Generation Me--Revised and Updated

by Jean M. Twenge

  She did not get the job.

  Another job applicant took a call on his cell phone 15 minutes into the interview. A third brought his father with him. These are, apparently, not isolated examples. A 2013 USA Today story notes that such behavior is gaining notice across the country: “Human resource professionals say they’ve seen recent college grads text or take calls in interviews, dress inappropriately, use slang or overly casual language and exhibit other oddball behavior.”

  Some blame new technology for this apparent lack of social skills, but it goes deeper than that. Raised on “just be yourself,” GenMe doesn’t always process the need to change behavior depending on the situation. If it’s good for them, they assume it’s good for everyone else—even in an interview. Jonathan Singel, director of talent acquisition for Avery Dennison, favors this explanation. GenMe’s parents, he observes, said, “You’re perfect just the way you are” and “Do whatever you’re comfortable doing.” As you know from the previous chapters, his observation is consistent with the numerous studies showing GenMe’s lower need for social approval and higher individualism.

  That’s not all bad. We have GenMe—and the individualism that gives them their name—to thank for casual Fridays (or casual every-days). Hierarchies are flatter, with bosses more likely to treat employees with respect and explain why they’re doing what they’re doing. Companies realize that time off and work-life balance make for more productive employees. The key is for all of the generations to find the strategies that accommodate GenMe’s preferences—but that also preserve the bottom line. With Boomers rapidly retiring and GenMe set to be 40% of the workforce by 2020, the time to do this is now.

  The first step is to get the right information on how the generations differ. You’ve already learned about the generational differences in personality and behavior, and some of those translate directly into the workplace. But what about attitudes toward work? What does GenMe want out of a job that’s different from what Boomers or GenX’ers wanted when they were young?

  Many popular press articles, consultants, and books on generations at work have tried to answer these questions. However, few are based on data comparing the generations—unfortunate given the emphasis on evidence-based management. Some describe the events each generation experienced and then guess how that will affect their attitudes toward work, rather than actually measuring attitudes. Other books interview managers who reflect on the changes they have witnessed in the workplace. That’s problematic, too, as perceptions are easily warped by fading memory, aging, and flawed recall. Most people have an overly rosy memory of what they were like when they were young employees—I was never late! I always did exactly what my boss said! Other authors who interview young employees can tell managers what young employees want, but that tells us little about generational differences. Perhaps this is what young employees have always wanted, so recruiting and retaining strategies can stay just the same. Interviews are also notoriously subjective—how does the author decide which parts of the interview to highlight? Often that depends on what point the author is trying to make, which introduces bias right off the bat.

  A more objective approach is to use standard questionnaires that measure work attitudes, which ask people to respond to standard questions and result in a numerical score. Researchers often use such questionnaires to survey a large group of workers at one time. This has the advantage of more objective measurement, but any one-time survey has a big downside: it’s impossible to tell whether any differences are caused by age or by generation. For example, if more GenMe’ers than Boomers say they want a lot of time off, that could be because young people have always wanted time off, or because GenMe’ers like time off more than Boomers did when they were young. If it’s just being young, GenMe will grow out of it just as every generation before them has grown out of some notions of its youth. If GenMe’ers preferences are due to their age and not to their generation, the same recruiting programs that worked for young employees 15 or 30 years ago will work now.

  Given these issues with one-time studies, it’s clearly best to study generational differences in work attitudes with an over-time study—one that has sampled people of the same age at different points in time. Until recently, only one or two studies had used data like this, and none with a large or nationally representative sample. Fortunately, the nationally representative Monitoring the Future Survey of high school students has measured work attitudes and desired job characteristics every year since 1976. That made it possible to trace work attitudes from Boomers to GenX’ers to GenMe’ers among those getting ready to enter the workforce. Because everyone was the same age, this dataset clearly shows the generational shifts in attitudes toward work without any concern that differences could be due to age. Along with my coauthors Stacy Campbell, Brian Hoffman, and Chuck Lance, we published the results of this analysis in the Journal of Management.

  The results of the study fall into four primary categories: leisure and work-life balance; helping and finding meaning; money and status; and high expectations and impatience. In some cases, the data confirm the perceptions of managers and journalists about what GenMe (also called Millennials) values at work. In other cases, the data suggest that common perceptions of GenMe are wrong. I also feature data from one-time studies when their results concur with the over-time data. However, always keep in mind that any differences in a one-time study could be due to age and experience instead. Each section includes concrete suggestions for managing this generation—or, if you’re GenMe yourself, for finding a match between your expectations and the reality of the workplace.

  LEISURE AND WORK-LIFE BALANCE

  New York investment banks such as Goldman Sachs were known for working young employees hard. Analysts were hired straight out of college on two-year contracts, paid around $100,000 a year, and expected to work 100 hours a week.

  Until now. In October 2013, Goldman Sachs began discouraging young analysts from working weekends. Instead of two-year contracts, they are permanent employees from the start. Why the change? Many young employees were leaving for private equity funds and start-ups, so the company’s “junior banker task force” suggested ways to keep young employees from quitting.

  Chegg, Inc., an online textbook-rental company, had a similar experience—many of its young employees left the company after a year or less. In their exit interviews, GenMe workers said they wanted to be more involved in projects, wanted more time off, and wanted to be able to work wherever they wanted.

  The company moved quickly to change things, giving younger workers more important roles in projects and instituting unlimited paid vacation. It worked: Turnover among GenMe employees fell by 50% a year for two years.

  In our over-time analysis, the largest generational difference appeared in the importance of work and views of work-life balance. More in GenMe said they “worked to live,” unlike the Boomers, who “lived to work.” In 1976, 3 out of 4 (74%) high school senior Boomers said they expected work to be “a central part” of their lives, but by 2012 only 2 out of 3 (66%) felt that way. Under 1 in 4 (23%) Boomers agreed that “work is just making a living,” but 1 out of 3 (32%) GenMe’ers thought so in 2012. GenMe is also more likely to say they wouldn’t work if they had enough money (28% vs. 23% in 1976). In a small over-time study of adult workers, those in the 2000s (versus the 1970s) were significantly less likely to agree that “rich people should feel an obligation to work even if they do not need to” and “work should be one of the most important parts of a person’s life.” Catalina, 20, reflects, “My generation views work as if it does not matter. It is not taken as seriously as it should be.”

  More in GenMe said it was important to have a job with a lot of vacation time, that allowed them to work at an easy pace, and that left a lot of time for other things in their lives. Fifty-three percent of GenMe in 2012 agreed they were “willing to work overtime to do a good job,” down from 60% in earlier years. In one study, college career counselors named “flexible s
chedules” and “want balance of life and work” among the top three characteristics GenMe wants out of a job. Bill George, a professor at Harvard Business School, says that his students “want an integrated life” and “are committed to having life the way they want it.”

  How you interpret this trend is a matter of perspective. Americans take much less vacation than most Europeans, who place more value on enjoying life. Perhaps GenMe is taking a page out of that book, wanting to focus on things other than work. Balanced workers may also be better workers. On the other hand, people have to earn a living—and recall that 82% of GenMe thinks it’s important to “be very well-off financially.” So how is GenMe going to achieve these riches while working fewer hours? That’s unclear.

  A study of Canadian young people by Harvey Krahn and Nancy Galambos suggests that this attitude may stem at least in part from increased entitlement. At age 25, 1996 high school graduates (compared to 1985 graduates) were more likely to agree with statements such as “if someone has worked hard in school, they are entitled to a good job” and “everyone has the right to the kind of job their education and training has prepared them for.” This suggests that the generational differences in work attitudes persist into GenMe’s mid-20s, the years when young adults settle into the workforce.

  In my GenMe online survey, lack of work ethic was a nearly universal theme. “I think my generation is mainly focused on a job that is easy to do but pays very well,” observes Ethan, 19. “More people want a job that gives them the most benefits with the least amount of work and responsibility necessary,” says Ashley, 29. I’d seen this belief in my undergraduate classes for several years. When I asked the students to name five qualities of their generation, “lazy” almost always made the top five. This surprised me at first, as more in their generation go to college, which seems more ambitious than lazy. Yet several studies suggest that college students now study for fewer hours than students in previous eras, so perhaps it’s not surprising that students recognize this deficit.

  In addition, a decline in the work ethic appears in several over-time studies. In the over-time survey of high school seniors, 40% of 2012 GenMe students admitted that “not wanting to work hard” might prevent them from getting the job they want, compared to only 24% of Boomers in 1976. A study of adults in the General Social Survey found a decline in the number who would continue working after a financial windfall, from 77% in 1980 to 68% in 2006. “I think everybody in my generation wants important high-end jobs but are really lazy and would rather not put in the work to get there,” says Kayla, 18. In a 2012 survey of 19-to-28-year-olds conducted by MTV, half of GenMe’ers said they would rather have no job than a job they hate.

  Adult workers in the 2000s were less likely than those in the 1970s to agree that “a worker should do a decent job whether or not his supervisor is around.” They were also less likely to agree that “a worker should feel a sense of pride in his work” or that working hard made them “feel more worthwhile and [like] a better person.” Another study found that manual workers in 2006 were willing to lift or carry only 70% as much as workers tested prior to 1991. This is the logical outcome of our modern cultural system that emphasizes self over duty. In past eras, working hard at a job was (at least for men) the only way to be a respected member of society. Now it is often seen as boring and restrictive.

  However, working yourself to death is no way to live, and no way to have a family. The idea of work-life balance began when fathers and mothers of young children wanted to work fewer hours. It’s now reached down to young single people, who want to enjoy life in other ways. With US workers getting an average of only eight vacation days after a year on the job, they have a point. The United States is the only developed nation that doesn’t mandate paid time off. Architect Ari Meisel, 30, uses a simple question to set his priorities: “Every decision I make, I calculate, how much time will it take away from time with my kids?”

  In many cases, the key is flexibility, not necessarily fewer hours. GenMe’ers want to be able to work from home, at a coffee shop, and when they want. Some companies are beginning to realize this might not be a bad thing. Electronics retailer Best Buy instituted their “Result-Only Work Environment” program, recognizing that getting the work done is more important than putting in face time at the office. Tyler Shaw, one of the proponents of the plan, likes that his time is no longer wasted in so many meetings. “I do my best work when I am rested, when I eat breakfast and lunch, work out regularly, spend time with my family, and play video games occasionally to recharge,” he says. “I just see so many people running ragged; they work hard, but too much and not at one hundred percent.” In other words, the company gets Tyler’s best work when he can balance it with the rest of his life.

  Flexible hours are quickly becoming expected. In a recent PricewaterhouseCoopers survey, only 29% of GenMe said they expected to work regular office hours. The MTV survey found that 81% of GenMe thinks they should be allowed to make their own hours at work. The key to making flexibility effective is clear expectations and deadlines, especially at first. Some in GenMe may dream of getting paid to “do nothing” (as the cult movie Office Space promotes), but most want to work smarter, not harder—and might reward the company with better performance.

  If you’re GenMe yourself, how can you get the flexible work schedule you desire? First, don’t expect it to happen right away. Most managers want to see you for at least a few months to make sure you’re capable of working independently. If you’re lucky enough to get a flexible schedule, put in your best work if you want to keep it. “Working at home” does not equal “answering a few e-mails between bouts of video games.” A flexible schedule often means you’re not wasting as much time in traffic or in meetings, but you have to be focused enough not to waste time on other temptations. Working at home can also be lonely—those watercooler conversations may sometimes seem like a waste of time, but they can generate good ideas and often build trust among coworkers. Many employees find that coming into the office a few days a week while spending the rest at home (or at the coffee shop) is a good compromise.

  WHY AM I HERE? HELPING OTHERS, FINDING MEANING, AND SEEKING PRAISE

  The accounting firm Ernst & Young offers employees the opportunity to volunteer—on company time. One young employee spent three months volunteering in Buenos Aires, with the company paying for her travel expenses and her salary. “First-rate corporate volunteer programs help attract and retain . . . workers born after 1980,” explained the Wall Street Journal article that documented the trend. “Millennials are saying, ‘I don’t want to park my values at the door,” says Carol Cone, head of a Boston consulting firm. The book The M-Factor advises, “When recruiting Millennials, make sure your websites, print materials, and even the recruiters themselves emphasize your contributions to society.”

  The view that Millennials/GenMe’ers are uniquely interested in helping others, especially at work, is widespread. Books and articles describe them as “a generous generation” and an “empathic generation.” Many point to the large number of young people involved in Teach For America, AmeriCorps, and organizations aiming to help the environment. One recent survey found that 79% of 13-to-25-year-olds say they want to work for a company that cares about how it affects or contributes to society.

  However, that might also have been true of Boomers and GenX’ers when they were young. But this survey—and most others presented as proof that Millennials are altruistic meaning-seekers—don’t have data from other generations. It is impossible to make a generational comparison with data from only one generation. Perhaps young workers in previous decades also sought meaning and wanted to help others.

  That’s exactly what the over-time data show. Boomers, GenX’ers, and GenMe’ers placed about the same importance on a job “directly helpful to others” (50% said that was “very important” in 1976, 48% in 1994, and 48% in 2012) or “worthwhile to society” (44% in 1976, 45% in 1994, and 47% in 2012). A one-time study
of US workers in 2010 came to a similar conclusion: when deciding which company to work for, GenMe did not value corporate social responsibility and business ethics any more than GenX and valued them a little less than Boomers. So these altruistic and “social cause” work values are generational universals, not differences. Thus, recruiting programs emphasizing paid volunteering or helping others may be attractive for today’s young workers, but on average no more than they were (or are) for GenX’ers or Boomers.

  Another common theory is that GenMe’ers/Millennials want jobs that are highly meaningful—jobs they are passionate about. That would certainly fit with GenMe’s high expectations and individualistic focus. However, the over-time survey showed that GenMe is actually less likely to favor these intrinsic work values. An overwhelming 88% of Boomers in 1976 wanted an interesting job, but that sank to 79% of GenMe’ers in 2012. More than half (54%) of Boomers wanted a job where they could make friends, compared to only 39% of GenMe’ers in 2012. Perhaps because they see work as less central to their lives overall, fewer in GenMe see meaning at work as important.

  Does that mean companies should not emphasize meaning and helping others? Of course not. Just don’t expect it to work uniquely well for young employees. While GenMe’ers are significantly more attracted to work-life balance than young workers were in the past, they are not any more attracted to helping or meaning. Organizations will reach the widest segment of GenMe if paid volunteering is presented as a way to regain work-life balance, see the world, or “find yourself.” These themes are closer to GenMe’s unique outlook.

  Emphasizing meaning should also be approached differently. As young workers, many Boomers were on a quest for meaning and purpose. GenMe sees things a little differently: work is meaningful if they feel meaningful. They don’t want to see themselves as cogs in the wheel and don’t want to do only what they’ve been told to do. They want to matter, to feel important, and to believe that they are having a personal impact. When they talk about wanting to help others, it’s often put in individualistic terms: “I want to make a difference.”