Validating Generational Differences: A Legitimate Diversity and Leadership Issue

Submitted by

Contact Person:
Paul M. Arsenault, Ph.D.
312D Anderson Hall
West Chester University
West Chester, PA 19383
Email: parsenault@[Link]
Fax: (610) 436- 3458
Phone: (610) 436-2208
 Validating Generational Differences: A Legitimate Diversity and Leadership Issue

Abstract

Today’s workforce is more diverse that ever. One diversity issue that has
not been generally recognized is generational differences. Defined as a
shared tradition and culture by a group of people that is life-long,
differences in generations have been plagued by erroneous
misconceptions. The principal reason has been a lack of research to
validate the significance of these differences. This extensive study
validates that generations create their own traditions and culture by a
shared collective field of emotions, attitudes, preferences, and
dispositions. In addition, the study illustrates significant differences in
how these generations rank admired leadership characteristics, which
correlates to their preferred leadership style and favorite leaders. The
conclusion is that generational differences are (1) a legitimate diversity
issue that organizations need to recognize and understand and (2) an issue
that needs to be addressed in developing current and future leaders.

Keywords: Generational Differences, Leadership, Diversity, Training and

Leadership Development

Word Count: 7141

 Today's workforce is more diverse than ever. The startling shifts that were

predicted in the 1980's especially with the Workforce 2000 study has occurred (Clark,

1999). The mix of race, gender, and ethnicity in organizations has now become stunning

(Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak, 2000). Forward looking organizations, realizing the

potential of diversity, have developed and employed strategic diversity plans that take

advantage of this diversity to become more competitive in the global economy (Clark,

1999).

However, there is one important factor often misunderstood and even ignored

when discussing diversity and that is the difference in generations. This confusion and

failure to appreciate generational differences has created pop stereotypes and criticism

from both the mass media and academia on its relevance to the diversity dialogue.

One critic describes generation differences as generational mushiness (Tolson,

2001) while another notes that the lack of understanding has led organizations to wrongly

gloss over generational differences (Tulgan, 1996).

The lack of understanding has prevented organizations from capitalizing on the

strengths of generational differences. Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2000) state that

generational differences are important because generations originate from different

values, attitudes, ambitions and mind-sets of people. Conger (2001) adds that

generations are a product of historical events that leave potent emotional memories that

shape feelings about authority, institutions, and family. Lancaster and Stillman (2002)

state that leveraging generational strengths can boast morale control costs, reduce

turnover, and increase sales and profits.

 It is essential to be savvy about generational differences because in the 21st

century generations are working together more than ever before, thanks to the demise of

the bureaucratic organization in favor of a horizontal style, new technology,

globalization, and a more information-friendly atmosphere.

This generational interaction can be both positive and negative. On one hand the

sharing of different perspectives across generations fosters creativity and innovation

(Meredith, Schewe, & Hiam, 2002). On the other hand, negative interaction comes from

clashpoints when the misunderstanding between generations creates unnecessary personal

and organizational conflict (Lancaster & Stillman, 2002).

The misunderstanding and under appreciation of generational differences arise

from the traditional, but erroneous, belief that people change their values, attitudes, and

preferences as a function of age. The premise suggests that a Baby Boomer (born

between 1944 - 1960) who grew up listening to the Beatles will abandon the music of the

"Fab Four" as he/she gets older. Schewe and Meredith (1994) disagree, declaring a

generation's attitudes and preferences are life-long effects.

Three studies support this belief. Zaslow (2002) points out that the recent success

of the Beatles greatest hit album "1"was not that Xers (born between 1961-1980) and

Nexters (born after 1980) were buying the compact disc for themselves but were buying

the music for their parents and grandparents. Studies of Coca-Cola and coffee

consumption by Rentz, Reynolds, and Stoudt (1983) and Rentz and Reynolds (1991)

reveal the same phenomena. While the traditional belief assumes that a generation’s

Coca-Cola consumption would decrease and its coffee consumption increase as it aged,

both studies found this was not so.

 Another reason is the lack of mutual exclusivity between generations. There are

two major reasons for this: (1) people born at the beginning and end of the generation or

on the cusp and (2) the crossover effect. People born on the cusp or sometimes called

“tweeners” are born at either edge of a generation. An example is people born on the

cusp of the Veterans and Baby Boomers generation (born in the years between 1940 -

1944). Therefore, in asking these "tweeners" what their response would be to the most

memorable events in their lives, the responses probably would include examples of the

most memorable events of both generations. Examples might include the GI Bill (a

frequent Veterans response) and the Civil Rights Movement (a frequent Baby Boomer

response). The crossover effect defined by Schewe and Evans (2000) as very significant

events that effect every generation. The authors give examples of John F. Kennedy's

assassination, the Challenger Incident, the movie Gone with the Wind, and leaders like

the Pope John Paul II and Mother Theresa as crossover effects.

Further muddying the waters is the lack of mutual exclusivity between

generations, due to those people born at the beginning or end of a generation, and to an

occurrence called the “crossover effect.” Consider, for example, the populace born on

the cusp of the Veteran and Baby Boomers generation (born 1940-1944). In asking these

"tweeners" to name the most memorable events in their lives, the responses would likely

include events from both generations such as the GI Bill (a frequent Veteran response)

and the Civil Rights Movement (a frequent Baby Boomer response). Schewe and Evans

(2000) define the “crossover effect” as especially significant events that affect every

generation, such as John F. Kennedy's assassination, the Challenger incident, and the

movie Gone with the Wind.

 But the principal reason for the misunderstanding and lack of appreciation is the

scarcity of empirical research to validate generational differences. But the principal

reason for the misunderstanding and lack of appreciation is the scarcity of empirical

research to validate generational differences.

The most comprehensive study of generational differences, by Schuman and Scott

(1989), clearly shows that individuals of the same generation do have collective

memories, especially from their formative years of adolescence and young adulthood.

Based on the responses of more than 1,400 participants, the study shows that different

generations recall different defining events and are able to attach meaningful reasons why

these events were important. Other detailed studies include the forecasting studies of

Rentz, Reynolds, and Stoudt (1983) and Rentz and Reynolds (1991) described above.

A study by Daboval (1998) found a significant difference between Baby Boomers

and Xers in their commitment to an organization, and therefore recommended different

compensation packages and training programs for each generation. Putnam (2000) and

Robinson and Jackson (2001) found that trust is less important to younger generations.

And in a survey Zaslow (2002) showed that less that 1% of adolescents and young adults

(late Xers and Nexters) named the Beatles among their favorite performers.

This concept has become popular even with the misunderstanding and lack of

appreciation of generational differences. The popularity originates from different values

and motivations of Baby Boomers and Veterans (born between 1922-1943). This

difference is frequently referred to as the "generation gap" (Higgins, 1998). Popularity

increased with Coupland’s (1991) novel Generation X that portrayed Xers as jaded

twenty-somethings dropping out of the rat-race that was established by the previous Baby
Boomers generation (Tulgan, 1997). Therefore, Xers have developed a chameleon

personality that makes them very difficult to understand and predict (Rosen, 2001). More

recently, the effect of September 11 has created interest on the impact on Nexters, who

had grown up with peace and prosperity before this incident (Kantrowitz & Naughton,

2001). A recent survey showed that September 11 has significantly affected more than

50% of 14- 18 year olds (Mayer, 2002). Meredith, Schewe and Hiam (2002) predict that

September 11 has imprinted a very deep level of patriotism and fear of danger among

Nexters that will endure throughout their lives.

One of the most well known users of generational differences has been in

marketing as a segmentation tool. Mercedes Benz's advertising campaign in the 1990's

using Janis Joplin's song "Oh Lord, Won't You Buy Me a Mercedes Benz?" to sell to

Baby Boomers their new product line of automobiles (Rice & McDonald, 1995) was very

successful. More recently, automobile manufactures are designing funky cars with

different brand names, more comfort and technologically advanced entertainment

equipment for the Xers because the members of this generation want their own look,

dress casually and carry their entertainment with them (Freeman, 2002: Freeman &

Shirouzu, 2003).

Marketers are not the only ones who have seen the value of using generation

differences. Politicians have become very interested in the concept to reverse the decline

in voter turnout and political knowledge and interest, especially from the Baby Boomers

to the Xers (Putnam, 2000). Halstead (1999) states that Xers have become very frustrated

with the current political system. This has led to an aversion to conventional politics.

The solution, according to Halstead, is politics based on Xer issues like fiscal prudence,
economic populism, family-friendly morality, social investment, and technological

innovation.

Religious organizations have also realized the differences between generations in

trying to reverse the decline of church attendance (Regele, 1995). The solution to

increase attendance with Xers and Nexters (people born after 1980) according to Walker

(2000) is to move away from the structured worship services culture toward a

relationship and personal experience culture that Xers and Nexters enjoy.

What is a Generation?

Introduced in sociological theory in the 1950's by Karl Mannheim, sociologists

have used generations to illustrate the impact on American culture (Eyerman & Turner,

1998). These authors define a generation as, "(people) passing through time who come to

share a common habitus, hexis and culture, a function of which is to provide them with a

collective memory that serves to integrate the generation over a finite period of time" (p.

93). This definition draws special attention to a shared or collective field of emotions,

attitudes, preferences, and dispositions and a set of embodied practices like leisure

activities that each generation uses to create their own traditions or culture (Schewe &

Evans, 2000).

Wyatt (1993) states that a generation is constituted of 6 causes or determinations:

1. A traumatic or formative event such as an assassination of a political leader or

Vietnam.

2. A dramatic shift in demography which influences the distribution of resources in a

society (i.e., the size of the Baby Boomer generation).

 3. A "privileged interval" which connects a generation into a cycle of success and/or

failure (i.e., the Depression).

4. The creation of a sacred space wherein sacred places (i e., Woodstock) sustain a

collective memory.

5. Mentors that give impetus and voice by their work such as Martin Luther King.

6. Generations are formed through the work of people who know and support each

other. Examples is the technological innovators of the Xers (i.e., Bill Gates and

Steven Jobs)

Therefore, a generation forms a persona from these factors that include attitudes,

values, and beliefs about family life, religion, gender roles, lifestyles, and more that does

not change as a function of age (Strauss & Howe, 1997).

Social scientists differ somewhat on how to name and segment these generations.

Kick (2002) states there are many names for each generation. For example, Nexters have

many names including the Echo Boomers, the Millennials, and the Internet Generation.

Other names for Veterans are the GI Generation, Matures, and the silent Generation.

Smith and Clurman (1997) segmented generations into three broad groups; (1)

Matures, (2) Baby Boomers, and (3) Generation X. Meredith and Schewe (1994)

identified six generations ranging from the Depression generation that came of age during

a time of economic strife and increased unemployment, Baby Boomer generations I and

II to Generation X that is a generation known for accepting cultural diversity and

computer literacy. Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2000) designate four generations, (1)

Veterans, (2) Baby Boomers, (3) Generation Xers, and (4) Nexters. (Table 1 gives the
birth years of each generation along with some core values and examples of defining

moments for the generation.)

-------------------------
Insert Table 1 Here
------------------------

The major reason for using Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak’s segmentation

procedure is their addition of the Nexter generation. The addition is important because of

the generation's differences between the two generations. Generation Xers tend to be

more skeptical about their future because they watched America fail militarily,

politically, diplomatically, and economically (Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak, 2000). Howe

and Strauss (1993) add that the Xers' skepticism originates from their attitude that these

failures have charged them to clean up this mess without the resources. They have

learned how to survive. Nexters are almost completely different in their viewpoint. They

tend to be very positive about their future because of the recent robust economy and

significant technological and economic advancements (Bounds, 2000), have more contact

with other racial groups, and a renewed interest in volunteerism (Sax, Lindholm, Astin,

Korn, & Mahoney, 2001).

Leadership and Generational Differences

Differences in the attitudes, values, and beliefs of each generation effect how each

generation view leadership, which Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2000) says manifests in

different leadership styles. Table 2 shows the proposed leadership styles by generation.

-------------------------------
Insert Table 2 About Here
-------------------------------
Meredith, Schewe and Hiam (2002) add that these differences require all leaders

to have a style that is broad and flexible. The style should include a structured style for
Veterans that emphasizes delegation, an individualist approach that values self-

expression for Baby Boomers, an excitement style that makes Xers feel like change

agents and a team one that is relevant to Nexters’ values of accomplishing greater societal

and corporate goals.

Conger (2001) supports these styles in his interviews with business leaders of

different generations. Examples include a Veteran and Baby Boomers explaining their

styles. First, the Veteran describes how the traditional organizational hierarchy

dominated his style:

"It was easy to manage in a strictly hierarchical setting like that, because
that was the system that was in place and that was the system that was
honored, revered, feared-all of the above-both by those managing the
hierarchy on top and by those who were on the rungs below. You always
knew exactly where you stood. There was a built-in sort of incentive to go
level by level. You would go one at a time." (p. 11)

Now the Baby Boomer explains his style based on participation and bringing a

fair and level playing field for everyone:

"So my style is to be very involved with other people. I prefer to get

expert opinions before having to impose a decision. I'm not afraid to
impose one if I have to, but I like to involve others in the decision process.
You'll get a better solution that way" (p. 13)

The Study

This study is an effort to extend previous research on validating generational

differences and whether these differences effect how a generation views

leadership. Therefore, the research questions are do generations

1. Form a different persona by recalling different national or world events,

cultural events and leaders?

2. View admired leadership characteristics differently?

 Methodology

Instruments

There are two instruments. The first is a survey that asks respondents five

open-ended questions based on Schumann and Scott’s (1989) question about what

national world events or changes over the last 50 years seemed important to he

respondent and Wyatt’s (1993) causes and determination of a generation that were

explained above. Using the question and the causes and determinations allowed

for more comprehensive picture of generations' emotions, attitudes, and

preferences and embodied practices that former studies had not asked. The five

questions are:

1. What three national and/or world events over the last 75 years were especially

important to you?

2. What are your favorite movies over the same period of time (75 years)?

3. What are your favorite television shows over the same time period?

4. What are your favorite all time musical individuals or groups?

5. Who are your favorite leaders?

The second instrument was based on a version of Kouzes and Posner’s

(Pierce & Newstrom, 2000) Checklist of Admired Leaders (See Appendix A).

Respondents were asked to rank-order the characteristics from 1 to 10 according

which characteristics they most admire in leaders (1 being the highest). The

instrument was based on their empirical work of over 2,500 profit and nonprofit

executives and managers by asking the open-ended question: “What values

(personal characteristics) do you look for and admire in your superiors?” (p.16).
This work has been validated for over 20 years not only in the United States but in

9 foreign countries and is the foundation of the 5 Practices of Exemplary

Leadership (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). The ten most mentioned characteristics

from this checklist were the basis of the instrument used in this study. The ten

characteristics are ambitious, caring, competence, determination, forward-

looking, honesty, imagination, inspiration, loyalty, and self-confidence.

Interviewers handed out the survey (See Appendix A for an example) for

the respondents to complete by themselves. Respondents were given as much

time as possible to complete the survey. Finally, respondents were asked their

age at the time of the interview to validate their generation.

Interviewers and Respondents

The interviewers were students from undergraduate business classes in a

mid-sized state university in the Northeast. Each interviewer was asked to contact

12 individuals, 3 from each cohort as part of a class assignment.

Before beginning the actual interviewing process, each student was given

a background in generations and experience in one-to-one interviewing. Students

were also required to read and participate in class discussions on the book

Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and

Nexters in the Workplace by Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2000).

A week before the actual interviewing, the students read a chapter on the

proper way to conduct one-to-one interviews. The guidelines were reviewed in

class and students practiced interviewing each other.

 The students or interviewers were given two weeks to conduct their

interviews. The interviews were conducted in the spring and fall of 2000 and the

spring of 2001. At the end of two weeks, students turned in the responses and a

reflective paper summarizing their results and experience. These reflective papers

included many quotes from respondents and comments from the interviewers that

became valuable in a more in-depth understanding of the results.

Results

The total sample size was 790 respondents. There is a fairly balanced

number of respondents per generation with 190 Veterans, 203 Baby Boomers, 243

Xers, and 154 Nexters responding to the survey. The small differences were

expected as many interviewers stated upon finishing their interviews they had an

easier time getting Baby Boomers and Xers to respond to the survey and the

opposite for Veterans and Nexters.

Many respondents gave more that one, usually 2 to 3 responses for each

question. Therefore, the total number of responses for the five questions is

approximately 2500. The responses varied greatly within generations but there is

a set of frequent responses that was evident for each question. Table 3 present

examples of the most frequent responses to the five open-ended questions.

The results clearly show that there are distinct collective memories for

each generation. Each generation has its unique set of shared field of preferences

and embodied activities through events, movies, TV shows, musical individuals

or groups, and favorite leaders. This is very true for the Veterans, Baby Boomers,

and Xers as their responses were much related to similar events, movies,
television shows, music and leaders that happened or were popular during their

formative years. The Nexters responses indicate a generation that is going

through a formative stage by giving responses that are of very current events,

movies, TV shows, music and leaders, especially current presidents.

-------------------------------
Insert Table 3 About Here
--------------------------------

To determine if there was a cusp effect, a random sample of 50

respondents’ responses born within three years either way of the break-off date

was conducted. The determination of whether there was a cusp effect is if a

"tweener" gave a response in three of the five questions stated by the appropriate

generations: the generation that they were born in and the generation they were

closest to by birth date. Approximately 23% of these respondents met this

requirement, therefore, it was determined there was a cusp effect.

In addition, as expected, there was a crossover effect. Many respondents

gave responses such as John F. Kennedy's assassination, the movie Godfather,

and the TV shows Saturday Night Live and the Simpsons. A crossover response

that is very prevalent was Xers stating 1960’s musical artists as their favorite.

Leaders that are mentioned by more than one generation were Colin Powell,

Martin Luther King and Pope Paul IV.

A MANOVA was conducted to determine the effect of generation on the

ranking of admired leadership characteristics. There is a multivariate main effect

for generation indicated by the Wilk’s Lambda (), of .045 with a p < .000.

(Table 4 shows the mean ranking or characteristics by generation.) The univariate

F-tests indicate 8 of the 10 characteristics as being significant. Only the

characteristics inspiration and self-confidence were not significant. Therefore, the

results indicate that generations have significant differences in how they

characterize admired leaders.

-------------------------------
Insert Table 4 About Here
--------------------------------

The significant differences are found between the Veterans and Baby

Boomers and the Xers and Nexters with the characteristics of honesty, caring,

determination, and ambitious. A Tukey HSD test reveals that the mean ranking

scores for honesty for Veterans and Baby Boomers (M = 2.88 and M = 2.63,

respectfully) are significantly (p < .05) higher than the means for Xers and

Nexters (M = 3.45 and 3.46, respectfully). The same significance (p < .05) level

by a Tukey HSD test with caring is found between the mean ranking scores for

Veterans and Baby Boomers (M = 5.24 and M = 5.21, respectfully) and the means

for Xers and Nexters (M = 5.82 and 5.92, respectfully). These results reveal that

Veterans and Baby Boomers are (1) much more likely to believe that honesty is

an absolute imperative in leadership and (2) that leaders must believe that

followers as more than employees but as friends and human beings than Xers and

Nexters.

The reverse was found with the characteristics of determination and

ambitious. Xers and Nexters were significantly more likely to rank determination

and ambition higher than Veterans and Baby Boomers. A Tukey HSD test

showed that the mean ranking scores for determination for Xers and Nexters (M =
4.39 and M = 4.28) were significantly (p < .05) higher than the means for

Veterans and Baby Boomers (M = 5.73 and M = 5.65, respectfully). The same

significant relationship was found with the Tukey HSD test for ambitious. Xers

and Nexters (M = 5.37 and M = 5.05, respectfully) has significantly (p < .05)

higher mean ranking for ambitious than Veterans and Baby Boomers (M = 6.10

and M = 6.59, respectfully). Therefore, the results reveal that Xers and Nexters

are much more likely to believe leaders as having determination to get things

done and be ambitious than Veterans and Baby Boomers.

One significant difference that had a different combination of generations

was competence. A Tukey HSD test reveal that Baby Boomers and Xers (M =

3.32 and M = 3.57, respectfully) were significantly (p < .05) higher means than

the means for Veterans and Nexters (M = 4.04 and M = 4.96, respectfully) for

competence. Xers and especially Baby Boomers are much more likely to want

leaders that have expertise in leadership abilities like challenge, inspire, enable,

and model than Veterans and Nexters.

 Discussion

Overall, the open-ended responses strongly supported generational

differences. There was clearly a shared field of responses or persona for each

generation supporting Schuman and Scott’s (1989) study by recalling different

events or changes that come especially from adolescence and early adulthood and

Wyatt's (1993) causes and determinations of a generation. The responses strongly

indicated that each generation has created their own culture, traditions, and

mentors through their attitudes, preferences, and dispositions.

The differences in most memorable national events were salient.

Veterans’ responses such as Pearl Harbor and GI Bill were strikingly different

that Baby Boomer and Xers’ responses to most memorable events like the

President Kennedy's assassination or the Challenger Incident.

Numerous interviewers expressed amazement that many Baby Boomers

and Xers went on to describe exactly where they were and what they were doing

when learning of President Kennedy's death of the shuttle explosion. These

responses support Conger (2001) and Schewe and Evans’ (2000) position that

these events are more than mental impressions but emotional memories that have

profound impact on the person’s values and views of the world.

This salience stayed very true throughout the other questions. Each

generation had their memorable musical stars, favorite movies, and television

shows. Many interviewers (mostly in their 20’s) even asked the author about

other generations’ responses such as movies like the Bridge Over the River Kwai

and television shows like The Ed Sullivan Show. They had never heard or seen
these movies, television shows, or heard of musical stars that other generations

stated as their favorites. This further accentuates that each generation has their

unique shared experiences that creates their own culture.

The differences in favorite leaders by generations fit each generations’

preferred leadership style. Veterans’ favorite leaders such as Franklin Roosevelt,

Dwight Eisenhower or Winston Churchill fit their preferred directive style

because they were leaders of large organizations and respect this type of

authority. Social movement leaders such as Ghandi and Martin Luther King

certainly encapsulate Baby Boomers’ preferred leadership style of being against

hierarchies and respecting a passionate leader. Leaders such as Bill Gates and

Tiger Woods are examples of leaders who exemplify Xers and Nexters’ preferred

leadership qualities of being competent and change agents.

The support of the cusp and crossover effects indicates that generational

differences are similar with other social categories. Strauss and Howe (1997) state

that every social category has individual exceptions and that the boundaries can

get a little fuzzy at the edges. These effects should not only be perceived as

deterrence to the relevance of generational differences. Instead the effects can be

used positively for example to show that there is common ground and a feeling of

connectedness among generations especially in seminars or training sessions.

This effect should decrease the we-versus-them attitude that naturally develops

within groups.

Even though there were significant differences found in the ranking of

admired leadership characteristics, similarities arose that need to be discussed. A

key similarity is that each generation believed that honesty is the most important

characteristic for leaders. This result validates Kouzes and Posner’s (2002)

findings that honesty is selected number one more that any other characteristic.

By stating that honesty is most important, all generations admire leaders that tell

the truth and not mislead them. Another similarity was how the generations

ranked competence and loyalty. Each generation ranked these characteristics

either second, third, or fourth in importance. Hence, each generation strongly felt

that a successful leader must be capable, effective, and know what he or she is

doing and promote high levels of loyalty.

The differences support the contention that each generation has its own

unique values, attitudes, and beliefs about leadership. Veterans prefer much more

honesty and loyalty in their leaders which endorses their preferred leadership style

and who they chose as their favorite leaders (i.e., Roosevelt and Eisenhower). In

addition, their importance of loyalty correlates well with their belief in authority

and hierarchical relationships.

The results definitely reveal the unique persona of Baby Boomers. Their

higher preference for caring, competent, and honest leader characteristics and

their selection of social leaders (i.e., Martin Luther King and Gandhi) illustrates

their penchant for leaders who are compassionate, honest, competent, and spirited.

The Clinton scandal, which dominated front-page news at the time of the

interviews, contributed to their high ranking of honesty and competent. Many

interviewers stated in their reflective papers that Baby Boomers were very upset

over this event.

 The results from also illuminated the Xers and Nexters persona. The

significance of the leadership characteristics determination and ambitious to Xers

and Nexters indicate they see leadership in a unique way. They want leaders who

challenge the system and create change as evidences by their identified favorites-

Ronald Reagan, Tiger Woods, and Bill Gates- who are certainly perceived as

change agents who challenged the status quo.

Finally, the significant differences in mean ranking of honesty between the

Veterans and Baby Boomers and Xers and Nexters support the findings of

declining level of trust in Xers and Nexters. Kouzes and Posner (2003) state that

trust is an essential component of honesty in that people need to know that leaders

will be honest about their values, ethics, and standards. If not, leaders can not be

trusted.

Veterans and Baby Boomers ranked honesty high; therefore leaders must be open

about their values, ethics, and standards to the older generations. Honesty was not as

important to the Xers and Nexters as evidenced by their comments concerning the

Clinton scandal. Interviewers reported that many Xers said it was okay that Clinton lied

about his activities because it was his life.

Conclusion

The results from this study validate the importance of generational

differences as a legitimate diversity issue. Leaders of organizations need to

recognize and understand that generations develop a unique persona that

translates into a mind-set that has different emotions, attitudes, beliefs,

preferences, and embodied activities. This mind-set creates differences in how a

person of a generation leads or how they prefer to be led.

Generations should be recognized by leaders and their organizations as

important part of the diversity mix as race, religion and gender are. Meredith,

Schewe, and Hiam (2002) believe that the different core attitudes and values of

generations often are the most important diversity determinants of workplace

behavior. Therefore, leaders of organizations need to recognize and understand

that generations develop a unique persona that translates into a mind-set that has

different emotions, attitudes, beliefs, preferences, and embodied activities. This

mind-set creates differences in how a person of a generation leads or how they

prefer to be led.

Organizations and their leaders need to become more sensitive to these

differences. The objective for this sensitivity is to leverage generational

differences into strengths. Raines (2002) recommends that leadership

development programs focus on education, avoiding judging others' perceptions,

having generational conversations, offering choice, and promoting flexibility.

Martin and Tulgan (2002) suggest holding a generational diversity summit that

promotes the strengths of different generations by sharing insights and clearing up

misunderstandings between generations. Zemke, Raines, and Filipczak (2000)

agree with the above suggestions and add that leaders need to develop listening

and questioning skills that surface potential conflicts before they happen.

The similarities and differences by generations found within the admired

leadership characteristics are important in developing and implementing more

effective leadership development programs. The similarities reinforce the

traditional belief that people expect leaders to be credible. Kouzes and Posner

(2002) state that credibility is built around the concepts that leaders do what they

say they will do and that they follow through on their promises. Therefore,

leadership development programs should continue to reinforce these

characteristics.

The significant generational differences support the contention that

leadership development programs need to become more sensitive to generational

differences. Traditional programs have a tendency to highlight Veteran and Baby

Boomer leadership styles, leaders like war heroes or charismatic political leaders,

use leadership books that were written for Veterans and Baby Boomers leadership

style, and formal learning. For example, many of the popular leadership books

written in the 1980's advocate the Veterans and Baby Boomers' preferred task and

people leadership style. More preference should be on the excitement and team

styles that cater to Xers and Nexters who need freedom to be change agents and

support because the vast changes at the same time (Meredith, Schewe and Hiam,

2002).

To make leadership development more relevant to the Xers and Nexters,

examples of leaders will have to focus more on their favorite leaders like Bill

Gates and reading materials that focuses on change and collective action.

Examples of reading materials are Hamel (2000) and Meyerson's (2001) books

that see leadership as less invested in formal authority, more opportunistic, and

act as change agents.

 Probably the most important change is how to deliver these diversity and

leadership development programs. The traditional formal learning of teacher

dominance that is primarily done in the classroom has to change (Arsenault,

2003). Xers and especially Nexters prefer action learning which does not happen

in the classroom but working on future-oriented scenarios and team based

training. These younger generations also desire quick assessment of their skills

in order for them to know how to succeed (Lancaster & Stillman, 2002).

Assessment needs to focus on self-renewal so they know how they are doing and

what skills they need to improve on to succeed (Arsenault, 2003).

Finally, much criticism has been directed toward this social category.

This research is a positive step towards reducing the criticism by increasing the

understanding and appreciation of generational differences. The results from this

survey will hopefully spur organizations to begin see the added value of

generational differences as a diversity issue and developing leaders and more

research in further validating generational differences. Further studies are

necessary because of the homogenous sample used in this sample limits the ability

to generalize the results. Research should be expanded with samples based in

private college or universities and international students.

 References

Arsenault, P. (2003). Leadership assessment and development:

Recommendations for a new assessment model. In R. Riggio and S. Smith-Orr (Eds.),

Improving leadership in nonprofit organizations (pp. 250-264). San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Bounds, E. M. (2000). Praying that receives answers. New York: Whitaker

House.

Clark, J. C. (1999). Key components for strategic diversity initiative. [On-Line].

Available: [Link]

Conger, J. (2001). How "gen x" manage. In Osland, J., Kolb, D. & Rubin, I. W.

(Eds.), Organizational behavior reader (pp. 9-19). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Coupland, D. (1991). Generation X. St. Martin's Press: New York.

Eyerman, R. & Turner, B. S. (1998). Outline of a theory of generations.

European Journal of Social Theory, 1, 91-106.

Daboval, J. M. (1998). A comparison between baby boomer and generation x

employees' bases and foci of commitment. (Doctoral dissertation, Nova Southeastern

University, 1998). Dissertation Abstracts International, 59, 0543.

Freeman. S. (2002, January 14). Car makers get creative appeal to generation y.

Wall Street Journal, B1-B4.

Freeman, S. & Shirouzu, N. (2003, July 30). Toyota’s gen y gamble. Wall Street

Journal, B1-B4

Halstead, T. (1999, August). A politics of generation x. The Atlantic Monthly,

33-42.
 Higgins, K. (1998). Generational marketing. Marketing Management, 7, 6-10.

Howe, N. & Strauss, B. (1993). 13th gen: Abort, retry, ignore, fail? New York:

Vintage Books.

Kick, F. (2002). What Makes kids kick: Inspiring the millennial generation to

kick-it-in! Manuscript submitted for publication.

Kantrowitz, B. & Naughton, K. (2001, November 12). Generation 9-11.

Newsweek, p 46-59.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Lancaster, L. C. & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Who they are.

Why they clash. How to solve the generational puzzle at work. New York:

HarperCollins.

Martin, C. & Tulgan, B. (2002). Managing the generation mix. New York: HRD

Press.

Mayer, I. (2002). Marketing to the teens & tweens in the post-9/11 era: A special

supplement to the research study marketing to teen and tweens. New York: EPM

Communications.

Meredith, G. & Schewe, C. D. (1994). The power of cohorts. American

Demographics, December, 22-31.

Meredith, G., Schewe, C. D. & Hiam A. (2002). Managing by defining moments.

New York: Hungry Minds.

Pierce, J. L. & Newstrom, J. W. (Eds.) (2000). Leaders & the leadership process:

Readings, self-assessments & applications. (Rev. Ed.), Burr Ridge, Il: Irwin Press.
 Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American

Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Raines, C. (2002). Managing the Generational Mix. Generations, 9, [On-Line].

[Link]

Regele, M. (1995). Death of the Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Harper Collins.

Rentz, J., Reynolds, F. D., & Stout, R. G. (1983). Changing consumption patterns

with cohort analysis. Journal of Marketing Research, 54, 12-20.

Rentz, J. O. & Reynolds, F. D. (1991). Forecasting the effects of an aging

population on product consumption: An age-old-period-cohort framework. Journal of

Marketing Research, 28, 355-360.

Rice, F. & McDonald, K. S. (1995). Making generational marketing come of age.

Fortune, 131, 110-114.

Robinson, R. V. & Jackson, E. F. (2001). Is trust in other declining in America?

An age-period-cohort analysis. Social Science Research, 30, 117-145.

Rosen, B. C. (2001). Masks and mirrors: Generation x and the chameleon

personality. Westport, CT.: Praeger.

Sax, L. J., Lindhom J. A., Astin, A. W. Korn W. S., & Mahoney, K. M. (2001).

The American freshman: National norms for fall 2001. Los Angeles: Higher Education

Research Institute.

Schewe, C. D. & Meredith, G. E. (1994). Digging deep to delight the mature

adult consumer. Marketing Management, 3, 20-35.

 Schewe, C. D. & Evans, S. M. (2000). Market segmentation by cohorts: The

value and validity of cohorts in American and abroad. Journal of Marketing

Management, 16, 129-142.

Schmitt, B. H. (1999). Experiential marketing: How to get customers to sense,

feel, think, act, and relate to your company and brands. New York: Free Press.

Schuman, H. & Scott, J. (1989). Generations and collective memories. American

Sociological Review, 54, 359-381.

Smith, J. W. & Clurman, A. (1997). Rocking the ages. New York: Harper

Business Press.

Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (1997). The fourth turning. New York: Broadway

Books:

Tolson, J. (2001, August, 13). Is generation a bad word? U.S. News & World

Report, 131, 42.

Tulgan. B. (1996). What is generation x? [On-line], The Workforce of the

Future. Available: [Link]

Tulgan. B. (1997). Redefining the meaning of generation x? Generation x: [On-

line], The workforce of the future. Available: [Link]

Wyatt, D. (1993). Out of the sixties: Storytelling and the Vietnam generation.

Cambridge, MA: University Press.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at work: Managing

the clash of veterans. boomers, xers, and nexers in your workplace. New York:

AMACOM.
 Zaslow, J. (2002, May 1). Janis who? Selling yesterday's stars to today's

teenagers is a challenge. Wall Street Journal, B1 & B4.

 Appendix A

Generation: __________________________
Interviewer: ______________________

Checklist of Admired Leaders

Instructions: Please give your respondent this survey. Ask your interviewee to rank-

order the items from 1 to 10 according which characteristics they most admire in leaders

(1 being the highest).

Characteristics Ranking

Ambitious _______

Caring _______

Competent _______

Determined _______

Forward-looking _______

Honest _______

Imaginative _______

Inspiring _______

Loyal _______

Self-controlled _______
Table 1

A Description of Generations

Birth

Generations Years Core Values Defining Moments

Veterans 1922- Dedication, Hard Work, The Great Depression,

1943 Respect for Authority [Link], Lindbergh, FDR

Baby 1944- Optimism, Personal JFK, Civil Rights & Women's

Boomers 1960 Gratification and Growth Movements

Generation 1961- Diversity, Technoliteracy, The Challenger Incident,

Xers 1980 Fun, Informality AIDS, Rodney King

Generation 1981- Optimism, Civic Duty, Terrorism, Oklahoma City

Nexters 2000 Confidence, Achievement Bombing, Computers

Source: Adapted from R. Zemke, C. Raines, and B. Filipczak, Generations at

Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in Your

Workplace (New York: AMACOM, 2000).

Table 2

Preferred Generational Leadership Styles

Generatio Preferred Leadership Style

Veteran Tend toward a directive style that is simple and clear. Rationale for this style was that Veterans were organization men who were loyal to

the organization. Within each organization there was a clear well-defined hierarchy with very formal, military-like relationships.

Authority was highly respected.

Baby Boomer Prefer a collegial and consensual style. Passionate and concerned about participation and spirit in the workplace. They espouse lots of

communication, sharing of responsibility, and respect from each other’s autonomy. Baby Boomers despise the traditional hierarchy and

make every effort to turn the hierarchy upside-down.

Generation X Tend to be fair, competent and straightforward. Do not respect authority as did past generations as they prefer egalitarian relationships.

Like to be challenged and thrive on change. Brutal honesty is a trademark of this generation

Nexters Prefer a polite relationship with authority. Like leaders who pull people together. Believe in collective action and a will to get things

changed.

Sources: Adapted from R. Zemke, C. Raines, and B. Filipczak, Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in Your

Workplace (New York: AMACOM, 2000) and J. Conger, How ‘Gen X’ Managers Manage (The Organizational Behavior Reader 7 th Ed. By Osland, J. S., Kolb,

D, and Rubin, I. M: Prentice-Hall, 2001).

Table 3

Examples of Frequent Generational Responses to Open-Ended Questions

Musical Individuals or

Generation Events Groups Movies Television Shows Leaders

Specific WW2 events, like Big Band- Dorsey and Miller White Christmas, Ed Sullivan and Show of FDR, Harry Truman, Colin

Veterans Pearl Harbor & GI Bill, Sinatra, Cole, the Ink Spots; Casablanca, John Wayne Shows; Game Shows; Ozzie Powell, WW II Military

Depression, Cold War Lawrence Whelk films; Bridge over the & Harriet; News Shows leaders, Winston Churchill,

River Kwai and Eisenhower

JFK assassination, Roe vs. Supremes, Four Tops, and To Kill a Mockingbird, Gilligan's Island; Saturday John F. Kennedy, Martin

Baby Boomers Wade, Civil Rights The Temptations, Beatles The Graduate, Godfather, Night Live; Mash; Hawaii Luther Ling, Mother Theresa,

Movement, The Walk on the Rolling Stones, Elvis, Bob and One Flew Over the Five-O; Hill Street Blues Gandhi, and Malcolm X

Moon Dylan Cuckoo's Nest

Challenger Incident, Fall of Dave Matthews Band, Caddy Shack, Steel Simpsons; Friends; Ally Ronald Reagan, Nelson

Generation Xers Communism, AIDS, Rodney Madonna, Phish, 60-70's Magnolias, Indiana Jones McBeal; Seinfeld Mandela, George Bush, Bill

King music films Gates

September 11, Princess Di's Brittany Spears, Sara Austin Power films, X files: Wrestling; Dawson's Michael Jordan, Bill Clinton,

Nexters death, Desert Storm, Clinton- McLauglin, Brandy, Garth Martix, Adam Sandler Creek; Sopranos George W. Bush, Parents;

Lewinsky, Technology Brooks films and Tiger Woods

Table 4

Generational Ranking by Means of Admired Leadership Traits

Veteran Baby Boomer Generation X Nexters

Rank (X) (X) (X) (X)
1 Honesty Honesty Honesty Honesty
(2.88) (2.63) (3.46) (3.45)
2 Loyalty Competence Competence Determination
(3.97) (3.32) (3.57) (4.28)
3 Competence Loyalty Determination Loyalty
(4.04) (4.54) (4.39) (4.43)
4 Caring Caring Loyalty Competence
(5.24) (5.21) (4.56) (4.96)
5 Determination Determination Ambitious Ambitious
(5.73) (5.65) (5.37) (5.05)
6 Ambitious Inspiration Inspiration Inspiration
(6.10) (5.70) (5.75) (5.84)
7 Inspiration Forward-Looking Caring Caring
(6.12) (6.38) (5.82) (5.92)
8 Forward-Looking Ambitious Forward-Looking Self Confident
(6.29) (6.59) (6.83) (6.71)
9 Self Confident Self Confident Self Confident Forward-Looking
(6.74) (6.96) (7.21) (6.94)
10 Imagination Imagination Imagination Imagination
(8.04) (7.58) (7.47) (7.54)