Looking Beyond the Generation Myth
I recently conducted a membership survey for an organization I volunteer with, and the subject of workplace generations was a major theme of curiosity. For years, workplace generations have been studied, written about, taught, analyzed, and discussed. I've listened to many speakers and read numerous articles on this subject, many of them informative and insightful.
However, after analyzing the survey results, I began to critically evaluate whether workplace generations truly shape the workforce as much as we assume. My conclusion? The concept of workplace generations lacks empirical support.
While generational discussions provide a convenient framework for marketing or workforce planning, their scientific basis is weak. A more effective approach is to focus on psychological and behavioral trends rather than broad generational labels.
Workplace Generations as We Know Them Today:
Silent Generation (Post-WWII) – Born before 1946
Baby Boomers – Born 1946 to 1964
Gen X – Born 1965 to 1980
Millennials (Gen Y) – Born 1981 to 1996
Gen Z – Born 1997 to present
Generation Alpha – Born 2010 to 2025
To clear the air, research from the Journal of Business and Psychology and Harvard Business Review suggests that the differences between individuals within a generation are often greater than the differences between generations. The true driving forces behind workforce shifts are cultural, technological, and economic evolutions—not generational labels. From my perspective, there have been three significant workforce evolutions.
1. The Post-War Evolution – Shaped by the Silent Generation & Baby Boomers
Following World War II, the U.S. underwent a massive industrial and economic boom. This period brought significant advancements in manufacturing, urbanization, corporate employment, and workplace structure.
The rise of large corporations and assembly-line efficiency shaped a workforce that valued stability, hierarchy, and long-term employment.
The 40-hour workweek, first introduced by Henry Ford, became the standard during this period, reinforcing the idea of work-life structure.
Labor unions gained power, leading to improvements in wages, benefits, and worker protection.
This era solidified the traditional corporate structure and workplace expectations that influenced future generations.
2. The Information Evolution – Shaped by Gen X & Early Millennials
The emergence of personal computing and the internet shifted the U.S. economy from industrial-based to a knowledge-driven workforce.
The rise of technology (PCs, email, cell phones, and later, the internet) revolutionized communication, efficiency, and remote work possibilities.
Globalization expanded markets, requiring a more mobile, adaptable workforce.
Job loyalty declined, as corporate downsizing, mergers, and economic recessions made lifelong employment less feasible.
Workplace independence became valued—Gen X favored self-reliance and flexibility over rigid corporate structures.
This evolution set the foundation for digital transformation and modern workplace flexibility.
3. The Social Evolution – Shaped by Late Millennials & Gen Z
The rise of social media, influencer culture, and digital activism has profoundly transformed how we communicate, work, and engage with society.
Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, and Twitter have reshaped personal branding, recruitment, and workplace visibility.
Corporate values now matter more—employees and consumers expect companies to take stances on social issues.
Workplace flexibility skyrocketed, with remote and hybrid models becoming a norm post-pandemic.
The expectation for diverse, inclusive workplaces has grown, influencing hiring, retention, and corporate culture.
This era emphasized personal fulfillment, digital fluency, and social consciousness in workplace expectations.
The Overgeneralization Trap
Generational stereotypes may hold some truth in broad studies, but they often fail at the individual level. Here are a few common misconceptions:
"Gen Z is lazy and job-hops frequently." Job-hopping has always been common among younger workers. Culture and leadership determine tenure far more than birth year.
"Millennials need constant validation." Many employees across generations appreciate recognition—leaders should focus on meaningful feedback, not generational assumptions.
"Boomers resist technology." Some do, but others are highly tech-savvy. Learning ability is driven by cognitive flexibility, not age.
"Gen X is the 'forgotten middle child.'" While not discussed as often, they lead many of today’s businesses and thrive in entrepreneurial spaces.
We all know Gen Z employees with stronger work ethics than some Boomers and Boomers who adapt to new tech faster than Millennials. People are shaped more by experience, values, and personal drive than by their birth year.
Hiring for People, Not Stereotypes
After years in hiring and recruiting, I can confidently say I have never had a meaningful conversation where someone’s "generation" was a deciding factor.
Instead of assuming a Gen Z candidate will "ghost" an employer or a Boomer can’t learn new technology, recruiters should focus on:
Behavioral fit – Does the candidate's natural working style match the role?
Cognitive ability – Can they learn the skills needed to excel?
Experience – Have they been a practitioner or merely a participant in past roles?
The Real Workplace Dividers Aren’t Generations
If we’re looking for meaningful workplace differences, they aren’t generational. Instead, they are based on:
Industry & Job Function – A Gen Z accountant may have more in common with a Boomer accountant than a Gen Z marketer.
Work Ethic & Values – Some employees prioritize stability, while others thrive on change. Personality matters more than birth year.
Career Stage & Behavioral Drives – A 25-year-old and a 50-year-old with similar ambition may share more traits than two same-generation peers.
When we focus on workplace behaviors instead of age-based assumptions, we create stronger, more inclusive teams.
Let’s Shift the Conversation
Discussing workplace generations is entertaining at conferences, but it shouldn’t dictate how we hire or lead. Instead, we should prioritize:
Hiring for Cognitive and Behavioral Fit – This reduces turnover more effectively than any generational approach.
Understanding Individual Motivations – Work ethic and drive matter more than age.
Evaluating Skills Thoughtfully – Talent is important, but high-cognitive individuals can learn quickly.
Prioritizing Cultural Alignment – Does this person fit the mission and values of the organization?
Final Thoughts
Generations influence culture, but they don’t define individuals. The best employees—regardless of their birth year—are the ones who show up, engage, and add value.
Rather than using generational labels to predict workplace behavior, let’s focus on people. Work ethic, motivation, and personality are shaped by experience, values, and drive—and that’s where hiring and leadership efforts should be focused.
Ready to make a cultural impact? Learn more about our academy or pick an upcoming event that works for you!