Today’s workplace can bring together people whose experiences of work were formed in very different environments. Someone who began their career in a structured organisation where hierarchy carried considerable weight may now be leading employees who entered the workforce expecting flexibility and a greater say in how decisions are made.
These differences are often described as generational, but age is not always the source of the tension. In our work with organisations, we often find that the real differences concern people’s values and their expectations of what work should look like.
Baby Boomers and many Gen X employees built their careers in environments that placed considerable value on structure, discipline, commitment and respect for authority. Millennials and Gen Z entered working life as expectations were shifting towards flexibility, self-development, inclusivity and involvement in decision-making. These are broad patterns rather than descriptions of every individual, but they help explain why people around the same table can approach a workplace issue differently.
Flexible working has brought some of these differences into view. Following the pandemic, we saw organisations where senior leaders wanted employees back in the office while younger employees resisted returning to previous ways of working. The disagreement concerned where people worked, but it reflected different ideas about commitment, autonomy and how performance should be judged.
When communication styles collide
These differences become harder to manage when they influence how people communicate. A leader who has spent decades in hierarchical organisations may reasonably believe their experience should carry weight. A younger employee may have entered a working world where questioning ideas and contributing to decisions are actively encouraged.
When neither understands what is driving the other, questions can be interpreted as disrespect, while authority can be experienced as dismissiveness. We see situations where people effectively talk past one another: the leader places greater emphasis on their authority and experience while the employee continues to push for their perspective to be considered.
Feedback often exposes the same tension with younger employees often expecting to participate in conversations and wanting their views to be heard, including when they disagree with someone who holds greater organisational authority. Leaders accustomed to a different relationship between seniority and influence may find this challenging. The way feedback is given and received can determine whether the conversation remains constructive.
Technology is changing who holds the expertise
Technology is also changing how knowledge and experience are shared within multigenerational teams. Younger generations tend to have greater familiarity with digital tools and may adopt technologies such as AI with relative ease. Experienced leaders may be adapting to technologies that bear little resemblance to the systems they used while developing their professional expertise.
Experience and knowledge no longer always follow the traditional organisational hierarchy. A younger employee may understand an emerging technology better than their manager, while the manager has years of organisational and professional experience that help determine where that technology can be applied effectively.
Leaders need to recognise the value of both because organisations lose something when experience becomes a reason to dismiss new ways of working. They also lose valuable judgement when enthusiasm for technology overlooks what can be learned from previous changes.
The idea of a career has changed
Different generations may have very different expectations of what a successful career looks like. Many people from older generations developed expertise within a particular profession and progressed through an organisation over many years.
Younger employees are increasingly comfortable moving between roles and employers, even across industries. Technology has widened their options further by allowing someone in South Africa to work for an organisation elsewhere in the world without relocating. The relationship between an employee and an organisation has evolved alongside those opportunities.
This can create very different views of loyalty and career progression. For example, a leader who spent years building a career within one organisation may see frequent moves as a lack of commitment, while a younger employee may simply see them as a normal part of building a career in today’s workplace.
Where emotional intelligence comes in
Managing these differences requires leaders to understand what people bring into an interaction beyond their job title or generational label. Emotional intelligence helps leaders understand those influences and respond appropriately.
EQ can be understood as an overall capability made up of individual competencies. Fitness offers a helpful comparison: we can talk about someone’s overall fitness while recognising that different physical capabilities contribute to it. Emotional intelligence works in a similar way.
One of the most important competencies in a multigenerational workplace is emotional self-awareness. People arrive at work carrying assumptions formed through their upbringing and previous experiences. Older employees may have developed professionally in environments where deference to authority was expected and emotions had little place in working life. Younger generations have often received greater encouragement to express their views and expect their individual perspective to be acknowledged.
Understanding these influences helps a leader recognise what may be happening during a difficult interaction. It does not require accepting every behaviour or lowering organisational standards. It allows the leader to consider why two people may respond differently to the same situation and decide how best to manage it.
Flexibility is another important EQ competency in this environment. Leaders cannot assume that the leadership approach they experienced will work equally well for everyone they manage. They need enough awareness and adaptability to adjust how they communicate while maintaining what the organisation requires.
Making different perspectives useful
A multigenerational workforce gives organisations access to employees with different forms of knowledge. Someone with decades of organisational experience brings lessons gained through changing markets and previous technological shifts. A digitally native employee may recognise possibilities in AI and emerging technology that an experienced colleague has yet to encounter.
One perspective does not have to displace the other. Leaders can create working environments where employees bring both into the same conversation.
This requires enough psychological safety for employees to contribute and challenge one another without disagreement becoming damaging conflict. Leaders also need to examine their own assumptions about authority and what good work looks like.
Generational labels can help explain some of the influences people carry into the workplace, provided they do not replace an understanding of the individual. Emotional intelligence helps leaders recognise their own responses and consider what may be driving someone else’s behaviour so they can adjust their approach when needed.
A leader who can only lead people who think and work as they do is managing for conformity. Five generations in one workplace will test assumptions about authority and commitment, including whose knowledge deserves respect. Organisations that fail this test may call it a generational problem. But often, it is a leadership problem. Success lies in the self-awareness to know the difference.
Written by Mark Baker, CEO | Psychologist, Mygrow