What We Know: Managing Generation Z in the Workplace

By Jacqueline Shaw Talent Development Emotional Intelligence, EQ-i 2.0, Talent Development

In a world where retirement ages are extending, lifespans are prolonged, and economic stressors grow, it has become increasingly common to have a multi-generational workforce. With employees ranging from the Silent Generation (1925-1945) to Generation Z (1997-2012)¹, it’s reasonable to wonder if generations have different work needs, goals, or leadership preferences.

Myth vs. reality

With most social or cultural groups, myths and stereotypes often develop due to misinformation or as a mental shortcut to help us make sense of the world around us². It’s important to distinguish between facts and myths, as these misconceptions can prevent people from understanding actual differences. Here are a few common myths about Generation Z (Gen Z) in the workplace and the broader existence of “generations”³:

Myth	Reality
1. “Generation Z” is clearly defined	Generations are culturally defined and, by nature, unclear. Cross-cultural research, including social, political, and technological context, has created variability in these cutoffs. Generation definitions are inevitably confounded by age, time period, and group effects.
2. Gen Z individuals have unique values and needs	Generations more often share values in different orders of priority (e.g., valuing the same work benefits with different orders of priority⁴, and sharing underlying motivational preferences⁵).
3. Gen Z individuals should be treated differently from the other generations	It’s more effective to consider generational similarities and individual employee needs. Focus on support at the individual level to help employees meet their potential. What one generation may value more (e.g., flexible work options) can benefit the whole workforce.
4. Different generations can be labelled as “disruptive,” “less productive,” “narcissistic,” “sensitive,” or “entitled”	These negative beliefs are developed by bias and work culture (e.g., some generations receive lower training scores because of age bias, even when they meet expectations⁶). One generation does not have a better approach than the other; in fact, they’re simply different. The counter argument to these stereotypes: Younger generations, with less stress to achieve early financial independence, have the opportunity to explore their interests and build new skills. A small decline in overall narcissism levels was found from 1992-2015⁷ rather than a supposed increase. This decline is potentially due to the social comparison of social media⁸. Generation membership does not affect productivity. Gen Z are rethinking their relationship to work, valuing their time and pushing for appropriate compensation⁹.

Our findings

To better understand whether there was truth to these myths, we investigated results from a sample of respondents (N = 800; n = 200 per generation; matched in terms of gender split within generation group) who completed MHS’ Emotional Quotient Inventory 2.0^® (EQ-i 2.0^®). This data, scored against the global professional norms, consisted of responses collected between January 2020 and March 2022. Statistically, significant differences between the generation groups were found in nearly every EQ-i 2.0 subscale, except for Self-Actualization, Emotional Self-Awareness, Assertiveness, Interpersonal Relationships, and Empathy. A general trend can be seen with EQ-i 2.0 scores increasing from younger to older generations. EQ-i 2.0 scores also generally increased with age — being closely tied to generation — with total emotional intelligence (EI) increasing by about two points for every 10-year increase in age (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Trends in Total EQ-i 2.0 Score by Age

Despite these trends, significant differences were only found between Gen Z and the other generations (see Figure 2). Effect sizes, indicating the practical significance or meaningfulness of the difference between generations, were calculated for each generation pair. Nearly all were found to have small effect sizes, suggesting little practical significance. However, three subscales —Independence, Problem Solving, and Stress Tolerance — were shown to have medium or large effect sizes, which suggests real-world differences between Gen Z and each of the other generations, and the potential impact on workplace behaviors (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Comparing EQ-i 2.0 Scores Across Generations

Note. Effect sizes (calculated as Cohen’s d values) that compare each generation to Gen Z are presented above the data bars. Small effect sizes (d between |.20| and |.49|) are shown in green, medium effect sizes (d between |.50| and |.79|) are shown in blue, and large effect sizes (d ≥ |.80|) are shown in red.

Similar results were found when using a Gen Z cutoff of 1995 instead of 1997 and when excluding data from 2020.

Connecting our findings to research

Our findings of EQ-i 2.0 scores across generations are well supported by other published studies about generational differences, both in academic and professional settings. Life History Theory¹⁰ applied to generation research describes the factors that dictate when and how fast a human matures. It suggests that growing up with more resources (e.g., money, support, love) results in a “slow life strategy” to personal growth. From a developmental standpoint, living with less support or capital equates to lower certainty of survival; early maturation, since people tend to grow up faster when times are tough, signals a need to make ends meet at a younger age. Greater resources give individuals the luxury of slower maturation and the opportunity to explore other interests during childhood¹¹.

At the core of generational change is cultural change. Where individuals in older generations used to have an established career, a partner, and children in their twenties, the slow life strategy is becoming increasingly common. Education, career development, and financial independence take longer for younger generations to achieve. Individuals are told to follow their dreams rather than follow the traditional path, and the availability of technology (e.g., washing machines and contraceptives) allows individuals to focus on other goals¹².

Significant differences were only found between Gen Z and the other three working generations, but what differentiates Gen Z from the others? There are a few potential explanations, such as:

Professional confidence: Following the slow life strategy¹⁰, Gen Z takes longer to develop professional self-sufficiency (e.g., having to rely on networking for work opportunities) and is subject to the cycle between an employee’s job market and an employer’s job market. With the all-too-common position of still being in their “early career” while in their twenties, these challenges can create a self-fulfilling prophecy for Gen Z — where their skills are valued, yet they don’t have the ability to be independent¹³.
New technology: Being born in a digital world, Gen Z may better use or be more reliant on social media, mobile devices, and artificial intelligence (AI). While these time saving devices offer opportunity, they may also bring increased depression symptoms, reduced or poorer quality of sleep, and minimized in-person connection⁸. Reliance on technology may reduce independence and problem solving, while these physical and mental health risks may reduce stress tolerance.
Remote work: Due to technological advancements, Gen Z can shift out of the traditional office role via flexible work and work from home options. Despite an overall stress decrease compared to in-person work, these alternative work options may create social isolation, reduce work-life balance, and introduce new forms of stress (e.g., Zoom fatigue)¹⁴ without the skills to tackle these issues.
Social media: The rise in social media brought social comparison and increased mental health concerns to Gen Z, affecting self-confidence in their problem-solving abilities and creating stress without adequate support⁸.

While these cultural contexts define the label of Gen Z, it should be recognized that generation is inherently tied to age. Conceptually, some of the challenges described above (e.g., professional independence and mental health) are not unique to Gen Z. Rather, they are true of many individuals entering their career or making the shift towards maturity and independence, regardless of their birth year. Entering the working world presents challenges that persist across many decades, rather than being specific to any one generational cohort.

Recommendations for leaders

These generational differences should be viewed as an opportunity for improvement, as the underlying causes are situational rather than inherent to Gen Z individuals themselves. Gen Z’s lower scores for Independence, Problem Solving, and Stress Tolerance may offer insights into the organizational supports they need to thrive.

Considerations for managing Gen Z employees⁸:

Provide clear direction: With less experience and independence, Gen Z employees may benefit from more detailed and constructive feedback to develop their skills and confidence.
Offer development opportunities: Offering challenging projects, contribution to decision making, and work autonomy can improve Gen Z employees’ skills and confidence in their independence and problem-solving skills.
Prioritize well-being: Individual and global factors provide a significant source of stress for Gen Z employees. Employers can retain and develop these employees’ skills by addressing burnout, offering flexibility and empathy, in the same way employers would for physical illness.

Considerations for managing a multi-generational workforce⁸

Knowledge sharing: A workforce has a wealth of knowledge across generations. As each generation has strengths to share, ability-based mentorship programs can be created for intergenerational knowledge sharing. Consider emphasizing group similarities over differences as the foundation for this collaboration.
Leader mentoring: Contrary to commonly held assumptions, older workers are not in decline. More senior employees can share their work experiences with younger employees, mentoring them into the next generation of effective leaders¹⁵.
Non-traditional roles: With the shift from seniority-based to qualification-based job roles, skills and education become more important than age. This shift leads to less traditional work relationships and potentially outdated notions about who has knowledge and who needs it. Employers should encourage individuals to collaborate, communicate (virtually and in-person), and openly share knowledge across the organization¹⁵.
Value alignment: As generations share the same values but prioritize them differently, employers should focus on the motivations and values of the individual. It is more productive to consider needs on an individual basis than to generalize based on generation or age group⁴.

Want to learn more about the EQ-i 2.0 and how it can help you lead multi-generational teams more effectively? Get in touch with a member of our team.

References

¹ Dimock, M. (2019, January 17). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. Pew Research Center.

² Fiske, S. T., & Dupree, C. H. (2015). Cognitive processes involved in stereotyping. In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 1–12). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

³ Rudolph, C. W., Rauvola, R. S., Costanza, D. P., & Zacher, H. (2021). Generations and generational differences: Debunking myths in organizational science and practice and paving new paths forward. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(6), 945–967.

⁴ Brower, T. (2022, August 28). What the generations want from work: New data offers surprises. Forbes.

⁵ Heyns, M. M., & Kerr, M. D. (2018). Generational differences in workplace motivation. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(1), 1–10.

⁶ McCausland, T. C., King, E. B., Bartholomew, L., Feyre, R., Ahmad, A., & Finkelstein, L. (2015). The technological age: The effects of perceived age in technology training. Journal of Business and Psychology, 30, 693-708.

⁷ Wetzel, E., Brown, A., Hill, P. L., Chung, J. M., Robins, R. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2017). The narcissism epidemic is dead; Long live the narcissism epidemic. Psychological Science, 28(12), 1833–1847.

⁸ Twenge, J. M., Sherman, R., & Loepp, B. (2024, July 23). Managing Gen Z [Audio podcast episode]. In The Science of Personality Podcast. Hogan Assessments.

⁹ Bai, S. (2023, February 16). You’re Wrong About Gen Z. Maclean’s.

¹⁰ Stearns, S. (1992). The Evolution of Life Histories. Oxford University Press.

¹¹ Twenge, J. M., & Park, H. (2019). The decline in adult activities among U.S. adolescents, 1976–2016. Child Development, 90(2), 638–654.

¹² Twenge, J. M. (2014). Generation Me – Revised and updated: Why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled–and more miserable than ever before. Simon and Schuster.

¹³ Yu, A. (2022, May 26). Why Gen Z workers are already so burned out. BBC.

¹⁴ Bishop, K. (2022, June 17). Is remote work worse for wellbeing than people think? BBC.

¹⁵Kuyken, K., & Costanza, D. (2024). Because work is changing: A new paradigm for intergenerational workplace knowledge sharing. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 1–17.