This paper aims to critically examine the application of generational labels in workplace research and practice with the purpose to provide human resources (HR) scholar-practitioners with insights into limitations and potential biases of this approach.
Building on Mannheim’s framework, this paper critiques commonly-held assumptions that have perpetuated misconceptions about generational differences. It highlights challenges with generational classifications, methodologies and stereotypes, while offering recommendations to improve future research and application in HR.
Often, HR practices accept generational differences without questioning how employees are grouped into generations. Although not a new phenomenon, these generalizations can create bias when comparing generations. Instead, HR scholar-practitioners can create thoughtful approaches and examine data based on other effects, such as period and life stage.
This paper provides support for HR leaders to question assumptions to study generations in organizations. Suggestions are provided to improve research, expand training and advance dialogue in the workplace and shift away from the traditional thinking about generations.
Grouping employees into generations is a common practice, which is not often challenged. This paper provides research-based insights for HR leaders who are managing data, programs and practices based on arbitrary generational groupings. Organizations need to be mindful of the pitfalls, take a nuanced approach and ensure practices are evidence-based.
