Business Horizons (xxxx) xxx, xxx

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
w w w. j o u r n a l s . e l s e v i e r. c o m / b u s i n e s s - h o r i z o n s

Here comes Generation Z: Millennials as managers

Karina Gabrielova, Aaron A. Buchko*

Bradley University, Foster College of Business, 1501 W. Bradley Avenue, Peoria, IL 61625, U.S.A.

KEYWORDS Abstract As the workplace continues to change, a new generational co-

Millennials as managers; hortdGeneration Z, sometimes referred to as iGendis beginning to enter the work-
Managing Generation Z; force. At the same time, millennials are now progressing in their careers and will be
Generational challenged with managing these incoming workers. The purpose of this article is to
differences in the provide a contextual overview that identifies and illuminates some of the defining
workplace; work-related characteristics of these two youngest generations in the workplace to
Leader-member increase understanding of the potential intergenerational conflict between these
exchange; cohorts and develop leadership strategies that can be utilized to increase employee
Generational cohort morale and productivity. This article analyzes the millennial supervisor-Gen Z sub-
theory; ordinate relationship based on generational cohort theory, leader-member ex-
Work values framework change (LMX) theory, and the work values framework.
ª 2021 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All
rights reserved.

1. Shifting generations in the workplace Zemke et al., 2013). At present, millennials (those
born in 1981e1996) make up the largest single
For several years, researchers, management con- generational cohort in the U.S. workforce, out-
sultants, and writers have discussed changes in the stripping both Baby Boomers (those born in
workplace due to the influx of workers from the 1946e1963) and Generation X (those born in
Millennial Generation (e.g., Espinoza & Ukleja, 1963e1981; Pew Research Center, 2018). Given the
2016; Kaifi et al., 2012; Stewart et al., 2017; size of this group, it is perhaps not surprising that
Thompson & Gregory, 2012). Numerous books and much effort has been devoted to understanding
articles look at the unique challenges created in them and seeking to improve their effectiveness as
organizations by millennials, and prescriptions have workers.
been offered to help managers deal with the needs, What seems to have escaped attention is that
wants, and expectations of individuals from this the first of the millennials turned 39 years old in
generation (e.g., Twenge, 2006; Zaslow, 2007; 2020. These early millennials will be entering their
40s in the coming decade. The “late millennials”
(born in 1996) are now entering their mid-20s.
* Corresponding author Given the nature of organizations, many of these
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K. Gabrielova), millennials are no longer entering the workforce;
[email protected] (A.A. Buchko)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.013
0007-6813/ª 2021 Kelley School of Business, Indiana University. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
2 K. Gabrielova, A.A. Buchko

indeed, many are now first-line supervisors or are recommendations for researchers and practi-
entering mid-level managerial positions through tioners for understanding and managing the
natural career progression. We have moved workplace interactions between these
beyond asking “How should we manage millen- generations.
nials?” as millennials have become managers
themselves.
Who do these millennials manage? In many 2. Generational cohorts in the workplace
cases, the early millennials are managing the late
millennials. As early millennials move into their A generation is a group of people of the same age
30s, they become mid-level managers and are in a similar social location experiencing similar
managing the later millennials, who are in their social events (Mannheim, 1952). Articles and books
mid or late 20s or even early 30s. This is as should focus on the assumed clash and collision of gen-
be expected given the natural progression of in- erations in the workplace with the belief that
dividuals and generational cohorts through careers generations differ in values, attitudes toward
and organizations. leadership, and behavior, and that a lack of un-
But there is another group now entering the derstanding among the generations regarding
workforce. Called Generation Z, these personsdborn these differences leads to intergenerational con-
between 1995 and 2012dhave been referred to as flict and detrimental effects on communication
iGen to reflect the internet generation. They have and working relationships (Dittmann, 2005). One of
always had the internet as part of their lives. Their the possible conflicts among generations in the
cell phones have always been “smart.” Their homes workplace lies in the area of management and
and schools have generally had personal or laptop leadership. That area both influences and is influ-
computers. The first of the Generation Z cohort enced by differences among the generations in
started graduating from high school in 2013 and col- retention, values, motivation, work style prefer-
lege in 2017. With approximately 74 million in the ences, and the perception of what it means to be a
cohort, these persons are the next generation to leader as well as the concept of what it takes to be
enter the workforce. a good leader (Arsenault, 2004). In this article, we
As Generation Z enters the workforce, in many focus on the two youngest generations in the
cases their first-level supervisors and/or superior workforce, millennials and Generation Z.
managers are millennials. While much was written,
researched, and recommended to Baby Boomers 2.1. Millennials as managers
and Generation X regarding leading and managing
millennials, presently there is a relative scarcity of Millennialsdsometimes referred to as Generation
similar offerings for millennial managers on how to Y or GenYdare individuals born between 1981 and
manage the newest generational cohort: the 1995; in the U.S. they number about 80 million
Generation Z workers. This is the next logical people. They are called millennials because they
progression in the demographic composition of were raised in the digital age, a sign of the up-
organizations, and millennials will likely encounter coming new millennium. Millennials have officially
challenges in managing this newest cohort just as become the largest generation in the population as
Baby Boomers and GenXers faced when dealing of 2018, and represent the largest percentage of
with the millennials. Since the entry of Generation the workforce (Pew Research Center, 2018). As a
Z is a relatively recent event in most organizations, whole, millennials have been described as well-
this might be expected; after all, millennial man- educated, optimistic, collaborative, sociable, and
agers have only had to deal with Generation Z open-minded (Raines, 2003).
workers for a few years. Millennials were raised during the “decade of
Recognizing this, in this article we use certain the child,” during which time parents were
existing frameworks to examine the relationship actively engaged in the child-rearing process.
between millennials as managers and supervisors During their formative years, millennials experi-
and those being supervised as the newest genera- enced the culture wars that included fights for
tion in the workforce: Generation Z workers. We equal rights for homosexuals and the debate on
use leader-member exchange theory and the work abortion rights as well as racial and ethnic di-
values framework as a basis for conducting an versity; millennials were often sheltered because
initial inquiry into the alignment of millennial of concerns about child safety and security (Pew
managers and Generation Z workers. We then use Research Center, 2018). As a result of a parental
this analysis as a basis for providing and social upbringing that tended to emphasize
Generation Z: Millennials as managers 3

building self-esteem through praise, recognition,  Millennial managers are viewed as generalists
and positive feedback, millennials have been rather than specialistsdthey have a broad
referred to as the “most praised” generation knowledge base. They are team-centric,
(Zaslow, 2007). Research suggests that the results wanting to build strong, cohesive teams
of their upbringing have led millennials to feeling with an emphasis on diversity and inclusion.
confident and assertive, and entitled to praise and They are comfortable using multiple modes of
recognition (Twenge, 2006). communication and tend to be more data-
Because there is a growing power vacuum as driven in decision-making (Grossman, 2018).
managers from older generations leave or climb
even higher, millennials are the most plentiful As millennials move into managerial positions,
candidates to fill the positions (Alton, 2018). The they will take the results of their life experiences
Millennial Generation in the workplace has and their early work experiences with them in
received increasing attention as it has been shown developing their managerial approaches and
that millennials demonstrate different attitudes, methods. They also have been influenced by the
values, beliefs, and aspirations in the workplace world in which they came of age, with globaliza-
compared to previous generations (Zemke et al., tion, political unrest, economic turmoil (many
2013). Millennials thrive on challenging work, car- were working or graduating during the Great
ing more about creative expression than leader- Recession of 2008e2009) having shaped their world
ship roles in organizations (Ng et al., 2010). They view. Despite these observations, to date there
are entrepreneurial thinkers who relish re- has been relatively little academic research that
sponsibility, demand immediate feedback, expect has examined the attitudes, behaviors, and prac-
a frequent sense of accomplishment, and have a tices of millennial managers in a rigorous, empir-
high need for organization engagement and sup- ical manner. This may be due in part to the fact
port (Twenge et al., 2010). Although millennials that millennials in managerial positions are a
have an urgent sense of immediacy, they adapt relatively new organizational phenomenon. Ten to
well to new people, places, and circumstances and 15 years ago, books and articles began to appear
can thrive in environments with consistent change counseling Baby Boom and GenX managers on how
(Martin, 2005). While there will always be excep- to manage the millennials; to date, there have
tions, millennial managers can be described using been few attempts to help millennials who are
the following terms: collaborative, flexible, becoming managers deal with the responsibilities
transparent, casual, and balanced (Karsh & of managing in the modern workplace. Unlike their
Templin, 2013). They have been identified as managers, who had a wealth of material to use as a
idealistic, taking pride in their behavior, confi- reference and guide, millennials at present have
dent, and having high levels of personal scrutiny relatively little systematic theory-based or
(Chen & Choi, 2008). empirically based content as they approach a
The shift to millennials as managers has been similar problem: managing the next generation
noted in current popular press and media outlets. entering the workforce.
Various internet posts have recognized that mil-
lennials are beginning to move into managerial and 2.2. Who will millennials manage?
leadership positions and have speculated on the Generation Z enters the workplace
impacts of this shift for the workplace. This has led
to some notable observations: Generation Z is the demographic cohort following
the millennials born after 1995. Early benchmarks
 Millennial managers are more prone to show post-millennials on track to be the most
delivering consistent, ongoing feedback and diverse, best-educated generation yet (Pew
more adept at virtual teams and digital Research Center, 2018). Generation Z is just now
communications; they value collaboration entering the labor market and employers need to
over competition and want to work for com- prepare for their arrival because, by 2030, almost
panies that reflect their values (Lulla, 2019). every entry-level role in the U.S. will be filled by a
member of Generation Z (Al-Asfour & Lettau,
 Millennial managers tend to be purpose- 2014). While Generation Z shares many traits
driven, emphasizing the need to make a dif- with the Millennial Generation, they also bring in
ference in society and their organizations. new patterns of behavior (Iorgulescu, 2016). Their
They work to develop a flexible management managers today not only have to understand how
style with an emphasis on agility (Taylor, to best manage these youthful, inexperienced
2020). employees but also the unique characteristics of
4 K. Gabrielova, A.A. Buchko

the generation shaped by their experiences. This Nearly four decades of research on LMX sub-
generation is first and foremost looking for the stantiates the importance of the supervisor-
best cultural fit for them at their future workplace subordinate relationship in achieving high perfor-
(Ozkan & Solmaz, 2015). They are looking for a mance in the workplace (Cropanzano et al., 2017;
company where they are not just a number, but Dulebohn et al., 2012). A meta-analytic review by
are in a position and place to make a significant Martin et al. (2016) provided support for the pos-
contribution. The top aspect Generation Z looks itive relationship between LMX and both task
for is a fun place to work, with a flexible schedule performance and organizational citizenship per-
and paid time off also ranking high. They are not formance, and a negative relationship with coun-
looking at climbing the ranks quickly. Like millen- terproductive performance. Recent research on
nials, they are interested in getting value quickly. the LMX relationship dynamics has noted the
But many will need to be trained on the skills that importance of memory and emotion in determining
earlier generations and millennials take for gran- the quality of the supervisor-subordinate rela-
ted, like handling calls and writing emails. That is tionship (Masterson et al., 2020; Pathki et al.,
because Generation Z has been less about face-to- 2020). Additional factors that have been found to
face communications. They more commonly moderate the LMX-performance relationship are
communicate via text, emoji, and video. They trust, motivation, empowerment, and job satis-
want to be socially connected with everyone, even faction (Martin et al., 2016).
with their boss. They also need feedback regularly Given the importance of the supervisor-
(Turner, 2015). subordinate relationship on performance in orga-
nizations, it seems logical to inquire about the
preferences of millennials and Generation Z em-
3. Analyzing millennial managers and ployees regarding the supervisor-subordinate
Generation Z workers relationship. To the extent that there is align-
ment between the preferences of the leader and
the followers, LMX theory suggests that workplace
3.1. Leader-member exchange (LMX) theory performance will be enhanced. If millennial man-
agers and Generation Z subordinates’ preferences
Employee performance is one of the major de- are consistent, it would be logical to assume that
terminants of organizational success. It is affected organization performance will be positively
by many factors arising within and outside of the impacted.
organizational context. The supervisor-
subordinate relationship is the primary relation- 3.1.1. Millennials
ship articulated by the organization and the su- Millennials perceive that the supervisory relation-
pervisor’s role is critical in an employee’s ship is the second most important work value
immediate working environment. According to the (Chen & Choi, 2008). According to Omilion-Hodges
leader-member exchange (LMX) theory (Dansereau and Sugg (2019), millennials prefer leaders who
et al., 1975), employees and organizations benefit choose interpersonal relationships, listen care-
from the development of satisfying supervisor- fully, and give personalized attention and frequent
subordinate relationships. Gomez and Rosen communication. Dulin (2008) also found that mil-
(2001) have suggested that high-quality LMX pre- lennials’ leadership preferences are mostly
dicts employees’ experiences of psychological depicted by interpersonal relations. In line with
empowerment, including autonomy. This is these results, Faller and Gogek (2019) found that
because LMX argues that over time, the quality of millennials seek leaders who care about them and
social exchanges leads to a diverse quality of re- leaders who can be trusted.
lationships between supervisors and subordinates. At the same time, since millennials are more
Effective supervisor-subordinate relationships individualistic, engaging in high-quality LMX is
(high-quality LMX relationships) are characterized difficult. Millennials’ focus on work-life balance
by a high level of mutual support, trust, and and extrinsic rewards are also thought to make
respect (Mueller & Lee, 2002), increased informa- millennials less likely to be involved in developing
tion and resource flows, as well as empowering LMX (Anderson et al., 2017). Similarly, cross-
relationships (Sparrowe & Liden, 2005). Employees temporal increases in self-entitlement and rejec-
reporting lower-quality LMX relationships tend to tion of authority (Laird et al., 2015) are cited as
experience fewer organizational perks and out- the source of employees’ decreased interest in
comes and are more likely to leave the organiza- being led by others, which, in turn, is assumed to
tion (Graen & Uhl-Bien, 1995). lead to the re-definition of traditional leader-
Generation Z: Millennials as managers 5

follower relationships and to prompt reformulation would not take on more leadership responsibility in
of leadership theory to fit these shifts. However, their roles.
high-quality LMX can still be obtained; for
example, by using a two-way communication 3.2. Work values
approach or when the subordinates interact more
often with their managers. Dose (1997) proposes a comprehensive definition
of work values and a structural framework that
3.1.2. Generation Z reflects the central elements of the construct and
There is evidence in the literature to suggest that reduces confusion over its conceptual boundaries.
Generation Z will have a high degree of alignment In this vein, she proposes the following definition:
with millennials’ leadership preferences and it is “Work values are evaluative standards relating to
speculated that the generally preferred leadership work or the work environment by which individuals
style will be transformational (Al-Asfour & Lettau, discern what is right or assess the importance of
2014). Generation Z has communicated that a preferences” (Dose, 1997, pp. 227e228). Because
positive attitude is very important for leadership each generation has its set of unique values, skills,
to exhibit (Universum, 2017). They expect to be and characteristics, having employees from
offered internal growth opportunities as well as different generations has created challenges and
development (Adecco, 2016). An organization’s opportunities for managers (Gursoy et al., 2008).
impact on the environment will influence their According to the Society for Human Resource
decision to follow or work for the organization. Management (SHRM), work values are the source of
However, these predictions are challenged as most significant differences among generations
being highly speculative because Generation Z is and a major source of conflict in the workplace
just beginning to enter the workforce. (SHRM, 2009). However, studies also suggest that if
According to research by McGaha (2018), Gen- managed well, those differences can be a source
eration Z prefers a leader who (1) is a strong and of significant strengths and opportunities
effective communicator; (2) drives a positive and (Lancaster & Stillman, 2002). Therefore, managers
inclusive culture; (3) demonstrates high levels of need to understand the underlying value structure
emotional intelligence; (4) provides ongoing of each generation and differences in values
mentorship; (5) has an involved and engaged per- among those generations if they want to create
sonality; (6) is highly competent, and (7) promotes and maintain a work environment that fosters
equality. Her research suggested that Generation Z leadership, motivation, communication, and
strongly prefers the transformational leadership generational synergy (Smola & Sutton, 2002).
style (more so than transactional leadership). A We know of only a few studies that have
study by Grow and Yang (2018) explored Gen-Z’s attempted to examine generational differences in
expectations of future managers. Gen Z re- work values over time. Smola and Sutton (2002)
spondents described their ideal boss as having fair sought to determine whether generation or age
and confident leadership, soft skills, and being contributed more to differences in work values by
friendly and open-minded. In addition, 77% of Gen comparing their 1999 data with data from a 1974
Z respondents indicate they would prefer to have a study conducted by a different author. They found
millennial manager rather than a Gen Xer or Baby that work values are influenced more by a gener-
Boomer. ation than by maturity or age,
Gen Z is unique in growing up with a culture of Although there are many different typologies of
safety where overprotective parenting inadver- work values, three categories have been consis-
tently took away their opportunity to learn life tently identified in past research: first, intrinsic
skills (Lukianoff & Haidt, 2019). This interfered work values, which pertain to the inherent psy-
with their social, emotional, and intellectual chological satisfactions of working, such as inter-
development, making it difficult for them to esting work, challenge, variety, and intellectual
become autonomous adults, able to navigate the stimulation; second, extrinsic work values, which
challenges of life, let alone the workplace. relate to material aspects of work, such as pay,
Becoming autonomous involves learning how to benefits, and job security; and third, social work
make responsible decisions and take actions in values, which pertain to relations with co-workers,
ambiguous and uncertain situations. Schroth supervisors and other people; and the desire to
(2019) notes that Gen Z cites the fear of failing help others and make a contribution to society (Ng
in a leadership role (34%) and a lack of confidence et al., 2010). According to research, millennials
required to lead (33%) as the main reasons they place the greatest importance on extrinsic work
6 K. Gabrielova, A.A. Buchko

values, followed by intrinsic, social work values decision-making and have their ideas valued
(Kuron et al., 2015). Additionally, Twenge et al.’s (Patel, 2017). They are entrepreneurial and not
(2010) research suggested millennials value lei- afraid to leave the known track and forge their
sure and extrinsic rewards more and social and own path because they are agile, adaptive, and
intrinsic rewards less than the previous genera- able to transition quickly to new platforms. Mil-
tion, GenX. Because Twenge and colleagues lennials are also goal and achievement-oriented
collected data across time, their analyses isolated and expect a frequent sense of accomplishment
generational differences from age differences. in their pursuit of changing the status quo, making
Because they are so relatively new to the work- a difference, and thriving in environments with
place, Generation Z has not yet been systemati- consistent change (Martin, 2005).
cally assessed.
4.1.2. Development
Both generations desire ongoing professional
4. Comparing millennial managers and
development through continuous learning,
Generation Z employees advancement, and using one’s abilities. Many
members of Generation Z are motivated by op-
4.1. Intrinsic work values portunities for professional advancement, there-
fore nearly 50% of Generation Z students are
Based on these frameworks, we have attempted to participating in internships (Schawbel, 2014).
summarize in Table 1 a comparison of the Additionally, Generation Z is fortunate to have
supervisor-subordinate relationship and the work websites where they can teach themselves new
values of millennials and Generation Z. given the skills. The top learning method for 59% of Gener-
centrality of the LMX relationship in workplace ation Z is YouTube (Pearson Higher Education,
performance and the differences in values and 2018). When it comes to on-the-job develop-
expectations, we seek to identify areas of high ment, Generation Zers want their managers to
exchange with areas of potential conflict. While become private mentors and help subordinates
millennials and Generation Z share many work with personal advancement (Patel, 2017). Millen-
values such as work-life balance, achievement, nials share this need with their younger counter-
having a supportive environment, and professional parts. They have a high need for organizational
development through frequent feedback, these engagement and support through training and
generations differ in some important values, which development (Martin, 2005).
might cause workplace conflict between a millen-
nial manager and a Generation Z subordinate. The
table indicates our main findings with an evalua- 4.2. Extrinsic work values
tion of how critical the individual value discrep-
ancies are for the working relationship. 4.2.1. Job security and salary
Generation Z is a pragmatic and realistic genera-
4.1.1. Achievement tion. They care about making a difference but are
Both generations share very similar approaches to ultimately motivated by ensuring they have a
intrinsic values. Generation Z is the most secure life outside of work. (Patel, 2017). Tulgan
achievement-oriented generation (Barna Group, (2013) highlighted Generation Z’s need for secu-
2018). Generation Zers want to participate in rity, explaining that members of this cohort grew

Table 1. Key work values: Millennials and Generation Z

Value typology Value indicator Millennials Gen Z Aligned?
Intrinsic work Achievement Achievement-Oriented Yes
values Development Desire ongoing professional development Yes
Extrinsic work Job security and Purpose e Optimistic e Security e Pragmatic e No
values salary Risk-takers Risk aversion
Feedback Frequent Constant Yes
Social work Teamwork Collaborative Competitive No
values Social interaction Sociability Messaging ?
Work-life balance Desire balanced life Yes
Generation Z: Millennials as managers 7

up in a recessionary period. Seeing the impact of a virtual environment, using an abbreviated lan-
the recession on their parents made Generation Z guage that affects their listening, interpersonal,
money conscious and focused on saving and job and socialization skills (Tulgan, 2013). Moreover, as
security (Patel, 2017). Moreover, Generation Zers Generation Zers developed in a competitive envi-
experience stress as they graduate due to sky- ronment, a survey conducted by Robert Half (2015)
rocketing student debt and a rocky labor market. indicates that almost 80% of the members of
More than half of Generation Z are either some- Generation Z expect to work harder than the
what or very worried about the future (58%), and generations older than them so they can carve out
nearly half (4%) of Generation Z say their biggest a successful professional path; they do not want to
financial concern is student debt. The cost of a risk the failure caused by a less ambitious team
college degree has increased by 1,120% in the last member.
35 years (Randstad, 2016). Thus, Generation Z By contrast, millennials believe in partnership,
likes to play it safe. Their expectations are lower, collaboration, and relationships and are more loyal
they are not as confident as millennials (Twenge, to the team than the organization (Casey, 2015).
2017). Millennials prefer to work in teams because they
On the other hand, beyond money, millennials perceive group-based work to be more fun. In ef-
want a sense of purpose. They are optimistic about fect, these two generations that are closest to
their contribution to making a better world (Patel, each other can least work together. Millennials can
2017). Millennials truly believe in the experimental work together with the older generation for a
approach and that the biggest problems can be common goal, but Generation Zers want to achieve
solved using the trial and error method and taking success alone (Adecco, 2016).
risks (Thompson, 2018). Millennials’ positive atti-
tude toward risk is predetermined by the economic 4.3.2. Social interaction
and social situation this generation was in during Workers’ social interaction effectiveness depends
their teenage years. Millennials grew up during an on their ability to read, understand, and control
economic boom and enjoyed the advantages of social interactions, and it is related to job per-
that financial opportunity. formance (Deming, 2017). Tulgan (2013) notes that
Generation Z representatives report a strong need
4.2.2. Feedback for social connections. Nevertheless, Generation
Generation Z demands feedback regularly. Having Zers are more comfortable using technology in
been raised in an instant-reaction world (with likes their social interactions to communicate. By
and other social media rewards), 40% of Gen Z relying on text messaging primarily for their
want daily interactions with their boss and if they interaction, Generation Zers have missed out on
do not get it, they often think they have done learning some vital rules of conversation. This in-
something wrong (Center for Generational cludes how to listen, ask questions, interject in a
Kinetics, 2018). According to a study by Randstad way that is seen as respectful to others, build re-
(2016), feedback needs to be frequent and lationships, solve problems in real time, and
actionable or Generation Z “checks out”. Since resolve conflicts (Pew Research Center, 2012).
they want to improve at their jobs, they can While potentially effective at delivering messages,
handle direct and constructive criticism. For mil- brief and informal correspondence such as that
lennials, who also proactively seek feedback, and frequently received in emails, web memos, text
need it often, feedback is an almost critical messages, social media, and e-bulletins will
ingredient in performance and job satisfaction decrease the opportunity for a high-quality rela-
(Sujansky & Ferri-Reed, 2009). tionship such that they do not allow for the
establishment of mutual trust and can be
4.3. Social work values perceived as disrespectful (Lau & Cobb, 2010).
Additionally, they are also the least likely to have
4.3.1. Teamwork worked when they were young and most likely to
Generation Zers want to manage their own pro- suffer from depression and anxiety (American
jects so their skills can shine through. They do not Psychological Association, 2018), thus they might
want to depend on others to get their work done miss social skills and traits needed for successful
for them (Patel, 2017). Some research (Adecco, professional interactions.
2016) indicates that Generation Z prefers inde- Millennials, on the other hand, tend to empha-
pendent work and tends to be reluctant to get size the face-to-face social aspects of work and
involved in teamwork. This fact can be determined the working environment (Duxbury & Higgins,
by Generation Z’s propensity for communicating in 2005). Appel-Meulenbroek et al. (2019) suggested
8 K. Gabrielova, A.A. Buchko

that sociability with colleagues is the most 5.2. Job security and salary (motivation)
important workplace need of millennials. They
enjoy being part of a community with strong re- To resolve different prioritizing of extrinsic re-
lations that can be called their “work family” wards, millennials should consider the use of
(KPMG, 2017). motivational factors that do not align with their
personal views such as rewards, job stability, and
4.3.3. Work-life balance security (instead of a dynamic environment or
Work-life balance is the most important factor for purpose), and offer a variety of engagement op-
Generation Z when choosing a job (Workforce portunities. Millennial managers should avoid
Institute at Kronos, 2019). They stated that pushing their Generation Z team members to risky
events like the September 11 terrorist attacks projects and rather support their conscientious-
have helped influence a shift toward more work- ness, attempts to lower uncertainty, and risk
life balance. Millennials, who are family-focused, mitigation. Millennials are advised to leverage a
also seek flexible hours and schedules that lead pragmatic approach and accept criticism and un-
to a better work-and-life balance (Karsh & willingness to accomplish unrealistic strategies by
Templin, 2013). This generation grew up with an Generation Z. It can even help decrease costs and
emphasis on family, which has created a shift in enable firms to budget more effectively.
the workplace (Andert, 2011). Having seen their
parents go through economic layoffs and divorces,
millennials prefer focusing on their private lives as 5.3. Teamwork
opposed to their careers (Ng et al., 2010).
Given Generation Z’s individualistic preferences,
millennial managers should provide autonomous
projects and foster a competitive but friendly at-
5. Implications for managerial practice
mosphere in the workplace. Competition can help
to drive innovation and encourage accountability.
As long as Generation Zers are not micromanaged
5.1. Leadership style
and given autonomy, they are likely to get things
done (assuming that they were given adequate
This review of the literature suggests that millen-
onboarding and training).
nials’ traits and skills meet Generation Z’s needs
and leadership style preferences. Specifically,
Generation Z subordinates want a positive, 5.4. Social interactions
communicative leader who provides mentorship
and other developmental opportunities for ambi- Millennial managers need to understand that some
tious team members. This is exactly what millen- of the Generation Z employees are likely to lack
nials are expected to deliver. It can be expected appropriate interpersonal skills. Generation Z
that conceptually, the leadership style prefer- employees may need help and guidance to improve
ences of the millennial superior and the Genera- their social interactions. The development of so-
tion Z subordinate would align and enhance the cial skills increases a worker’s self-esteem, au-
leader-member exchange relationship. tonomy, and more importantly for Generation Z,
However, hoping that first-time managers will their ability to cope with stress while also reducing
excel in their managerial and leadership skills anxiety, depression, and frustration. Millennial
would be naive. Research by Randstad (2016) in- managers can help address these issues by offering
dicates millennials may simply not be prepared, opportunities to Generation Zers to socialize with
nor equipped, with the emotional intelligence other colleagues and organizing team-building
quotient (EQ) and soft skills required to manage events. These events are likely to help Genera-
others effectively. Millennials have not had the tion Zers to feel like they are part of a bigger
opportunity to develop their much-needed skills in family. Finally, millennials also need to adapt to
the areas of navigating corporate politics, leader- new ways to collaborate and communicate,
ship, and team building. According to the Randstad including Generation Z’s preferred computer-
study, millennials named corporate politics as the mediated communication.
second biggest obstacle getting in the way of their Overall, listening, understanding, sharing stor-
work performance. And only 27% of millennials ies, and then setting some developmental goals
rate their personal skills as very good. Millennials together can make a big difference not only in the
will need managerial training to effectively quality of the leader-member relationship but in
perform and succeed in their roles. effort, attitude, and quality of work performed.
Generation Z: Millennials as managers 9

6. Implications for organization research recommendations for millennial managers who

currently are or soon will be responsible for their
Early research on Generation Z has tended to Generation Z subordinates’ work performance.
examine the attitudes and beliefs of this genera- Both of these generations share many similar-
tional cohort, in anticipation of having these in- ities in work values and leadership preferences.
dividuals enter the workforce. We have used some However, we draw attention to those aspects that
of this research as references in this article and in might cause subordinate-supervisor conflict
providing background material for our analysis. because of work value characteristics. Based on
Based on our assessment, there are two major the existing literature it can be suggested that the
immediate needs for high-quality research to be reason for these perceived differences is often
conducted. explained to be the succession of defining mo-
The first is research on early attitudes and be- ments in the lives of these generational cohorts.
liefs of Generation Z as these persons begin their We have identified four areas where there is a
careers and work lives. Much of the existing higher risk of a work conflict. These areas are
research has been on students, and to be sure leadership style, motivation, teamwork, and social
many in the Generation Z cohort are still in high interactions. We have offered leaders some rec-
school and college as this is written. However, as ommendations to address these discrepancies that
we have noted, the leading edge of this cohort is millennial managers should not only be aware of
now entering the workplace. Initial research using but also know how to apply in their organizations.
employee survey data opportunities might provide These suggested tactics cannot be used all of the
insights into how these first movers are adapting to time, though. At the end of the day, the answers to
the work environment. What are their attitudes questions about how to manage Generation Z lies
toward work? Toward the company? Toward their with the employees themselves. Millennial man-
supervisors? Much work needs to be done to begin agers need to make the effort to talk to their
to discern the values, beliefs, and attitudes that subordinates, engage Generation Z to identify
will influence the behavior of these newest em- what they want, and seek to accommodate these
ployees in the organization. wants in the organization and in work life when-
The second opportunity for meaningful research ever possible.
is in examining the initial behaviors, attitudes, and
beliefs of millennials as these persons begin to
take on managerial roles and responsibilities in References
their organizations. How do millennials prefer to
be managed, and how do they manage others? Adecco. (2016). Generation Z vs. millennials. Available at
What are their attitudes toward their sub- http://pages.adeccousa.com/rs/107-IXF-539/images/
ordinates, in particular toward Generation Z? How generation-z-vs-millennials.pdf
do these beliefs translate into managerial prac- Al-Asfour, A., & Lettau, L. (2014). Strategies for leadership
tices? What types of training or education pro- styles for multi-generational workforce. Journal of Leader-
ship, Accountability, and Ethics, 11(2), 58e69.
grams do millennial managers perceive as most Alton, L. (2018, January 17). Millennials are ready to be leaders:
valuable, and how can organizations provide such Here’s how they’re doing it. Forbes. Available at https://
training? These and many similar management is- www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2018/01/17/millennials-
sues will need to be examined and reviewed with are-ready-to-be-leaders-heres-how-theyre-doing-it
high-quality theoretical and empirical efforts to American Psychological Association. (2018). Stress in America:
Generation Z. Washington, DC: APA.
assist organizations in making the transition to the Anderson, H. J., Baur, J. E., Griffith, J. A., & Buckley, M. R.
next generational cohort. (2017). What works for you may not work for (Gen) Me:
Limitations of present leadership theories for the new gen-
eration. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 245e260.
7. Conclusion Andert, D. (2011). Alternating leadership as a proactive orga-
nizational intervention: Addressing the needs of the baby
boomers, Generation Xers, and millennials. Journal of
Generation Z represents a very significant gener- Leadership, Accountability, and Ethics, 8(4), 67e83.
ational shift in the workplace. As Generation Z Appel-Meulenbroek, H. A. J. A., Vosters, S. M. C.,
starts to enter the labor market, the need to Kemperman, A. D. A. M., & Arentze, T. A. (2019). Workplace
better understand its characteristics has become needs and their support: Are millennials different from
more important. As a result, this article has other generations?. Available at http://www.prres.net/
index.htm?http://www.prres.net/Conference.htm
attempted to provide a contextual overview of the Arsenault, P. M. (2004). Validating generational differences: A
defining work-related characteristics of the two legitimate diversity and leadership issue. The Leadership &
youngest generations and create a set of Organization Development Journal, 25(2), 124e141.
10 K. Gabrielova, A.A. Buchko

Barna Group. (2018, June 6). Is Gen Z the most success oriented gaps in the hospitality workforce. International Journal of
generation?. Available at https://www.barna.com/ Hospitality Management, 27(3), 458e488.
research/is-gen-z-the-most-success-oriented-generation/ Half, R. (2015). Get ready for Generation Z. Menlo Park. CA:
Casey, S. (2015). How millennial are you? PM World, 4(10). Robert Half.
Available at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/ Iorgulescu, M. C. (2016). Generation Z and its perception of
uploads/2015/10/pmwj39-Oct2015-Casey-how-millennial- work. Cross-Cultural Management Journal, 18(1), 47e54.
are-you-second-edition.pdf Kaifi, B. A., Nafei, W. A., Khanfar, N. M., & Kaifi, M. M. (2012). A
Center for Generational Kinetics. (2018). State of Gen Z 2018: multi-generational workforce: Managing and understanding
Surprising new research on Gen Z as employees and con- millennials. International Journal of Business and Manage-
sumers. Available at https://genhq.com/generation-z- ment, 7(24), 88e93.
research-2018/ Karsh, B., & Templin, C. (2013). Manager 3.0: A millennial’s
Chen, P. J., & Choi, Y. (2008). Generational differences in work guide to rewriting the rules of management. New York, NY:
values: A study of hospitality management. International AMACOM.
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(6), KPMG. (2017). Meet the millennials. Available at https://home.
595e615. kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/uk/pdf/2017/04/Meet-the-
Cropanzano, R., Dasborough, M. T., & Weiss, H. M. (2017). Af- Millennials-Secured.pdf
fective events and the development of leader-member ex- Kuron, L. K., Lyons, S. T., Schweitzer, L., & Ng, E. S. (2015).
change. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 233e258. Millennials’ work values: Differences across the school to
Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad work transition. Personnel Review, 44(6), 991e1009.
linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: Laird, M. D., Harvey, P., & Lancaster, J. B. (2015). Account-
A longitudinal investigation of the role-making process. ability, entitlement, tenure, and satisfaction in Generation
Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 13(1), Y. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(1), 87e100.
46e78. Lancaster, L. C., & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations
Deming, D. J. (2017). The growing importance of social skills in collide: Traditionalists, baby boomers, Generation Xers,
the labor market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), millennials: Who they are, why they clash, how to solve the
1593e1640. generational puzzle at work. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Dittmann, M. (2005). Generational differences at work. Monitor Lau, R. S., & Cobb, A. T. (2010). Understanding the connections
on Psychology, 36(6), 54e55. between relationship conflict and performance: The inter-
Dose, J. J. (1997). Work values: An integrative framework and vening roles of trust and exchange. Journal of Organiza-
illustrative application to organizational socialization. tional Behavior, 31(6), 898e917.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2019). The coddling of the American
70(3), 219e240. mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a
Dulebohn, J. H., Bommer, W. H., Liden, R. C., Brouer, R. L., & generation for failure. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Ferris, G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and Lulla, A. (2019, December 3). The millennial managers are here:
consequences of leader-member exchange. Journal of Four ways millennials are reshaping the workplace (again).
Management, 38(6), 1715e1759. Forbes. Available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/
Dulin, L. (2008). Leadership preferences of a generation Y forbeshumanresourcescouncil/2019/12/03/the-millennial-
cohort: A mixed-methods investigation. Journal of Leader- managers-are-here-four-ways-millennials-are-reshaping-
ship Studies, 2(1), 43e59. the-workplace-again/?shZ5dce4f46e044
Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2005). An empirical assessment of Mannheim, K. (1952). Essays on the sociology of knowledge.
generational differences in work-related values. In Pro- London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
ceedings of the annual conference on the administrative Martin, C. A. (2005). From high maintenance to high produc-
sciences association of Canada human resources manage- tivity. What managers need to know about Generation Y.
ment. Toronto, Canada: ASAC. Industrial & Commercial Training, 37(1), 39e44.
Espinoza, C., & Ukleja, M. (2016). Managing the millennials: Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O.
Discover the core competencies for managing today’s (2016). Leaderemember exchange (LMX) and performance:
workforce. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1),
Faller, M., & Gogek, J. (2019). Break from the past: Survey 67e121.
suggests modern leadership styles needed for millennial Masterson, C. R., Sun, J., Wayne, S. J., & Kluemper, D. H.
nurses. Nurse Leader, 17(2), 135e140. (2020). Roller coasters of happiness: A study of interns’
Gomez, C., & Rosen, B. (2001). The leader-member exchange as happiness variability, LMX, and job-seeking goals. In Acad-
a link between managerial trust and employee empower- emy of management proceedings (Vol. 2020). Briarcliff
ment. Group & Organization Management, 26(1), 53e69. Manor, NY: Academy of Management.
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based McGaha, K. K. (2018). An interpretive phenomenological study
approach to leadership: Development of leader-member of America’s emerging workforce: Exploring Generation Z’s
exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying leadership preferences [Unpublished doctoral dissertation].
a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership University of Phoenix.
Quarterly, 6(2), 219e247. Mueller, B. H., & Lee, J. (2002). Leader-member exchange and
Grossman, P. (2018, May 25). What to expect from millennials organizational communication satisfaction in multiple con-
as managers. Zendesk. Available at https://www.zendesk. texts. Journal of Business Communication, 39(2), 220e244.
com/blog/millennials-as-managers/ Ng, E., Schweitzer, L., & Lyons, S. (2010). New generation,
Grow, J. M., & Yang, S. (2018). Generation-Z enters the great expectations: A field study of the millennial genera-
advertising workplace: Expectations through a gendered tion. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 281e292.
lens. Journal of Advertising Education, 22(1), 7e22. Omilion-Hodges, L. M., & Sugg, C. E. (2019). Millennials’ views
Gursoy, D., Maier, T. A., & Chi, C. G. (2008). Generational dif- and expectations regarding the communicative and rela-
ferences: An examination of work values and generational tional behaviors of leaders: Exploring young adults’ talk
Generation Z: Millennials as managers 11

about work. Business and Professional Communication perspectives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4),
Quarterly, 82(1), 74e100. 505e535.
Ozkan, M., & Solmaz, B. (2015). The changing face of the Stewart, J. S., Oliver, E. G., Cravens, K. S., & Oishi, S. (2017).
employeeseGeneration Z and their perceptions of work (a Managing millennials: Embracing generational differences.
study applied to university students). Procedia Economics Business Horizons, 60(1), 45e54.
and Finance, 26, 476e483. Sujansky, J., & Ferri-Reed, J. (2009). Keeping the millennials:
Patel, D. (2017, August 27). The top 5 traits Gen Z looks for in Why companies are losing billions in turnover to this gen-
leaders. Forbes. Available at https://www.forbes.com/ erationeAnd what to do about it. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
sites/deeppatel/2017/08/27/the-top-5-traits-gen-z-looks- & Sons.
for-in-leaders/?shZ5572e7c8609d Taylor, C. (2020, July 3). The millennial managers have arrived.
Pathki, C. S. R., Gooty, J., Williams, C., Kluemper, D. H., & Korn Ferry. Available at https://www.kornferry.com/
Little, L. M. (2020). The role of a LMX defining memory and insights/articles/the-millennial-managers-have-arrived
relationship emotions in leader-follower relationships. In Thompson, R. (2018). Millennials aren’t entitled. It’s employers
Academy of management proceedings (Vol. 2020). Briarcliff that need to change. Mashable. Available at https://mashable.
Manor, NY: Academy of Management. com/2018/06/01/millennials-entitled-workplace-culture
Pearson Higher Education. (2018, May 24). What do Generation Thompson, C., & Gregory, J. B. (2012). Managing millennials: A
Z and millennials expect from technology in education?. framework for improving attraction, motivation, and
Available at https://www.pearsoned.com/generation-z- retention. Psychologist-Manager Journal, 15(4), 237e246.
millennials-expect-technology-education/ Tulgan, B. (2013). Meet Generation Z: The second generation
Pew Research Center. (2012, March 19). Communication within the giant “millennial” cohort. New Haven, CT:
choices: Texting dominates teens’ general communication Rainmaker Thinking.
choices. Available at http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/ Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and social interest.
03/19/communication-choices/ The Journal of Individual Psychology, 71(2), 103e113.
Pew Research Center. (2018, April 11). Millennials are the Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation me: Why today’s young Ameri-
largest generation in the U.S. labor force. Available at cans are more confident, assertive, entitledeAnd more
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/11/ miserable than ever before. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
millennials-largest-generation-us-labor-force/ Twenge, J. M. (2017). IGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are
Raines, C. (2003). Connecting generations: The sourcebook for growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happydAnd
a new workplace. Boston, MA: Cengage. completely unprepared for adulthoodeAnd what that means
Randstad. (2016). Gen Z and millennials collide at work. for the rest of us. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
Atlanta, GA: Randstad. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E.
Schawbel, D. (2014, February 3). The high school careers study. (2010). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and
Workplace Intelligence. Available at http:// extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values
workplaceintelligence.com/high-school-careers-study/ decreasing. Journal of Management, 36(5), 1117e1142.
Schroth, H. (2019). Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace? Universum. (2017). Building leaders for the future. Stockholm,
California Management Review, 61(3), 5e18. Sweden: Universum.
SHRM. (2009). The multigenerational workforce: Opportunity Workforce Institute at Kronos. (2019). Generation Z in the
for competitive success. Alexandria, VA: Society for Human workplace. Lowell, MA: UKG.
Resource Management. Zaslow, J. (2007, April 20). The most-praised generation goes to
Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: work. Wall Street Journal. Available at https://www.wsj.
Revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. com/articles/SB117702894815776259?mgZprod/com-wsj
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 363e382. Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2013). Generations at
Sparrowe, R. T., & Liden, R. C. (2005). Two routes to influence: work: Managing the clash of boomers, Gen Xers, and Gen
Integrating leader-member exchange and social network Yers in the workplace. New York, NY: AMACOM.