In order to ensure harmonious relationships in the workplace, work values of different generational cohorts need to be investigated and understood.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the work values of a South African sample from a generational perspective, in order to foster an understanding of the similarities and differences of different generational cohorts in terms of work values.
Understanding the work values of different generational cohorts could assist organisations to manage and retain human capital in an increasingly competitive environment. Furthermore, it could assist organisations to develop an advanced understanding of employee behaviour, which should inform conflict-resolution strategies to deal with reported conflict between different generational cohorts.
The study was conducted within the positivist paradigm and was quantitative in nature. Data were gathered from 301 employees representing three different generational cohorts, namely the Baby Boomers, Generation X and Generation Y. A cross-sectional study was conducted, and data were collected once off by means of the Values Scale. The psychometric properties of the Values Scale have a reliability coefficient of 0.95, and the scale has been applied successfully in various iterations.
The findings indicate statistically significant differences and similarities between the various generational cohorts in terms of work values. More specifically, similarities and differences between the various generational cohorts were observed with regard to the values of authority, creativity, risk and social interaction in the work context.
Organisations can use the findings of the study to strengthen employee interaction within the work environment. In addition, the findings can be used to inform retention and management strategies, in order to ensure harmonious relationships in the workplace.
The study contributes to the literature on South African generational cohorts and work values.
Considerable interest has been generated globally by researchers regarding the impact of generational differences on employee interaction in the workplace. This is due to the assertion that multicultural environments combined with multigenerational workforces create additional organisational stumbling blocks for global leadership (Roongrerngsuke & Liefooghe,
A generation is defined as a distinguishable group that shares a similar birth year and age, and, consequently, noteworthy life events at critical developmental stages (Kupperschmidt,
Work values are pivotal, as they represent what is perceived as important by different individuals, as well as by generational cohorts. They represent changes over time, and they provide justification for opinions and behaviour (Popovska, Latkovic, Jakimovski & Popovski,
Despite the importance of generational differences with respect to work values, there is a paucity of research on this topic, particularly in the South African context. Globally, in terms of values, it has been found that Generation Y and Generation X value financial stability, community leadership and residing close to family, friends and relatives (Twenge, Campbell & Freeman,
To date, there is a dearth of research studies focusing on the work values of different generations within the South African context. In light of the above, the purpose of this study was to investigate the work values of a South African sample from a generational perspective, in order to foster an understanding of the similarities and differences of different generational cohorts in terms of work values. Specifically, the research objective of the study was to determine the generational differences in terms of work values for a South African sample. The secondary objective was to establish whether generational cohorts differ with regard to the work values that they perceive as important. The research objective was tested by the following hypothesis: ‘There is a statistically significant difference between the various generational cohorts in terms of work values in the South African work environment’. The secondary hypothesis of the study is: ‘Generational cohorts differ with regard to the work values that they perceive as important’.
Generational differences can be studied from the perspective of generational cohort theory, which is widely regarded as a theory of social history elaborating on longitudinal fluctuations in generational and public attitudes (Wolf, Carpenter & Qenani-Petrela,
Generational cohort research is based on the premise that each generation experiences a common distinctive combination of circumstances and environmental forces that are prevalent during their formative years (Bevan-Dye,
Four generational cohorts are identified, namely the Traditionalists (1930–1949), the Baby Boomers (1946–1964), Generation X (1965–1981) and Generation Y, also referred to as the Millennials (1982–2000) (Gursoy, Maier & Chi,
The Baby Boomer generation was exposed to some form of violence and social conflict, because this period had its onset in the wake of World War II (Drago,
Generation X came of age during the social and economic turmoil that the previous generational cohort left in its wake, and they had to strike out on their own in a challenging economic period (Sessa et al.,
Generation Y grew up at a time when everything was technologically connected (Sessa et al.,
The concept of values seems to be well researched globally, with various definitions of the concept having been offered over time. The following detailed definition of values is offered: values refer to ‘desirable states, objects, goals, or behaviours, transcending specific situations and applied as normative standards to judge and to choose among alternative modes of behaviour’ (Schwartz,
Past research studies have focused on work values and possible generational differences (Parry & Urwin,
The study was conducted in the positivist paradigm and was quantitative in nature. The specific research design that was used in the study was a quantitative cross-sectional design. The rationale for this choice of research design is that it was deemed the most suitable design to test the research hypotheses of the study. Using a cross-sectional design allowed the researchers to collect data from a large number of respondents at a specific point in time, in order to determine whether statistically significant differences exist between the work values of different generational cohorts. A sample was drawn from a population that is representative of the various generational cohorts at a specific point in time (Field & Buitendach,
A non-probability convenience sampling method was used to generate the sample, as sampling frames could not be provided by the employers, due to confidentiality concerns. A total of 540 questionnaires were distributed to the initial sample population, and in total, 301 completed questionnaires were returned, which equates to a 55.7% response rate. Thus, the final sample consisted of 301 respondents. Individuals were the unit of analysis, and the population parameter was working-age individuals who were working or had work experience but were currently unemployed. The population consisted of individuals working at organisations in different sectors, but situated in the same geographical area within South Africa.
The sample consisted of more women (
The data collection method consisted of the Values Scale (VS) and a biographical data sheet that was developed in order to collect demographic information about the respondents. The biographical data sheet solicited information regarding the participants’ gender, generational cohort (i.e. age), the number of years that the participants had worked at their current place of employ, and their highest academic qualification. The VS developed by the Human Sciences Research Council was used as a measure of work values (Langley,
The VS is classified as a psychological test, and as such, it is regulated by Section 8 of the Employment Equity Act (Act 55 of 1998). The requirements set by this act are that the psychological tests may not be used unless the test has been scientifically shown to be valid and reliable, can be applied fairly to all employees and is not biased against any employee or group. In line with the Employment Equity Amendment Act (Act 47 of 2013), which came into effect in January 2014, psychological tests cannot be used if they have not been certified by the Health Professions Council of South Africa. However, the data were collected prior to this amendment coming into force.
A pilot study was conducted with 10 respondents from the target population. In addition, two psychologists were requested to provide insight into the content of the questionnaire items. After the questionnaires were returned, suggested changes were considered. No changes were suggested to the items included in the VS, but changes were made to the layout of the questionnaire.
Data were collected by means of self-administered questionnaires. This data collection method was deemed effective to collect data on a construct such as work values, because it allows respondents to reflect on questions before answering them, and to answer questions anonymously. The research strategy that was employed involved distribution of the measuring instrument to respondents and collection of the instrument within 14 days of distribution. Although the ideal would have been for the respondents to complete the questionnaire in one setting, it was not possible due to the geographical dispersion of the sample and prior work commitments. After completion, the questionnaires were collected personally from the respondents at a central point. It should be noted that the questionnaires were completed with the explicit purpose of enhancing the current limited body of knowledge regarding work values of generational cohorts in South Africa. Thus, the VS was used for research purposes only as was stated in the consent form. Thus, the data collected were not be utilised for decision-making and/or psychometric purposes.
Statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) version 20. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed. Descriptive statistics consist of measures of central tendency, including means, medians, standard deviations, skewness and kurtosis (Salkind,
The objective of the research was to determine generational differences in terms of work values. To this end, the generational data were firstly subjected to analysis using measures of central tendency. The results of the analysis are presented in
As is evident from
Measures of central tendency for Generation Y with regard to work values.
Variable | Level of the variable | Minimum | Maximum | Median | Mean | Standard deviation | 50% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ability utilisation | 1 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.58 | 0.446 | 3.60 | |
Achievement | 1 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.51 | 0.455 | 3.60 | |
Advancement | 1 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.51 | 0.450 | 3.60 | |
Aesthetics | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.13 | 0.525 | 3.20 | |
Altruism | 1 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.26 | 0.561 | 3.40 | |
Authority | 1 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.81 | 0.509 | 2.80 | |
Autonomy | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.87 | 0.597 | 3.00 | |
Creativity | 1 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.23 | 0.496 | 3.20 | |
Cultural identity | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.01 | 0.625 | 3.00 | |
Economic rewards | 1 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.39 | 0.590 | 3.40 | |
Economic security | 2 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.40 | 0.508 | 3.40 | |
Own lifestyle | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.09 | 0.544 | 3.20 | |
Personal development | 1 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.48 | 0.423 | 3.60 | |
Physical activities | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.97 | 0.619 | 3.00 | |
Physical prowess | 1 | 4 | 2.60 | 2.58 | 0.669 | 2.60 | |
Prestige | 1 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.29 | 0.561 | 3.40 | |
Risk | 1 | 4 | 2.40 | 2.49 | 0.628 | 2.40 | |
Social interaction | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.87 | 0.553 | 3.00 | |
Social relationships | 1 | 4 | 2.60 | 2.68 | 0.607 | 2.60 | |
Spirituality | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.14 | 0.523 | 3.20 | |
Variety | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.94 | 0.569 | 3.00 | |
Working conditions | 1 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.10 | 0.497 | 3.20 |
The scores for the different levels of the variable of work values for Generation X are depicted in
Measures of central tendency for Generation X with regard to work values.
Variable | Level of the variable | Minimum | Maximum | Median | Mean | Standard deviation | 50% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ability utilisation | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.54 | 0.428 | 3.60 | |
Achievement | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.51 | 0.417 | 3.60 | |
Advancement | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.53 | 0.408 | 3.60 | |
Aesthetics | 2 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.30 | 0.498 | 3.40 | |
Altruism | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.43 | 0.485 | 3.60 | |
Authority | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.95 | 0.578 | 3.00 | |
Autonomy | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.99 | 0.556 | 3.00 | |
Creativity | 2 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.32 | 0.493 | 3.40 | |
Cultural identity | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.05 | 0.616 | 3.20 | |
Economic rewards | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.46 | 0.495 | 3.60 | |
Economic security | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.45 | 0.443 | 3.60 | |
Own lifestyle | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.14 | 0.570 | 3.20 | |
Personal development | 2 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.57 | 0.403 | 3.60 | |
Physical activities | 1 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.05 | 0.596 | 3.00 | |
Physical prowess | 1 | 4 | 2.60 | 2.59 | 0.722 | 2.60 | |
Prestige | 2 | 4 | 3.33 | 3.26 | 0.528 | 3.33 | |
Risk | 1 | 4 | 2.60 | 2.50 | 0.646 | 2.60 | |
Social interaction | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.08 | 0.541 | 3.00 | |
Social relationships | 1 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.71 | 0.629 | 2.80 | |
Spirituality | 2 | 4 | 3.23 | 3.25 | 0.509 | 3.23 | |
Variety | 1 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.09 | 0.538 | 3.20 | |
Working conditions | 1 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.16 | 0.545 | 3.20 |
The scores for the different levels of the variable of work values for the Baby Boomer cohort are presented in
Measures of central tendency for the Baby Boomer cohort with regard to work values.
Variable | Level of the variable | Minimum | Maximum | Median | Mean | Standard deviation | 50% | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ability utilisation | 3 | 4 | 3.60 | 3.55 | 0.341 | 3.60 | ||
Achievement | 3 | 4 | 3.55 | 3.48 | 0.347 | 3.55 | ||
Advancement | 2 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.39 | 0.407 | 3.40 | ||
Aesthetics | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.01 | 0.617 | 3.00 | ||
Altruism | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.23 | 0.465 | 3.20 | ||
Authority | 1 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.85 | 0.632 | 2.80 | ||
Autonomy | 1 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.79 | 0.701 | 2.80 | ||
Creativity | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.10 | 0.457 | 3.00 | ||
Cultural identity | 1 | 4 | 2.70 | 2.61 | 0.810 | 2.70 | ||
Economic rewards | 2 | 4 | 3.23 | 3.26 | 0.540 | 3.23 | ||
Economic security | 3 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.38 | 0.383 | 3.40 | ||
Own lifestyle | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 2.94 | 0.562 | 3.00 | ||
Personal development | 3 | 4 | 3.40 | 3.37 | 0.381 | 3.40 | ||
Physical activities | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 2.98 | 0.598 | 3.20 | ||
Physical prowess | 1 | 4 | 2.35 | 2.45 | 0.754 | 2.35 | ||
Prestige | 2 | 4 | 3.00 | 3.01 | 0.557 | 3.00 | ||
Risk | 1 | 4 | 2.00 | 2.08 | 0.768 | 2.00 | ||
Social interaction | 2 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.86 | 0.559 | 2.80 | ||
Social relationships | 1 | 4 | 2.40 | 2.47 | 0.618 | 2.40 | ||
Spirituality | 2 | 4 | 3.20 | 3.16 | 0.578 | 3.20 | ||
Variety | 1 | 4 | 2.80 | 2.77 | 0.655 | 2.80 | ||
Working conditions | 2 | 4 | 2.90 | 3.02 | 0.555 | 2.90 |
From the aforementioned results, it would appear that the generational cohorts differ with regard to the work values that they perceive as important. Both Generation Y and Generation X regard work values as less important in comparison with the Baby Boomers. To test the hypothesis ‘There is a statistically significant difference between the various generational cohorts in terms of work values in the South African work environment’, a Kruskal-Wallis test was performed. The results of the test are depicted in
Kruskal-Wallis test results for work values as dependent variable and generational cohort as independent variable.
Variable | Level of the variable | Chi-square | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Ability utilisation | 1.314 | 2 | 0.518 | |
Achievement | 0.769 | 2 | 0.681 | |
Advancement | 3.848 | 2 | 0.146 | |
Aesthetics | 9.138 | 2 | 0.010 |
|
Altruism | 8.378 | 2 | 0.015 |
|
Authority | 4.919 | 2 | 0.085 | |
Autonomy | 3.209 | 2 | 0.201 | |
Creativity | 6.283 | 2 | 0.043 |
|
Cultural identity | 8.697 | 2 | 0.013 |
|
Economic rewards | 3.669 | 2 | 0.160 | |
Economic security | 1.365 | 2 | 0.505 | |
Own lifestyle | 4.042 | 2 | 0.133 | |
Personal development | 8.192 | 2 | 0.017 |
|
Physical activities | 0.666 | 2 | 0.717 | |
Physical prowess | 1.195 | 2 | 0.550 | |
Prestige | 8.270 | 2 | 0.016 |
|
Risk | 9.379 | 2 | 0.009 |
|
Social interaction | 11.426 | 2 | 0.003 |
|
Social relationships | 3.519 | 2 | 0.173 | |
Spirituality | 3.164 | 2 | 0.206 | |
Variety | 8.192 | 2 | 0.017 |
|
Working conditions | 2.726 | 2 | 0.256 |
According to the results presented in
With regard to
In terms of the results for
The results presented in
Work values profiles of the different generational cohorts.
Cohort | Born between | Work values |
---|---|---|
Generation Y | 1990–2000 | Authority, creativity, cultural identity, risk, social relationships, economic security |
Generation X | 1970–1989 | Physical activities, social interaction, spirituality |
The Baby Boomers | 1950–1969 | Aesthetics, authority, creativity, economic rewards, economic security, physical prowess, prestige, risk, social interaction, social relationships, agreeable working conditions |
From the above results, similarities and differences between generational cohorts in terms of work values were found. More similarities were established between the Baby Boomers and Generation Y than between the Baby Boomers and Generation X, or between Generation Y and Generation X. The above results show that both the Baby Boomer respondents and the Generation Y respondents value
In terms of the work values of different generations working within the South African work environment, it was not expected to find that there are more similarities between Generation Y and the Baby Boomers than between Generation Y and Generation X, although there were also not many similarities that were found between the Baby Boomers and Generation X. This finding could hold both positive and negative implications for organisations. When employees have similar work values, it may be easier for management to structure work in such a way that will satisfy all of their employees. Among other things, having similar work values across generations could enable mutual understanding and cooperation in the organisation, where employees will work together towards a common vision. However, the generational cohorts included in this study also showed differences in work values. This could hold negative implications for the organisation. When employees have dissimilar work values, the organisation leaders will need to ensure that diverse needs of the workforce are met, based on the preferences of each cohort. If these needs are not met, high labour turnover, job dissatisfaction, a high number of conflicts and disloyalty to the organisation could be some of the implications that such an organisation will face.
The following limitations should be taken into consideration when interpreting the findings of this study. Firstly, data gathering took place in a specific location, and a non-probability sampling technique was used to generate the sample. As a result, the external validity of the research reported on might be compromised. Even though trends can be identified, caution is advised when generalising the findings to a larger population. Because the research was only conducted in one geographical region, it is recommended that the study be replicated nationally. Secondly, although the sample was representative of the South African population, it consisted mainly of African respondents. As a result, the findings are subject to cultural bias. Despite the aforementioned limitations, the study provides some valuable insights. It should be noted that the VS used to measure work values does not necessarily represent the work values of the South African workforce and further investigation into the relevance of the measuring instrument is suggested for future research.
Aligning the needs of an organisation with those of the employees is critical in order to create a healthy and productive work environment. The Baby Boomers and Generation Y share the work value of social relationships, while both the Baby Boomers and Generation X attach much importance to social interaction. It is thus recommended that organisations focus more on team work and collaboration, as the findings of the study indicate that all the generations investigated would be good team players, and teams would advance the effectiveness and competitive advantage of organisations. It is further recommended that managerial styles within organisations should not be autocratic, but participative, so as to ensure that employee contributions and creativity are valued. A stronger focus should also be placed on human capital development, which will create opportunities for personal development and growth. Furthermore, employees should be allowed to use office space creatively, in order to make the working environment more appealing and comfortable. This will not only strengthen employee interaction within the work environment, but it will also ensure harmonious relations between different generational cohorts in the workplace, and, as such, human capital will be retained.
This study and its findings offered valuable insight into generational differences in terms of work values within the South African work environment. It is evident that generational differences exist in terms of work values. However, it should also be acknowledged that there are certain similarities between generational cohorts with regard to work values. Organisations should capitalise on and build on these similarities, particularly in the light of prevailing cultural differences.
We thank Anthony Sparg for editing this article.
The authors declare that they do not have any competing interests that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
P.J. was the project leader and contributed towards the literature review and data interpretation. F.v.d.W. contributed towards the literature review and data interpretation, and N.S. contributed towards the literature review, data collection and data interpretation.