How to motivate generation Y at the workplace?
– Retail market context
2
Dissertation submitted as a requirement to obtain the degree in
MBA BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
How to motivate generation Y at the workplace?
– Retail market context
Kalinka Macagnan
Student number – 1654769
Word count: 20,814
May 2013
3
Contents Page
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….7
Chapter I
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Literature review ………………………………………………………………………………………………….
1. Human resource management: an overview………………………………………………………11
2. Generation: personal and work characteristics
…………………………………………………..15
2.1. Veterans
…………………………………………………………………………………………………17
2.2. Baby Boomers ………………………………………………………………………………………..17
2.3.Generation X …………………………………………………………………………………………..18
2.4. Generation Y ………………………………………………………………………………………….19
3.Workplace: a changing environment
…………………………………………………………………24
3.1. Retail environment ………………………………………………………………………………….25
3.2. Job design ………………………………………………………………………………………………25
3.3.Organizational culture and best fit ……………………………………………………………..26
4. Motivation ……………………………………………………………………………………………………28
4.1. Theories of motivation …………………………………………………………………………….30
4.1.1. Content theories
……………………………………………………………………………………30
a) Maslow‟s hierarchy of needs ……………………………………………………………………31
b) Alderfer‟s ERG theory …………………………………………………………………………….33
c) Herzberg‟s two-factor theory ……………………………………………………………………33
d) McClelland‟s acquired needs theories ……………………………………………………..35
4.1.2. Process theories ……………………………………………………………………………………36
a) Vroom‟s Expectancy theory
…………………………………………………………………….37
b) Latham and Locke Goal-setting theory
………………………………………………………38
c) Adam‟s Equity theories ……………………………………………………………………………40
Chapter II ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
5. Research question
…………………………………………………………………………………………42
Chapter III…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
6. Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………………43
4
6.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………43
6.2. Proposed Methodology…………………………………………………………………………….43
6.3. Proposed Sampling Methodology ……………………………………………………………..45
6.4. Data Collection tools ……………………………………………………………………………….47
6.5. Data analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………..48
6.6. Limitations of the research ……………………………………………………………………… 48
6.6.1. Practical efforts to obtain/ access primary data
………………………………………48
6.6.2.Personal biases……………………………………………………………………………………49
6.7 Ethics. …………………………………………………………………………………………………….49
6.8.Time allocation
………………………………………………………………………………………..49
Chapter IV
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
7.Darta analysis/ Findings ………………………………………………………………………………….51
8. Conclusion
……………………………………………………………………………………………………61
9. Recommendation
…………………………………………………………………………………………..69
10.Self reflection on Own learning and performance ……………………………………………70
Bibliography ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..75
Appendix I … ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..90
5
Abstract
The main purpose of this paper is to investigate and discuss how to motivate Generation
Y employees at workplace, increasing their performance and satisfaction, and helping the
organization to achieve its goals. The concern about motivation has increased as business
environment becomes more competitive and organization‟s Human Resources (HR)
happen to be more important to the business success. The increased number of
researchers across the HR field focuses on the differences in generations and its
consequences at workplace; this research aims to focus on factors that can foster
motivation in the specific group of employees known as millenniums because they differ
greatly from any other cohorts and also because they are the future of any organization.
They have twisted organization inside out with their requirements and suffering with
stereotypes largely reported by observation rather than utilizing empirical evidences. In
consequence of this misunderstanding, many organizations are facing difficulty to attract
and maintain this new generation of employees that can greatly contribute to the firms‟
success. Aiming to understand certain behaviours and work attitudes of these employees,
the current research analyses the role of HRM and its evolving through times, from its
emergence until its recognition of strategic role. Going further, it will analyse the concept
of generation, differentiate cohorts and their behaviours, aiming to understand way
organizations structure in certain ways and why the new employees demand new
structures and policies. Theories of motivation will also be studied aiming to gain more
knowledge. The research will conduct in-depth interviews with members of Gen Y in
order to discover what motivates them to work. The study will contribute to the HRM
field because it will suggest what management style is more effective to manage
millenniums.
Keywords: Human Resources Management, Motivation, Generations, Generation
Y, Workplace, Organizational Culture, Retail Context.
6
Commitment is what transforms a promise into a reality. It is the
words that speak boldly of your intentions. And the actions which
speak louder than words. It is making the time when there is
none. Coming through time after time…
Shearson Lehman Brothers, 1986
7
Introduction
Today‟s business environment brings many challenges to organizations. These include
globalization, the pressure for speed and innovation, the transition to a service economy
with its extreme emphasis on customers, the pressure for financial performance, the
impact of technology and the changing workforce demographics. All these factors greatly
influences the business context but perhaps the biggest change that has impacted
organizations in the past decade has been the growing understanding that people are an
organization’s primary source of competitive advantage.
It is now widely accepted that an organization’s success is determined by decisions
employees make and behaviours in which they engage. It has never been more important
for organizations to promote the strategic potential of people. Researchers, supervisors,
managers and human resource professionals have been making an effort in perfecting
management strategies, trying to find ways to better motivate employees.
Despite the fact that individuals have different needs and wants and their reasons of
motivation vary, studies suggest that it is possible to see motivation‟s similarities
between employees who belong to the same generation. Barford and Hester (2011)
argues that because individuals from the same generation share similar historical,
economic and social experiences they would also have similar work attitudes and
behaviours and so, the reasons of motivation would be similar.
A generation, according to Crumpacker and Crumpacker (2007) consist of individuals
born roughly in the same time period of two decades each. Scholars mostly agree that
there are four large generations of employees: Veterans, Baby Boomers, Gen X and Gen
Y. (Wong et al., 2008). The current study is going to focus on understanding generation
Y‟s employment motivation with the awareness of not stereotyping individuals based on
generational values and characteristics. (Barford and Hester, 2011)
8
To do so, theories of motivation will be studied aiming to gain further comprehension
about needs and wants that can influence the motivational behaviour in „Y‟ employees
and also how the management team, through rewards, praise and incentives can motivate
their people. Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley (2011, p.137) affirms that motivation theories
“base its analysis of worker performance on how work and its rewards satisfy the
individual employees‟ needs”. If these needs are satisfied, employees will be motivated to
work at high-performance levels but, if not, their motivation is only one factor affecting
performance, such as technology and training. High-performance levels are what can
bring competitive advantage to an organization; it is the difference between long-term
success to a short-term success or even failure.
Many are the theories of motivation, which shows that the subject has been arousing
curiosity in the Human Resource (HR) field, bringing concepts and enriching the content
matter and because of this it is relevant to review them. However, the study will be
developed with the awareness of the limitations of each theory.
To investigate the factors influencing motivation the study will be developed, gathering
information from interviewing members of generation Y, searching for reasons that
motivate them to work. The study focuses on a group of retail managers, from two
different organizations and belonging to the generation Y (between 26 and 30 years old),
to find more reliable results.
The differences in organizational culture or climate are another relevant factor for the
research because it influences employees‟ behaviour, affecting their performance and is
highly valued by members of generation Y. In this sense, retail context and workplace
environment are also important to be analysed. Especially workplace will be discussed,
its changes and how it can be more suitable to the new generation of Y workers.
Armstrong, (2009, p. 252) affirms that
Work is the exertion of effort and the application of knowledge and skills to
achieve a purpose. Most people work to earn a living- to make money. But they
9
also work because of the other satisfaction it brings, such as doing something
worthwhile, a sense of achievement, prestige, recognition, the opportunity to use
and develop abilities, the scope to exercise power, and companionship.
Understanding the reasons that can contribute to motivate Gen Y is a complex task. As
we can extract from the citation, to achieve the research‟s goal it is essential to study the
three main elements (generation, motivation and workplace) in an integrated way.
The paper will be developed according to the following structure. Chapter one is the
Literature review, where the research will raise the main points to base its conclusions
on. This part is divided into 4 sections beginning with an (1) overview of Human
Resources Management; going further and analysing (2) what is generations and how are
they (veterans, baby boomers, generation X and generation Y) defined; scrutiny of (3)
workplace, retail environment, job design and organizational culture and best fit will be
analysed; reaching the final topic, (4) motivation where all the relevant theories will be
reviewed. Chapter two is the Research Question, which the answer is the aim of the
study. Chapter three is the Research Methodology, which has as an objective to explain
the bases of research such as the philosophy and approach adopted; Primary research,
where the author will be interviewing members of generation Y in order to understand
their issues and reasons that motivate them. Followed by Chapter Four where the
finding will expose the main discovery, and conclusions, which will be the comparison
between the information gathered from the primary research with the existing theories
and concepts.
Even though employee motivation is a well researched topic, most of the studies on
generations have been based on observation rather than empirical evidences, and very
little academic research has been done on the characteristics and expectations of
generation Y and its implications for the workplace. The vast literature is normally
concerned about differentiating generations and a lack of attention to generation Y
specific characteristics has resulted in decisions being made by HRM practitioners based
on stereotypes and claims in the popular press whose underlying assumptions have been
10
largely permitted without examination by the academic community. The research aims to
fulfil the gap in the literature in terms of finding the reasons that motivate members of
generation Y to work. The study is hoping to enrich the HR field, providing an empirical
analysis of members of generation Y and how HR practitioners and line managers can
improve
those
employees
performance,
increase
their
productivity,
helping
the
organization to gain sustainable competitive advantage.
11
Chapter I
Literature Review
1. Human resource management : an overview
Human Resources management (HRM) emerged during the Industrial Revolution in the
18th century, when the concept of production shifted from the cottage system to the
factory system, increasing the number of employees in the organization. (Gunnigle,
Heraty and Morley, 2011) Due to larger number of employees, recruitment, payment and
training became specialized activities, requiring specialized agents to execute these tasks
for the organization. (Price 2007; Dessler, 2011)
The welfare tradition is characterized by voluntary initiatives carried out in some large
English companies to improve the working conditions of factory employees, such as sick
days, working hours and health and safety concerns. (Foot and Hook, 2008) At this stage,
the welfare practitioner did not belong to the management chain of the company, being
more like a „middle men‟ and staying in between the organization and employees.
(Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2011)
With the downturn of the economy in the early years of twentieth century, the welfare
tradition lost its pace to Taylor‟s idea of efficient labour. Also known as Taylorism, the
idea was to break the job into simple, repetitive and measurable tasks to maximise
productivity and efficiency of the company‟s technical resources. (Foot and Hook, 2008)
Employees were trained to obtain the necessary skills and the payment system was
developed accordingly employee productivity. (Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 1997)
High turnover, absenteeism and low motivation were the result of such practice. Even
criticized, Taylor contributed greatly within the HRM field because he brought the idea
of job design, training and payment system. (Foot and Hook, 2008) As Gunnigle, Heraty
and Morley, 1997) highlights “probably its most significance legacy is the notion that
work planning (seen as management task) should be separated from work doing (seen as
worker task)”.
12
In the 1950s, Drucker (1954) introduced the concept of employees as “human resources”,
based in the economic factors and supporting the idea of well-trained workforce to
increase the economic outcomes. (Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990) Bakke, in 1958,
suggested that human resources function should be placed as part of the general
management activities, highlighting that an effective use of resources (money, material
and people) would help organization achieve its objectives and that a poor use of any of
the resources would weaken the effectiveness of the entire business. (Marciano, 1995)
In the 1960s came the behavioural science movement, initiated by Maslow and Herzberg.
These scholars emphasised the value aspect of human resources in organisations and
argued for a better quality of working life for workers. (Ishak, Abdullah and Ramli, 2011)
In the 1970s HRM emphasised the human resource as asset for the organization with the
„human resource accounting‟. (Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990) In the 1980s, the „asset‟
view began to gain support (Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990) with Fombrun and Beer (and
their colleagues) proposing two distinct HRM concepts: “Hard” HRM and “Soft” HRM.
It was also in the 1980‟s that HRM became a substitute for personnel management.
(Armstrong, 2012; Ishak, Abdullah and Ramli, 2011)
Fombrun and his colleagues, in 1984, developed the „matching model‟ which aligns HR
system with organization strategy and highlights the efficient utilization of resources to
meet organizational objectives. (Armstrong, 2012; Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990) Also
known as hard HRM, this model is based in the statement that human resources, like any
other resources of the organisation, have to be obtained cheaply, used carefully,
developed and exploited as fully as possible. (Druker et al, 1996) The matching model is
an expansion of Chandler‟s (1962) argument that an organisation‟s structure is an
outcome of its strategy, emphasising the need for a tight fit between organisational
strategy, organisational structure and HRM system. (Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990)
Fombrun‟s framework emphasizes that both organisation structure and HRM are
dependent on the organisation strategy. The main goal for HR is to develop a suitable
system that will contribute most efficiently to the implementation of business strategies.
13
(Druker et al, 1996; Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990; Ishak, Abdullah and Ramli, 2011) This
model is focused on systems, functions and processes, being closer to strategic
management concept. (Hendry and Pettigrew, 1990)
The framework has been criticised for a number of reasons. The emphases in the tight fit
between organisational strategy and HR strategies suggest that the model ignores the
interest of employees, and therefore considers HRM as having an inert and reactive
function. (Guest, 1987) It also fails to perceive the potential for a reciprocal relationship
between HR strategy and organisational strategy (Lengnick-Hall and Lengnick-Hall,
1988). The idea of „tight fit‟ makes the organisation inflexible, incapable of adapting to
required changes and for this reason does not fit to today‟s dynamic business
environment.( Storey, 2001) The matching model also failed to see the „human‟ aspect of
human resources, reason why it has been called a „hard‟ model of HRM (Guest, 1987;
Storey, 2001). Despite the many criticisms, however, the matching model can be used in
mass production industry where minimizing labour costs is essential for gaining
competitive advantage. It also deserves credit for providing an initial framework for
further development of the Strategic HRM. (Drucker et al, 1996)
On the other hand, Beer and his colleagues developed in 1984 the „Harvard framework‟
stressing the „human‟ aspect of HRM, being more concerned with the relationship
between employer and employees, reason why is termed „soft‟ HRM. (Druker et al, 1996)
The model highlights the value of the workers and considers them a source of
competitive advantage, focusing on getting a positive human response via appropriate
communication, motivation techniques and leadership style. (Ishak, Abdullah, and Ramli,
2011) Harvard framework also emphasises the interests of different stakeholders in the
organisation
(such
as
shareholders,
management,
employee
groups,
government,
community and unions) and how their interests are related to the objectives of
management, shaping HR policies and procedures. (Armstrong, 2012; Druker et al, 1996)
According to Armstrong (2012) Beer and his colleagues were pioneers in appointing that
line managers were responsible for ensuring the alignment of competitive strategy and
14
HR policies, being HR managers responsible for setting its policies and for implementing
it.
Even though Hard and Soft HRM propose two different approaches, the literature affirms
that they are more “complementary rather than reciprocally exclusive practices”.
(Armstrong, 2012, p. 181) Ishak, Abdullah, and Ramli (2011, p. 213) affirm that the
mixture of soft and hard HRM are, indeed, what build the organization, stating that
organizations are made up of systems, process, structures and people and its
effectiveness depends, to a large extent, on the appropriateness of system,
structures and processes, as well as the functional orientations. But ultimately
organizational effectiveness depends on the quality of its human resources.
In the last thirty years the HRM field has been experiencing great developments and
changes, which are results of a number of factors such as changing in the workforce,
growing competition (as reflect of globalization), slow economic growth in some
developed
nations,
increasing
recognition
of
the
HRM‟s
contribution
to
the
organizations‟ performance. (Armstrong, 2012; Boxall and Purcell, 2003; Gunnigle,
Heraty and Morley, 2011) The debate relating to the nature of HRM continues to be a
controversial topic in literature, although the focus has changed.
It begun by outlining differences between Personnel Management and HR (Lengnick-
Hall and Lengnick-Hall, 1988); progressing in a attempt to incorporate Industrial
Relations into HR (Torrington et al., 2011); going further in examining the relationship
of HRM strategies, the integration of HRM into business strategies and the devolvement
of HRM to line managers. Nowadays scholars are considering that HRM can act as a key
element to help organization achieve competitive advantage. (Barney, 1991)
This late stage has been called “Strategic Human Resource Management” (SHRM).
(Price 2007; Dessler, 2011; Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2011; Wright and McMahan,
2011) Featured by Beer and Fombrum, (Armstrong, 2012) it reflects a shift of emphasis
15
from operating efficiency of individual employees to managerial efficiency of the whole
organization. Bringing a more flexible way to arrange and utilize the human resources,
SHRM emphasize the relationship between Human Resource management systems as
solutions to business rather than individual HR management practices. (Wright and
McMahan, 2011) The focus is on organizational performance rather than individual
performance in order to achieve organizational goals and therefore, help the organization
gain sustainable competitive advantage. (Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2011)
In most of its history, Human Resources (HR) has generally focused on the
administrative aspects except lately, when HRM became a strategic business support.
(Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2011) The core functions of HRM are still the same:
hiring,
performance
management,
organization‟s
development,
compensation,
motivation, safety, wellness, benefits and rewards, communication, administration and
training. (Armstrong, 2012) But new tasks came to refresh the HRM role and recognize
the importance of this area for the organization‟s development. (Dessler, 2011) As a
concept, contemporary HRM is viewed as involving all activities to manage the
relationship between employees and organization. (Boxall and Purcell, 2003) or simply
defined as being “concerned with all aspects of how people are employed and managed in
organizations”. (Armstrong, 2012, p. 4)
2. Generations: personal and work characteristics
As explained above, over the last decade HR functions have been relentlessly evolving,
shifting from the traditional personnel function towards the „people and performance‟
approach, being inserted into the heart of the business through the Strategic HRM.
(Armstrong, 2012; Dessler, 2011; Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2011) All these changes
are responsible for shaping the human resources management science and are results of
many factors: labour market, generational workers, globalization, technology sector
where the organization is inserted, competition, economy trends and challenges, and so
on. (Myers and Sadaghiani, 2010)
16
In this paper we are concerned about how Generation Y challenges HRM. As members of
this generation continue to enter the workplace, there is widespread speculation and some
concern about how management can best motivate them to extract their best performance
and commitment since they are the future of the organization. To answer this question
and to be able to fully comprehend generation Y and know why it differs so greatly from
others, it is important first to understand what a generation is and review the previous
cohorts.
There are numerous definitions of Generation. Kupperschmidt (2000, cited in Smola and
Sutton, 2002) defines generation as an identifiable group which shares birth years, age,
location and significant life events at decisive developmental periods. Manheim (1952,
cited in Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007) states that what defines a generation is the
similar world view, as a result of the exposure to common social and historical events
occurring within the same times throughout their formative years. Barford and Hester
(2011) categorize generations as those born within the same historical period of time and
culture. Crumpacker and Crumpacker (2007) add that birth rate along with historical
events define each generation, arguing that similar life experiences of individuals
belonging to generational group tend to shape their unique characteristics, aspirations,
and expectations.
While not every member of a generation has necessarily personally experienced each of
that generation’s defining events, all members of a specific generation are normally
recognized as having a shared awareness of or an appreciation for the events common to
that generation. (Howe and Strauss, 1992)
In sum, the literature shows two common elements distinguishing a generation: the birth
rate and significant life events. (Barford and Hester, 2011) Crumpacker and Crumpacker
(2007) explain the beginning and the end of a generation affirming that when the birth
rate boosts and then remains stable indicates the beginning of a new generation and when
the birth rate of a newly formed generation begins to decline it marks the end of that
17
generation. The most recent generations, according o Wong et al. (2008), are: Veterans
(1925-1944), Baby Boomers (1945-1964), Gen X (1965-1979) and Gen Y (1980-2000).
2.1.
Veterans
Veterans were born between the period of 1925 and 1944. (Cogin, 2012) They are the
oldest generation in the workplace, although the majority is now retired. Also known as
Traditionalist, Silents (Silent generation) or the “Greatest Generation” they witnessed the
Great Depression and two world wars. (Tolbize, 2008) They grew up in a highly
structured society, with formal roles where men work and married women stay home to
raise the children. (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007)
Veterans are considered to be loyal to their employer, to have a strong work ethic, to
prefer a top-down management with clear lines of authority, to follow directions and to
be risk- averse. They judge money as a motivator, considering it an award for their hard
work. (Cogin, 2012; Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007)
2.2.
Baby boomers
Called baby boomers because of the boom in their births, 1945 to 1964, (Smola and
Sutton, 2002) this generation witnessed significant events that shaped their values, such
as the social revolution of the 1960s, the sexual revolution, the landing on the moon, the
substantial role of television within society, the Vietnam War and the high inflation of the
1980s. (Cogin, 2012; Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007; O‟Bannon, 2001)
Baby boomers respect authority, but unlike the previous generation they are averse to
authoritarian management and want to be viewed as an equal. (Cogin, 2012) They value
status symbols and face-to-face communication and abhor laziness. (Smola and Sutton,
2002) Boomers have strong social skills while lacking technical skills, they are consider
to
be
excellent
networkers,
loyal
to
employers,
competitive,
self reliant and
individualistic. (Wallace, 2006; Smola and Sutton, 2002)
18
Working from outside office (via virtual office, phone or in a remote location) is viewed
as unproductive work environment. Such benefits should be earned and can be offered to
an employee who works longer in the organization. (Cogin, 2012) They measure success
materially and believe that work and personal sacrifice drives financial success.
(Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007) Boomers consider themselves harder workers than
the younger generation because they work long hours – 8am to 6pm every day – (Cogin,
2012, p. 2275) often becoming workaholics. (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007; Glass,
2007)
The lifetime career with only one organization shifted away after the recession in the
1980s when businesses were downsized and reorganized. Because of this, Baby Boomers
became characterized as free agents in the workplace, highly competitive micromanagers
with a positive behaviour towards professional growth. (Barford and Hester, 2011, p.65-
66)
2.3.
Generation X
Generation X, Gen X or Xers were born between the 1965 and 1979 (Barford and Hester,
2011). The life events that had a profound impact were the HIV as a pandemic, oral
contraceptive pills, the 1973 oil crisis, the Cold War, the introduction of computers and
the Internet. (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007)
Gen X grew up with both parents in the workforce or in a divorced household and, as a
result, they became independent at a young age (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007).
Smola and Sutton (2002) state that this generation has lack of solid traditions, describing
them as experiencing social insecurity, rapidly changing surroundings and for distancing
themselves from companies just as the Baby Boomers did, making them distrustful of
organizations. Generation X entered the workforce competing with the Baby Boomers for
jobs during the 1980s‟ recession, which made many of these individuals cynical towards
the older generation. (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007)
19
They distinguish strongly from the previous generations because “their approach to work
has been characterised as one that values a strong work-life balance […], whereby
personal values and goals are likely to be regarded as more important than work-related
goals”. (Wong et al., 2008, p.4)
2.4.
Generation Y
There is no consensus when Generation Y either begins or ends, but prevalent literature
agrees on beginning in 1980‟s and ending in 2000‟s. (Barford and Hester, 2011;
Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007; Smola and Sutton, 2002) The relevant events that
Generation Y experienced were the fall of the Berlin Wall, (Crumpacker and
Crumpacker, 2007), Columbine High School shootings, 9/11 terrorist attacks, more
frequent natural disasters and the obesity epidemic. (Barford and Hester, 2011) Also
known as “Millennials”, “Net Generation”, “Yers”, “Echo boomers”, “Millenniums”,
“Generation Next” or “Nexters”, (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007; Barford and
Hester, 2011; Martin, 2005) this generation has seen more substantial life-changing
events early on than any other cohorts. (Martin, 2005)
Cogin (2012) describes Millennials as independent, confident, and self-reliant. Although
considered confident and high maintenance, (Barford and Hester, 2011) Yers need a
constant approval, reason why Crumpacker and Crumpacker (2007) affirm that
Generation Y has an emotionally needy personality. This may be due to the extensive
protection and praise given to them throughout their formative years (Crumpacker and
Crumpacker, 2007). Glass (2007) states that Generation Y has grown up with „helicopter
parents‟ who stayed close to their children, trying to supervise the education and social
activities. This involvement has stretched to the college years and reached the workplace.
(Cogin, 2012, p. 2288)
Because of the active role of parents in Yers‟ life, Tuglan (2009) concludes that Gen Y
employees need a strong, not a weak, leadership. They need clear directions and
management assistance for tasks, while expecting freedom to get the job done via
20
empowerment. (Martin, 2005) They expected daily feedback to stay on track – or get
back on track – quickly. (Cogin, 2012) Millenniums abhor top-down management,
preferring an interactivity, two-way communication and engagement with their managers.
(Cogin, 2012)
Martin (2005) classifies them as being frank and expresses their opinion. Raised by
parents who wanted to be friends with their children, members of generation Y are used
to seeing their elders as peers rather than authority figures (Matchar, 2012) which does
not mean that they do not respect authority. Here is a generation that respects their
superiors and their co-workers but also believe that respect should come from both sides.
(Loiola, 2009)
Nexters do not hesitate in expressing their opinion and they want to be heard. When they
want something, Yers are not afraid to ask. (Matchar, 2012) This generation has learnt to
negotiate the best deals in ways that older generations would never have conceived
(Martin 2005). They seek a portable career and greater degrees of personal flexibility and
are not shy to say so. (Glass, 2007) Next generation has less respect for rank, valuing
more ability and accomplishment and will trade pay for work that is more meaningful at a
company where they feel appreciated. (Martin 2005)
Possibly the major difference that Gen Y have over other cohorts is the integration of
technology into their everyday lives and the perception of how technology has always
been in their world. (Martin, 2005) Crumpacker and Crumpacker (2007, p. 354) argue
that because of Gen Y have comfort with technology, multitasking for them “e.g., talking
on the mobile phone while typing on the computer and listening to music through an i-
Pod” is considered a norm.
Ibsen (2012) through research concludes that companies that decide to block certain
websites can be lacking in understanding the generation Y. Such time can increase
motivation and productivity. In a survey developed in 13 countries by Accenture (2010),
an management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, exploring
21
how Gen Y uses technology in their personal/professional lives has indicated that they
expect to use their own technology/devices in the workplace and 45% of Millennials
(globally) use social networking sites at work, even if there is a corporate policy
prohibiting it. Nexters understand that if work can invade private life (such as answering
e-mail, taking work calls), why private time should not invade the workplace. (Cogin,
2012) Accenture‟s 2010 survey indicates that companies that “fail to embrace Millennial
behaviour are at risk of failing to attract and retain new hires, while also seeing their
competitive edge erode from lack of innovation in information technology”.
At workplace, Generation Y exhibits the tendency for working in teams while being
collaborative, results-oriented individuals and having an interest for pressure.(Barford
and Hester, 2011) Martin (2005) calls them “high maintenance” because they are thrived
on the adrenaline rush of new challenges and new opportunities, demanding managers
learn their capabilities rapidly and push them to their limits. This high maintenance can
lead to high productivity. (Martin, 2005)
Researchers have found that members of Generation Y work well alone, but work better
together. (Martin, 2005) In this sense, Salgado (2009) argues that members of generation
Y are surrounded by large amount of information which surpasses the human capacity to
store all of it. Therefore, knowledge has to be shared, stimulating conversation and teams
work, where collaboration is necessary to build as mutual intelligence.
Technology as the way it is now enables knowledge to be made and constructed globally
and in a collective way. Studies of differences of generations point that previous
generations, baby boomers and Gen X, used to centre their innovation‟s capacity more
individually and locally and were more goals oriented. On the other hand, members of
Generation Y tend to act more globally and rely in group work. They build a more
integrated net of knowledge where different patches play an important part in their
everyday role at work. (Salgado, 2009)
22
Whereas members of previous generation normally stayed longer in an organization,
(Cogin, 2012) Gen Y expects to change jobs often during their lifetime, especially if their
talents are not fully utilized. (Morton, 2002) Barford and Hester (2011) argue that Gen Y
seeks permanent learning and expect in-house training to continue marketability. The top
priority when choosing a job is to do what they love. In a research conducted by Asthana
in 2008, ‘earning lots of money’ was in seventh place and when it came to leave an
employment, the lack of motivation was the first reason followed by a work-life balance
leaning too far towards the job.
They have seen their parents working long hours in stressful jobs and they realised that
working hard for a big companies apparently does not bring wealth and happiness nor
make the world a better place. (Asthana, 2008) They aim for a work/life balance to
achieve professional fulfilment and personal freedom (Crumpacker and Crumpacker,
2007), but if they have to choose between family/friends and work, the will not hesitate
to choose the first. (Cogin, 2012) Work is just one priority in life, not the priority. (Smola
and Sutton 2002)
This detachment can be explained by the lack of a significant downturn in the economy
over the past decade and a half. As Asthana (2008) reports: “Here is a group that has
never known, or even witnessed hardship, recession or mass unemployment and does not
fear redundancy or repossession”.
In terms of schooling, the contradictory children of Baby Boomers believe education is
the key to success. (Martin 2005) Generation Y employees typically enter the workplace
well educated in terms of quality and quantity of schooling but have substandard
communication and problem-solving skills. (Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007) Martin
(2005) argues that they have preference for instant messaging, text messaging and e-
mails, finding it more comfortable and easier to send a quick e-mail or other digital
message than having a face-to-face conversation or making a call. Glass (2007)
concludes that Yers over reliance on e-mail has not helped the development of social
23
skills. The strong technical skills are not matched with strong social skills or independent
thinking. (Martin, 2005)
For the first time in modern society, four distinct generations of people are interacting in
the same workplace, (Martin and Tulgan, 2006) bringing numerous challenges to the
work environment because different generations have different values and expectations,
placing emphasis on distinct things. (Bartle, Ladd and Morris, 2007; Lieber, 2010)
Schultz and Schwepker (2012) questioned if organizations have to rethink work
environments, supervisory styles and methods of rewards and recognition to be prepared
for Millenniums. Cogin (2012) argues that Gen Y are the future of the organizations and
therefore it is HRM duty to develop policies and strategies that suits this – and every
generation
of
employees,
seeking
their well-being and also exploit their best
performance. In this sense, Lieber (2010, p. 86) points out that organizations have the
opportunity to take advantage on the assets of each generation for competitive advantage.
As discussed before, Gen Y prioritizes personal life to work, prefer non-hierarchical
structure, they need constant feedback and challenging tasks once they get bored easily
(Cumpacker and Cumpacker, 2007; Cogin, 2012; Martin, 2005).They prefer hands-on
leadership and managers who deserve to be in that position not for being older but for
being hard worker (Howe and Strauss, 2000). In response, HRM should develop policies
that allow employees to take time off; flexi-hours and appropriate workplace; prioritize
flatter organization structure with less hierarchy, being team-oriented; (Schultz and
Schwepker, 2012) design jobs with challenging tasks to avoid boredom and increase
commitment; have a supportive managerial style allowing free conversation and give
constant feedback and support. (Cogin, 2012; Martin and Tulgan, 2006)
24
3.
Workplace: a changing environment
The evolving of HRM was greatly influenced by the changes perceived in the work
environment which, in turn, is influenced by employees working in the organization. If
we compare the workplace from the Industrial revolution up to now we barely will find
similarities. (Maitland and Thomson, 2011) The discussion of the changes in the work
environment in the past few years have been intensified especially due to the new
workforce entering the workplace, mixed generation, globalization and technology.
(Armstrong, 2012; Crumpacker and Crumpacker, 2007; Maitland and Thomson, 2011;
Parker et al, 2001)
Influenced by technology (especially internet) that broke barriers of distance and time
and by the change in the workforce, new models of work have been emerging but still
facing obstacles in many organizations that expect employees to be present at their
workplace for fixed period of time and to be paid in fixed amounts. (Maitland and
Thomson, 2011)
The shift from large-scale industrial production (manufacturing jobs) to service work
increased the interactivity between employees and final customers and also enlarged
requirements of customized products and the need for flexibility to response to this
consumer‟s needs. (Parker et al, 2001) It broadened the variety of demographics of
workforce (increased number of women and ethnic diversity); brought to the workplace
more educated employees (professionals), increased dependability on IT to make the
work possible and shifted from traditional office/factory-based work to more flexible
options, such as home working. (Maitland and Thomson, 2011)
Through all these changes, many organizations still maintain some retrograde concepts
about employment. Maitland and Thomson (2011, p.2) emphasizes that “many
organizations remain stuck with a model of employment and management that were
appropriate for work in the nineteenth and twentieth century, but not for the twenty-first”.
25
3.1.
Retail environment
The retail environment has unique characteristics when compared to other organizations.
(Schultz and Schwepker, 2012) Issues such as interaction between professionals, work
performance expectations, job behaviours (Menguc, Sang-Lin and Seigyoung, 2007) and
pay schemes (commission and / or bonus) all together, create a completely distinctive
environment in which work conditions and structure vary greatly from other business.
(Schultz and Schwepker, 2012)
Because this sector depends heavily in its workforce to achieve its goals, they have to
develop an environment that will engage and motivate its employees. (Lassk and
Shepherd, 2013)
3.2. Job design
Job design has been object of several researches in the work motivation field (Bratton and
Gold, 2012) because special attention has to be paid in how employers organise and
design work that has to be done. (Armstrong, 2012) Scholars have traditionally defined
job as group of tasks (Armstrong, 2009) and job design as “the process of putting
together a range of tasks, duties and responsibilities”. (Torrington, et al., 2011, p.84) Job
design is, indeed, intrinsically linked to employees‟ performance, satisfaction and
motivation. (Gunnigle, Heraty and Morley, 2006)
Job design is usually considered to have begun with scientific management, around the
1900‟s century. (Bratton and Gold, 2012) Pioneering scientific management such as
Taylor (1911) systematically divided the labour into simple jobs, narrowing defined tasks
(job fragmentation). Although criticized, this model has still been applied in some sector
of our society, especially in manual work where there is no room for decision-makers and
the motivation is done by money. (Bratton and Gold, 2012; Torrington, et al., 2011)
Maslow (1940) shifted away from the idea of „man as machine‟ (Bratton and Gold, 2012)
to the recognition that employees have needs, beyond economic ones, and suggested a
hierarchy of needs such as social and self-esteem as motivators. In this sense, new
