Who are Generation X and Y?

Generation is defined as people that are grouped within a certain range of ages, location they
live, and significant life events they experienced at critical developmental stages
(Kupperschmidt, 2000). The groups are often referred to as cohorts, whose members are linked
to each other through shared life experiences during their formative years. As each cohort ages, it
is influenced by what sociologists call generational markers. As products of their environment,
members of the cohort are influenced by events that have an impact on all members of the
generational grouping (Zemke et al. 2000).As a result each generation has its own unique
combination of experiences, expertise, prospective and expectations. It is believed that their
similarities in terms of work values, attitudes, preferences, expectations, perceptions and
behaviors are fettled from same or hemophilic historical, economic, and social experiences
(Smola & Sutton, 2002; Zemke et al., 2000). With proper understanding, accepting and
cooperation of these generations, organization will enjoy stronger competitive advantages by
utilizing and sharing their unique experiences and expertise.
Generation X
Generation X refers to as Lost Generation that are born between 1966 - 1976 and reaching their
age of 36 to 46 years old as of year 2012 (William, 2008, Tay, 2011). Generation X learned from
their elders that following company rules and regulations is least likely secure their jobs (Dougan
et. al., 2008). This generation cohorts are placing a high importance on maintaining their work-
life balance and constantly seeking for a balance between family, life and work (Gursoy et. al.,
2008; Kaylene et. al., 2010). Hence, they rank their families and personal time very important to
a level where they will least likely to sacrifice their leisure hours to go for work. Much of them
are not willing to work at the weekends as these are the days they will get along with their
families. They are often showing their demands when they face issues that may have effects on
their lives (Cole et.al., 2002).
A number of studies have discovered generation X possesses some important characteristic. For
example Santos and Cox (2000) discovered generation X prefers organization that grant them
flexible working schedule, high autonomy, interesting yet challenging work, and continuous
opportunity for professional growth. Hence, they treat work delegated to them as tasks and prefer
to do it on their own (Murphy, 2010). They are much dependent on their own skills and trust in
their own judgments to perform their task independently (Richard, 2007).
Gursoy et al. (2008) perceived Gen X employees as employees that prefer to work smartly they
will always be looking for their own ways to carry out their task than just follow what their
seniors usually do. With the aid of their characteristic nature in technological literacy, they
displayed high favor in working environment that fill up by high technology that allowing them
to carry out their task independently(Dougan et al., 2008).In addition, they are much focused on
self-career development (Santos & Cox, 2000) and motivated by desire to enhance their
professional skills to increase their marketability for future career prospects (Richard, 2007;
Dougan et. al., 2008). Their decisions to whether remain or leave organization basely depends on
opportunities for professional development and prefer direct and immediate recognition and
reward (Hammil, 2005). They have low tolerance in queuing their turns for promotions and are
looking forward to immediate recognitions and rewards them every time they did a good job
(Dougan et al., 2008). Altimier (2006) found that much of the Generation X employees do not
resist job hopping and are less interested to remain long in an organization, but believe that with
their sufficient and competitive capabilities, job hopping will provide higher promotion
opportunities and higher salary.
Moreover, most of Generation X employees have also experienced Asian Financial Crisis in year
1997 and suffered limited job opportunities in their young ages (Lager, 2006). As generation X
has experienced economic depressions; they have developed a low trust on their organization.
Besides, as they watched their elders that exerted time and loyalty in return of being sacrifice
from economic depressions, they were skeptical for their organizations and have very low
tolerance for bureaucracy and organizational regulations, especially regarding procedures that
will obligate their performance (Crumpacker & Crumpacker, 2007). The summary of
characteristics of Generation X is shows in table below


Generation Y
Generation Y is well known as Millenniums who are born between 1980 to 2000 (William, 2008,
Tay, 2011). Zemke et al., (2000) and it is perceived that Generation Y employees are more
cooperative and optimistic than their elders as most of them have high educational background or
professional training. Hence, most of them are well graduated at least with Diploma or Degree in
colleges or universities (William, 2008). Besides, they usually prefer to be casual in workplaces
and expecting their managers to care for their well-being (Gursoy et al., 2008). Nevertheless,
they have a high tolerance in diversity in age, ethnicity, and gender orientation because they
want this world to be a better place for everyone to live (Gursoy et al., 2008; Zemke et al., 2000).
However,In addition, generation Y are great collaborators and showing a high favour in
teamwork (Dougan et al., 2008) and prefer to follow directions as long as there is flexibility for
them to get the work done (Gursoy et al., 2008; Iyer & Reisenwitz, 2009). Their motivations rely
much on good teamwork with their team members (Murphy, 2010). Since they experienced an
equal status and opportunities to voice in schools extra-curriculums, they are also showing their
capabilities in group activities, practicing instant communication and expecting feedback in their
workplaces (Gursoy et al., 2008).
Generation Y is found to be grown up with advanced technology (Spiro, 2006). With aids of high
technologies, they are proficient in assimilating information quickly, grabbling for wider
knowledge, and high capability in multitasking (Dougan et. al., 2008). Thus, Tay (2010) pointed
out that Generation Y employees would remain longer in organizations that invest and supplies
sophisticated technologies and make their jobs interesting, challenging and entertaining. The
summary of characteristics of generation Y is presented in Table below .



Kupperschmidt, 2000
Multigeneration employees: strategies for effective management.
Kupperschmidt BR.
Abstract
Today's health care workforce comprises Traditional, Baby Boomer, and Generation X
employees. Effective managers must understand the times and generational characteristics of
these employees and they must assure that employees understand and respect one another's
differences. They must foster open discussion of how generational differences influence attitudes
toward work and organizations. They must provide opportunities for multigenerational
employees to contribute their best concurrent with meeting organizational goals. Employees
must be offered a conditional security based upon value-added results and collaboration.
Managers must use leadership practices that encourage the hearts of dispirited employees.

Generations at Work: Managing the Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and
Nexters in Your Workplace
Ron Zemke
Veterans...Baby Boomers...GenXers ...Nexters. Mix them all together, and what do you get?
Sometimes disaster! Here are fresh insights and practical solutions for easing the inevitable
conflicts of today's age - and values-diverse workplace, where people just don't see work (or life)
the same way. "They have no work ethic". "So I told my boss, 'If you're looking for loyalty, get a
dog". "I will not attend meetings that start after 5". There's a serious new problem in the
workplace, and it has nothing to do with downsizing, change, foreign competition, pointy-haired
bosses, cubicle envy, or greed. Instead, it's the problem of distinct generations - the Veterans, the
Baby Boomers, the GenXers, and (coming soon) the Nexters - crossing paths and sometimes
colliding. So how can you manage this motley group with their conflicting work ethics,
dissimilar values, and idiosyncratic styles? How do you get them to stop snarling at each other?
How do you motivate them to work together? "Generations at Work" is the first book to clearly
outline each group's primary characteristics, and to explain the seminal events and cultural icons
that shaped their attitudes and values. But it doesn't just provide an astute sociological portrait.
The book also offers practical, sound solutions for avoiding (or remedying) the most common
mistakes of managing in today's cross-generational workplace. Readers will find profiles of
companies with effective strategies for smoothing generational conflict ...a true-to-life case study
of a manager caught in the crossfire ...and 21 key questions and answers for solving cross-gen
problems. For anyone struggling to manage a workforce with different ways of working, talking,
and thinking, "Generations at Work" both explains the gulf that separates the generations and
offers insightful solutions for creating workplace harmony.
Managing your multigenerational workforce. Strategic Finance
Kyles, D. (2005)
Kyles cautioned although each of the four generations of working employees manifests
different values, expectations, and attitudes, not every person fits all of the characteristics of
his/her generations description. Kupperschmidt indicated although generations share
experiences and develop a peer personality, these characteristics are generalizations, thus
individual differences within generations do exist.
Generational differences in values, attitudes, expectations, learning styles, and needs present
unique challenges for leaders responsible for intergenerational knowledge transfer within
organizations.


The Big Five Personality Dimensions
Many contemporary personality psychologists believe that there are five basic dimensions of
personality, often referred to as the "Big 5" personality traits. The five broad personality traits
described by the theory are extraversion, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness, and
neuroticism.
Previous trait theorist had suggested a various number of possible traits, including Gordon
Allport's list of 4,000 personality traits, Raymond Cattell's 16 personality factors and Hans
Eysenck's three-factor theory.
However, many researchers felt that Cattell's theory was too complex and Eysenck's was too
limited in scope. As a result, the five-factor theory emerged to describe the basic traits that serve
as the building blocks of personality.
What Are the Big Five Dimensions of Personality?
Today, many researchers believe that they are five core personality traits. Evidence of this theory
has been growing over the past 50 years, beginning with the research of D. W. Fiske (1949) and
later expanded upon by other researchers including Norman (1967), Smith (1967), Goldberg
(1981), and McCrae & Costa (1987).
The "big five" are broad categories of personality traits. While there is a significant body of
literature supporting this five-factor model of personality, researchers don't always agree on the
exact labels for each dimension. However, these five categories are usually described as follows:
Extraversion: This trait includes characteristics such as excitability, sociability, talkativeness,
assertiveness and high amounts of emotional expressiveness.
Agreeableness: This personality dimension includes attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness,
affection, and other prosocial behaviors.
Conscientiousness: Common features of this dimension include high levels of thoughtfulness,
with good impulse control and goal-directed behaviors. Those high in conscientiousness tend to
be organized and mindful of details.
Neuroticism: Individuals high in this trait tend to experience emotional instability, anxiety,
moodiness, irritability, and sadness.
Openness: This trait features characteristics such as imagination and insight, and those high in
this trait also tend to have a broad range of interests.
It is important to note that each of the five personality factors represents a range between two
extremes. For example, extraversion represents a continuum between extreme extraversion and
extreme introversion. In the real world, most people lie somewhere in between the two polar
ends of each dimension.
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
A chart with descriptions of each Myers-Briggs personality type and the four dichotomies central
to the theory.
Carl Jung in 1910. Isabel Briggs Myers and Katharine Cook Briggs extrapolated their MBTI
theory from Jung's writings in his book, Psychological Types. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTI) assessment is a psychometric questionnaire designed to measure psychological
preferences in how people perceive the world and make decisions. These preferences were
extrapolated by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers from the typological theories
proposed by Carl Gustav Jung, and first published in his 1921 book Psychological Types
(English edition, 1923). Jung theorized that there are four principal psychological functions by
which we experience the world: sensation, intuition, feeling, and thinking. One of these four
functions is dominant most of the time.

The original developers of the personality inventory were Katharine Cook Briggs and her
daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers. After extensively studying the work of Jung, they turned their
interest of human behavior into a devotion to turn the theory of psychological types to practical
use. They began creating the indicator during World War II in the 1940s[2] through their own
original research, with the belief that a knowledge of personality preferences would help women
who were entering the industrial workforce for the first time to identify the sort of war-time jobs
that would be "most comfortable and effective":xiii for them. The initial questionnaire grew into
the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which was first published in 1962. The MBTI is constructed
for normal populations and emphasizes the value of naturally occurring differences.Robert
Kaplan and Dennis Saccuzzo stated that "the underlying assumption of the MBTI is that we all
have specific preferences in the way we construe our experiences, and these preferences underlie
our interests, needs, values, and motivation.
Correlations of extraversion, impulsivity and sociability with sensation seeking and MBTI-
introversion
John B. Campbell, Jack F. Heller
Three samples of undergraduates completed the Eysenck Personality Inventory (EPI), Sensation
Seeking Scale (SSS), Myers-Briggs Type Indicator-Introversion scale (MBTI-I), and, in one
sample, the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). As predicted, the correlation of EPI-Soc
with MBTI-I was significantly and consistently larger than that for EPI-Imp; however, the
tendency for EPI-Imp to have a larger correlation than EPI-Soc with SSS was not significant.
Impulsivity and Sociability exhibited similar correlations with EPI-E, but Sociability had a
significantly higher correlation with EPQ-E than did Impulsivity. Results demonstrate both the
differential utility of Impulsivity and Sociability and the evolving nature of the EPI and EPQ
measures of Extraversion.
Personality and its effects on learning performance: Design guidelines for an adaptive e-
learning system based on a user model
Jieun Kima, Ahreum Leeb, Hokyoung Ryub,
An increasingly widespread interest in developing fully adaptable e-learning systems (e.g.,
intelligent tutoring systems) has led to the development of a wide range of adaptive processes
and techniques. In particular, advances in these systems are based on optimization for each user's
learning style and characteristics, to enable a personalized learning experience. Current
techniques are aimed at using a learner's personality traits and its effect on learning preferences
to improve both the initial learning experience and the information retained (e.g., top-down or
bottom-up learning organization). This study empirically tested the relationship between a
learner's personality traits, analyzed the effects of these traits on learning preferences, and
suggested design guidelines for adaptive learning systems. Two controlled experiments were
carried out in a computer-based learning session. Our first experiment showed a significant
difference in the learning performance of participants who were identified as introverts vs. those
who were identified as being extroverts, according to the MBTI scale. As the distinction between
extroverted personality types vs. introverted personality types showed the strongest correlation in
terms of different learning styles, we used this criteria in our second experiment to determine
whether design guidelines for appropriate content organization could reinforce the
aforementioned correlation between personality type and learning experience.
Relevance to industry: The findings from this article provide how one can practically apply
personality traits to the design of e-learning systems. The structure and level of extraversion
could be the features to be examined in this regard.