to a question about whether changing company policies for one generational
group is unfair to others. Business ethics frequently involves evaluating how decisions affect
5
different stakeholder groups and finding a fair middle ground. This dilemma reflects broader
debates about fairness, stakeholder responsibility, and how organizations should balance
competing interests among employees from different generations (Ferrell et al., 2022).
Research on generational workforce dynamics suggests that Generation Z’s expectations
have been shaped by the era in which they grew up, including exposure to technology, digital
communication, and changing social values (Schroth, 2019). Studies have also found that Gen Z
employees are often willing to leave organizations that do not meet their expectations,
particularly regarding flexibility, purpose driven work, and opportunities for growth (Corporate
Navigators, 2024). These patterns affect how Generation Z interacts with employers and
colleagues and influence turnover and workforce stability. Because this ethical issue can impact
many different groups, it is important to identify the stakeholders and understand their interests.
Stakeholders
When considering whether organizations should adapt to Generation Z’s work
preferences or whether younger employees should adjust to traditional workplace norms, it is
essential to identify the key stakeholders and how they are affected. Important stakeholder
groups include Generation Z employees, older generation employees, management, human
resources professionals, companies, customers, and shareholders. Each group has distinct
concerns and interests that shape the discussion.
Generation Z employees are arguably the most directly affected stakeholders in this
debate. They are typically defined as individuals born between 1997 and 2012 and have grown
up in an evolving digital world that is very different from the environment experienced by older
generations (Deskpass, 2025). They have been surrounded by the internet, smartphones, and
social media from a young age, which has influenced their expectations for communication,
6
speed, and flexibility. For many Gen Z workers, hybrid and remote roles feel normal, while to
older generations these arrangements may feel unfamiliar. A 2023 Deloitte survey cited by
Deskpass (2025) found that a large majority of Generation Z employees currently work in remote
or hybrid roles and would look for another job if they were required to return to the office full
time. Generation Z is also highly goal oriented and value driven and wants to work for
companies that align with their personal values and allow them to make a difference (Fromm,
2024). When they feel that their work does not match their goals, they are more likely to leave
than older generations have been.
Older generation workers, including Baby Boomers, Generation X, and some Millennials,
are also significantly affected. Many of these employees have spent years or decades working in
traditional workplaces and are used to established concepts of work culture. Their primary
concern often involves perceptions of fairness. Fromm (2024) notes that many older workers did
not have access to the same level of benefits or flexibility that Generation Z is beginning to
receive. As a result, some older employees view new accommodations as unnecessary or
excessive. Their concerns are not only about specific benefits but also about the broader idea that
workplace standards are changing after they have invested years into adapting to older
expectations.
Management and human resources professionals are critical stakeholders because they
design and implement workplace policies and shape organizational culture. They must balance
the need to attract new talent with the need to retain existing employees, while also maintaining
productivity and organizational stability. High turnover is a major concern. Fromm (2024)
reports that a significant percentage of frontline workers have changed occupations in recent
years, and there is evidence that many Gen Z employees do not fully understand their company’s
7
benefits. Poor communication and misaligned expectations can undermine retention and
performance, which puts pressure on managers and HR staff.
Companies as organizations are central stakeholders because they face the consequences
of both adapting and not adapting. They must consider how to remain competitive in attracting
new talent while also maintaining operational effectiveness. By 2025, Generation Z is expected
to make up a large portion of the workforce, so completely ignoring their expectations does not
appear realistic (Fromm, 2024). At the same time, companies must consider costs, fairness, and
long term sustainability. Research from Gallup cited by Deskpass (2025) suggests that flexible
work policies can improve productivity and retention across generations, indicating that some
accommodations may benefit more than just younger workers.
Customers and shareholders are indirectly affected by these generational issues.
Companies with disengaged or dissatisfied employees often struggle to maintain service quality,
innovation, and profitability. In contrast, organizations with engaged employees who feel
supported and aligned with their work are more likely to provide better service, build stronger
brands, and achieve better financial outcomes (Fromm, 2024). Because of this, the way
organizations handle generational differences has implications that reach beyond internal
dynamics and influence wider stakeholder interests.
Application of Ethical Theories
Ethical theories provide structured frameworks that help organizations evaluate complex
moral questions and determine responsible courses of action. In the case of generational
differences in the workplace, ethical theory helps clarify whether companies should adjust their
workplace practices to accommodate Generation Z preferences or whether younger workers
should adapt to established organizational norms. This section applies three major schools of
8
ethical thinking to the issue: utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and virtue ethics. Each theory
provides a different perspective on how businesses should approach the question of adapting to
new workplace expectations.
Utilitarianism is a consequential ethical theory that focuses on the outcomes of decisions.
According to utilitarian thinking, an action is considered ethical if it produces the greatest overall
good for the greatest number of people (Ferrell et al., 2022). Rather than focusing primarily on
intentions or rules, utilitarianism evaluates the consequences of decisions and considers how
those decisions affect stakeholders. When applied to the issue of generational differences in the
workplace, utilitarianism would evaluate whether adapting to Generation Z preferences creates
greater benefits than maintaining traditional workplace structures.
Many organizations have begun introducing policies such as flexible schedules, remote
work opportunities, and more frequent performance feedback. Research suggests that these
policies can improve employee satisfaction, reduce turnover, and increase productivity. If these
outcomes benefit the majority of employees and contribute to stronger organizational
performance, utilitarian reasoning would support adapting workplace practices. From this
perspective, adjusting workplace expectations may also help companies remain competitive in
attracting and retaining talent. Generation Z employees often prioritize work life balance,
meaningful work, and open communication with supervisors. When organizations acknowledge
these expectations, they may foster greater engagement and long term commitment among
younger workers, which can benefit employees, employers, customers, and shareholders.
However, utilitarianism also requires consideration of potential negative consequences. If
organizations change policies too quickly or too drastically, they may create frustration among
employees who prefer traditional structures. Older workers who value stability, clear hierarchies,
9
and predictable schedules might feel that their needs are being ignored. There is also the
possibility that excessive flexibility could reduce accountability or disrupt team coordination.
Under utilitarian analysis, the ethical choice would depend on which approach produces the
greatest overall benefit. If adapting workplace policies improves satisfaction and productivity for
a large number of stakeholders without significantly harming others, utilitarianism would likely
support some level of organizational adaptation. If the changes create instability or reduce
efficiency, the theory might favor maintaining existing norms.
Kantian ethics represents a non consequential approach to ethical decision making.
Developed by philosopher Immanuel Kant, this theory emphasizes moral duties and universal
principles rather than outcomes. Kant argued that individuals should always be treated as ends in
themselves rather than as means to an end (Ruggiero, 2011). In a workplace context, this means
organizations have a moral obligation to respect the dignity, autonomy, and rights of employees.
Applying Kantian ethics to generational workplace expectations focuses on whether companies
treat employees fairly and respectfully when establishing policies.
If businesses expect employees to sacrifice their well-being entirely in the pursuit of
productivity, this may violate the principle of respecting individuals as autonomous persons. For
example, rigid schedules or inflexible policies that ignore legitimate work life balance concerns
could be viewed as treating employees primarily as instruments for profit. From a Kantian
perspective, organizations should establish policies that acknowledge the legitimate needs of
employees. Flexible work arrangements or opportunities for meaningful work may align with the
duty to respect employee autonomy. When workers have a reasonable level of control over their
schedules or responsibilities, they are more likely to feel valued and respected.
10
At the same time, Kantian ethics also emphasizes consistency and fairness. Moral rules
should apply universally rather than benefiting one group at the expense of others. This means
companies must avoid creating policies that unfairly favor one generation while neglecting
another. If organizations only adapt policies to satisfy Generation Z while ignoring the
preferences of older workers, this could violate the principle of fairness that Kantian ethics
requires. Kantian reasoning therefore supports a balanced approach. Companies have a duty to
respect employees as individuals, but employees also have responsibilities toward the
organization and their colleagues. Workers should not expect companies to accommodate every
personal preference if doing so would undermine fairness or organizational stability.
Virtue ethics takes a different approach by focusing on character and moral values rather
than rules or consequences. This theory, often associated with Aristotle, suggests that ethical
behavior arises from the development of positive character traits such as honesty, fairness,
responsibility, and empathy. Rather than asking which rule should be followed or which outcome
is best, virtue ethics asks what a good and responsible person or organization would do in a given
situation.
In the context of generational differences in the workplace, virtue ethics encourages
organizations to develop cultures that reflect strong moral character. Leaders who demonstrate
empathy and fairness may recognize that the workforce is changing and that workplace practices
should evolve over time. Being open to new ideas, such as flexible work arrangements or more
collaborative communication styles, may reflect the virtues of adaptability and respect. At the
same time, virtue ethics also emphasizes the importance of responsibility and professionalism
among employees. Workers should demonstrate commitment, reliability, and respect for
organizational goals. Generation Z employees who expect immediate advancement or complete
11
flexibility without demonstrating dedication to their work may not be acting in accordance with
virtues such as discipline and accountability.
Virtue ethics therefore highlights the importance of mutual responsibility. Organizations
should strive to create supportive environments that promote employee well-being and
professional development. Employees, in turn, should demonstrate strong work ethics and
contribute positively to organizational culture. Ethical workplaces are built not only through
policies but also through the character and behavior of the individuals within them.
Each ethical theory offers a distinct way of evaluating the issue of generational
adaptation in the workplace. Utilitarianism focuses on outcomes and would support whichever
approach produces the greatest benefit for the largest number of stakeholders. Kantian ethics
emphasizes moral duties and fairness and requires consistent treatment of all employees. Virtue
ethics focuses on the moral character of both organizations and employees and suggests that
ethical workplaces develop when leaders demonstrate empathy and integrity while employees
demonstrate responsibility and professionalism. Taken together, these theories highlight the
complexity of the issue and indicate that ethical decision making requires balancing flexibility
with fairness, responsibility, and long term organizational success.
Analysis and Decision
The ethical frameworks of utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and virtue ethics together
suggest that the question of whether companies are obligated to adapt to Generation Z work
preferences cannot be answered in a purely one sided way. Each theory emphasizes a different
aspect of the problem, and when they are considered together they point toward a balanced
decision rather than an extreme conclusion that favors only one group. Utilitarianism highlights
the importance of overall outcomes, asking whether adapting to Gen Z preferences increases
12
well-being, satisfaction, and performance for the greatest number of stakeholders. Kantian ethics
stresses duties of fairness and respect, insisting that all employees, regardless of generation,
should be treated as ends in themselves and not merely as tools for achieving business goals.
Virtue ethics focuses on the character of both organizations and employees and encourages traits
such as empathy, responsibility, and integrity in shaping workplace culture.
Based on these perspectives, the decision is that companies do have an ethical obligation
to seriously consider and, when it is reasonable, adapt to Generation Z work preferences,
particularly in areas such as flexibility, meaningful work, and communication. These preferences
are not only personal desires but are closely connected to concerns about mental health, work life
balance, and long term career satisfaction. When organizations thoughtfully adjust policies, such
as offering hybrid or flexible work arrangements where job duties allow, improving feedback
practices, and clarifying opportunities for growth, they show respect for employee autonomy and
acknowledge changing social and technological realities. Such changes can also lead to practical
benefits, including higher engagement, lower turnover, and stronger performance, which support
the overall health of the organization. At the same time, this obligation is not unlimited. Ethical
adaptation must still take into account fairness to older generations, the operational needs of the
business, and the importance of maintaining stability and clear expectations.
Generation Z employees also share responsibility for how this ethical issue is addressed.
It would not be fair or realistic to expect organizations to bear the entire burden of change while
younger workers refuse to adapt in any way. Gen Z employees have an ethical duty to approach
their roles with professionalism, to respect organizational goals, and to recognize that trust,
flexibility, and autonomy are often earned over time through consistent performance. They
should be willing to learn from existing practices, listen to the perspectives of more experienced
13
colleagues, and understand that some structures exist to support coordination, accountability, and
fairness. In this sense, ethical adaptation is mutual rather than one sided. Companies listen and
respond to legitimate needs, and employees engage in good faith with the realities of the
workplace.
The most ethical path forward is therefore a shared and balanced approach. Companies
are ethically obligated to evolve in meaningful ways that reflect the changing expectations of
Generation Z, while still maintaining fairness for all employees and supporting long term
organizational success. Generation Z workers, in turn, are ethically obligated to adapt to
reasonable organizational norms and to contribute positively to the culture they hope to improve.
When organizations and employees act with integrity, openness, and a willingness to
compromise, the workplace can become more flexible, respectful, and sustainable for every
generation involved. This mutual effort reflects a practical and ethically grounded approach that
is consistent with the key insights of the ethical theories considered in this paper.
Generation Z employees also have ethical responsibilities in this relationship. It is not
realistic or fair to expect organizations to make all of the adjustments while younger workers
ignore existing norms and constraints. Gen Z employees have a duty to approach their roles with
professionalism, to respect the goals and constraints of the organization, and to recognize that
trust and flexibility are often earned through consistent effort and reliability. Adapting to a
workplace includes learning from more experienced colleagues, understanding why some
structures exist, and being willing to compromise when necessary. Ethical behavior on the part of
employees includes being open to feedback, honoring commitments, and contributing positively
to the work environment.
14
Overall, the most ethical path forward is a shared one in which both organizations and
Generation Z employees are willing to adapt. Companies should be open to updating policies and
practices in ways that acknowledge changing expectations while still maintaining fairness for all
generations and protecting the long-term health of the organization. Younger workers should
bring new ideas and perspectives, but also show patience, responsibility, and respect for the
people and systems already in place. When both sides act with integrity and a willingness to
understand each other, the workplace can become more flexible, inclusive, and sustainable for
everyone involved. This mutual effort reflects not only a practical solution, but also an ethically
grounded approach that aligns with the core insights of the ethical theories considered in this
paper.
15
References
Corporate Navigators. (2024). Recruiting Trends: Gen Z in the Workplace.
https://www.corporatenavigators.com/articles/recruiting-trends/genz-workplace/
Deskpass. (2024). What Gen Z Wants From Flexible Work Policies
https://www.deskpass.com/resources/guides/what-gen-z-wants-from-flexible-workpolicies
Deskpass. (2025). Generational Expectations in Hybrid Workplaces
https://www.deskpass.com/resources/research/gen-z-2025
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2022). Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and
Cases (13th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Fromm, J. (2024, September 25). Gen Z Demands Flexible Workplace Benefits. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jefffromm/2024/09/25/gen-z-demands-flexible-workplacebenefits/
Ruggiero, V. R. (2011). Beyond feelings: A Guide to Critical Thinking (9th ed.). McGraw Hill.
Schroth, H. (2019). Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace? California Management Review,
61(3), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619841006