Generational Diversity And Its Impact On Organizational Development Strategy

The Matures

Discuss about the Generational Diversity and Its Impact on Organizational Development Strategy.

The workplace is continuously becoming more varied and poses more trials for the human resource managers of today. Misunderstandings are becoming a common occurrence among generational workers, it has become more problematic and still growing. This is because of a difference in work value amongst the different generations. Managing this miscellany in the workplace requires that the Human resource managers comprehend and relate effectually with people who are different from themselves. The ability of personnel to build harmony and strength through their diversity is the muscle propelling these institutions into new magnitudes of performance. (Notter, 2009)

Deliberations of office diversity in countries such as the United States tend to commence on topics such as race, sexuality, gender, ethnicity and disability. Establishments that desire to flourish in the future necessitates having a workforce and leaders who are mindful of and experienced enough to deal with the differences along the said identity lines.

Another important diversity that is usually overlooked is the generational difference which is the main point of focus. In a majority of large institutions, you are likely to find units, work teams, and divisions, where at least distinctive age group is functioning side by side. Researchers have recognized vital variances amid these generations in the way they approach everyday jobs at the workplace, employee allegiance, and authority (Sweetman, 2004).

In the older days, many generations while employed in the same organization were apart from each other due to the nature of their job descriptions, and the groups ranking. Currently, four generations exist at the workplace. These four generations work side by side leading to the occurrence of glitches due to the difference in the ages. Workers from the same generations share work ideals, these ideals commonly differ for a different generation to generation. This includes opinions concerning leadership, authority, and goals at the workplace.

A generation refers to a set of individuals who are defined by their age limits. People born in a given period. These people share related familiarities growing up, and their ethics and approaches, especially towards work related ventures tend to be alike (Debra Dupree, 2009). This is by their collective experience during their formative years. This is because of the variations within the generations is enormous. The general features of each age group prove to be valuable in the management of the multiplicity at the workplace; this is because it helps people comprehend their own and others’ expectations about how establishments should operate and how individuals should treat each other.

Boomers

The Cohort theory states that interests are evident in the effect of generational dissimilarities in the workplace. Work beliefs may vary hence impacting a related age at a point in time (Parry, 2014). Today’s workforce comprises of four generations. Matures, the Boomers, Generation x and the Millennials.

This is the generation that was conceived before the commencement of the World War two.  Many still have memories of the Great Depression. Many of these individuals have already retired, and this category of workers account for only approximately 5 percent of the workforce currently. An important factor to know is that even though the individuals in this group account for only 5 percent of the workforce, they are in high-ranking positions and exercise substantial power. They are highly swayed by family and conviction; this generation view education as a dream and holiday time are taken to be a compensation for hard work (Underwood, 2007). Many are not comfortable with change and focus on being stable. This generation is characterized by the values such as dedication, hard work, sacrifice, conformity, respect for the authorities and law and order.

This generation consists of those individuals born between 1940 to1960s. The group grew up through a time of fortune (in the 50s), then twisted into the time of social turmoil (in the 60s and 70s). Currently, this group comprises of those aged between forty and sixty years old. This category of individuals account for 45 percent of the labor force; they are more than any other known generation. They are referred to as the generation of the ‘self-absorbed,’ flaunting the individual’s capability of accomplishing whatever he/she sets out to achieve. The generation practices their parent’s hard work beliefs more to the people benefit rather than the company’s interest. The generation of this era experienced an evolution in the solidity of the household. However, education was taken to be a right rather than a dream. The important values that are attributed to this generation include team alignment, optimism, personal fulfillment, personal growth and development, involvement, youth and work (Johnson & Johnson, 2010).

The beginning of this age bracket into the labor force coincides with the identification of the dissimilarities in generations in the workplace. Early in the 1990s, some articles were being written which were describing the emerging force as it moved to employment at that time, with some doubt and frustration. This generation comprises of individuals born between the 1960s and 1980s. Currently, this generation is aged between 20 to 40 years. This number is slightly lower than that of the boomers. They account for only 40 percent of employment. The generation entered the labor force after the first wave corporate downscaling, their approach to the workplace lacked loyalty, and the individuals had a strong entrepreneurial soul (Potter, 2015).

Generation X

This is the newest entrants in the workforce. Born after 1980, these individuals are more than 22 years of age and occupy only 10 percent of the workforce. In this generation leisure is also a part of their work life. These individual are flexible and are more contented with variety. This is the internet generation, raised around PCs. They value achievement and are very social and confident (Mehta, 2009).

The impact of generational diversity on organizational development strategy

Range, as a subcategory of corporate growth, continues to achieve substantial status, especially in the last 15 years. Identification of generational Metamorphoses has just of late come to the forefront as a vital issue for crafting a well organizational vibrant. Therefore, this is a new edge for corporate improvement approach and offers untapped opportunities (Matthew Legas, 2011).

Flexibility in the administrative arrangement is a vital constituent for taking on generational diversities. New organizational development agendas and strategies will have to advance to reflect this necessity. Like in most theories, it will be subservient for executives to take into account the wishes of the modern business environment and employees. It is likely to prove fascinating in comparing the various emerging diversities in the workplace (Geisman, 2005).

The indication is to make it conceivable for the individuals within a particular organization to be able collaboratively to succeed the ethos of that setting in a manner that the goals and purposes of the establishment are achieved, and at the same time, social values of people within the institution are furthered. Individuals in the workplace are also urged to be self-aware, this creates the baseline from which people in the organization work (Rood, 2010). People first need to apprehend their filters in which their needs and morals are entrenched. The individuals then will need to comprehend the needs and values of other generations in common.

Generational variance is a lens through which the common behavioral trends and practices in the organization are observed. Specifically, communication styles, ethics of work, management style, interactions, and the workplace enterprise. All these are influenced by the culture of the establishment. Therefore, an application of the empathetic of how these are subjective by generational values backs the foundation of effective intermediation formulas in the institution (Kister, 2012).

The critical issue that diversity deals within current organizations is difficult for some even to visualize and consider. The ability of an organization to make good use of a mixture of human and additional resources to create a unique blend of focused policy results, by its nature, develops an inventive progression that’s hard to copy. This creates a competitive benefit which is obscure to other competitors. A business that makes use of this generational diversity as a strategy keeps its competitive edge sharp for a long time making the generational difference the primary source for workable, economic potential.

While applying strategies to effectively face the generational differences, it is imperative that one ensures that the performance prospects remain persistent to eradicate the presence of favoritism. All workers should have a perfect understanding of expectations. Both of their very own positions, and their behavior in the working place. The management should set consistent performance standards which should employees fail to meet; corrective action is taken by agency’s practices.

The most dominant correlation in the workplace is the member of staff and his/her supervisor. Managers can profit from on this facilitating open communication within employees themselves to bridge the gap between different generations that exist in the workplace.

While several managers have acknowledged the fact that there is a shifting demographic in today’s labor force, it is vital that the administration capitalizes on the variation by applying approaches to address the different prerequisites of the different generations.

References

Debra Dupree. (2009). Four GenerationS,one workplace, the first time ever. Generational Diversity, 1-10.

Geisman, J. (2005). Organizational Development and The Power of Generational Differences. Learning & organizational effectiveness programs with bottom line results, 4-5.

Johnson, M., & Johnson, L. (2010). Generations, Inc. : from boomers to linksters–managing the friction between generations at work. New York: New York : AMACOM, ©2010.

Kister, C. (2012). Intergenerational Communication In An Organizational Setting. A Senior Project Presented to The Faculty of the Communication Studies DepartmentSan Luis Obispo, 76.

Matthew Legas. (2011). Leveraging Generational Diversity in today’s workplace. Online Journal for Workforce Education and Development, 1-2.

Mehta, A. (2009). Organizational Development. New Delhi: Global India Publications PVT Limited.

Notter, J. (2009). Generational Diversity in the Workplace. The Multi Cultural Advantage, 1-3.

Parry, E. (2014). General Diversity at work. London: Routledge.

Potter, J. (2015). Crisis at work : identity and the end of career. New York: Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; New York, NY : Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.

Rood, S. (2010). Understanding Generational Diversity in the Workplace. Journal of Tourism Insights, 1-3.

Sweetman, C. (2004). Gender, development and diversity. Oxford: Oxfam.

Underwood, C. (2007). The generational imperative : understanding generational differences in the workplace, marketplace and living room. North Charleston: North Charleston, SC : BookSurge, ©2007.