ArticlePDF Available

Decoding gen Z employee profiles: revealing work values

February 2024
Recherches en Sciences de Gestion N° 159(6):267-294

February 2024
N° 159(6):267-294

DOI:10.3917/resg.159.0267

Authors:

University of Sfax

Cette recherche tente de répondre à la question : les salariés de la génération Z sont-ils homogènes ou y a-t-il des profils différents selon les valeurs du travail ? Une approche quantitative a été déployée via une enquête par questionnaire administrée en ligne auprès des employés actifs de la génération Z à travers les médias sociaux. Au total, 152 employés ont répondu à notre questionnaire. L’analyse typologique a été effectuée afin de vérifier l'existence d’un ou plusieurs groupes homogènes par rapport aux valeurs du travail. Les résultats montrent que les profils de la Gen Z ne sont pas homogènes et ont identifié trois types de profils : le fonctionnaire-bienveillant, le carriériste et l’indépendant.

Bartlett's sphericity test, KMO test and cronbach's alpha

…

Factor structure of the variables

…

Work values according to Gen Z profile categories

…

Figures - uploaded by Amira Sghari

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Amira Sghari

Content may be subject to copyright.

Decoding gen Z employee profiles: revealing work values

Amira Sghari, Wafi Chtourou, Sarra Ghattas

Dans Recherches en Sciences de GestionRecherches en Sciences de Gestion 2023/6 (N° 159)2023/6 (N° 159), pages 267 à 294

Éditions ISEORISEOR

ISSN 2259-6372

DOI 10.3917/resg.159.0267

Distribution électronique Cairn.info po ur ISEOR.Distribution électronique Cairn.info po ur ISEOR.

La reproduction ou représentation de c et article, notamment par photocopie, n'est autorisée que dans les lim ites des conditions générales d'utilisation du site ou, le

cas échéant, des conditions générales de la licence souscrite par votre établissement. Toute autre reproduct ion ou représentation, en tout ou partie, sous quelque

forme et de quelque manière que ce so it, est interdite sauf accord préalable et écrit de l'éditeur, en dehors des cas prévus par la législation en vigueur en France. Il est

précisé que son stockage dans une ba se de données est également interdit.

Article disponible en ligne à l’adresseArticle disponible en ligne à l’adresse

https://www.cairn.info/revue-recherches-en-sciences-de-gestion-2023-6-page-267.htm

Découvrir le sommaire de ce numéro, suivre la revue par email, s’abonner...

Flashez ce QR Code pour accéder à la page de ce numéro sur Cairn.info.

revue Recherche en Sciences de Gestion-Management Sciences-Ciencias de

Gestión, n°159 p. 267 à 294

Decoding Gen Z Employee Profiles:

Revealing Work Values

Amira Sghari

Assistant Professor

ESSEC, University of Tunis

PRISME, LR18ES24

(Tunisia)

Wafi Chtourou

Professor

IHEC, University of Carthage

ECSTRA, LR11ES21

(Tunisia)

Sarra Ghattas

PhD Student

IHEC, University of Carthage

ECSTRA, LR11ES21

(Tunisia)

This research tries to answer the question: Based on work

values, are Gen Z employees homogeneous, or are there different

profiles? A quantitative study via a questionnaire was administered

online to active Gen Z employees through social media. A total of 152

employees responded to our questionnaire. Cluster analysis was

carried out to verify the existence of one or more homogeneous

groups according to their work values. The results show that the

profiles of Gen Z are not homogeneous and have identified three

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

profile types: the civil servant-benevolent, the careerist, and the self-

employed.

Keywords: Gen Z - Work values – Profile - Quantitative study -

Cluster analysis.

Comprendre les profils des employés de la Génération Z

à travers leurs valeurs au travail

Cette recherche tente de répondre à la question : les salariés

de la génération Z sont-ils homogènes ou y a-t-il des profils différents

selon les valeurs du travail ? Une approche quantitative a été

déployée via une enquête par questionnaire administrée en ligne

auprès des employés actifs de la génération Z à travers les médias

sociaux. Au total, 152 employés ont répondu à notre questionnaire.

L’analyse typologique a été effectuée afin de vérifier l'existence d’un

ou plusieurs groupes homogènes par rapport aux valeurs du travail.

Les résultats montrent que les profils de la Gen Z ne sont pas

homogènes et ont identifié trois types de profils : le fonctionnaire-

bienveillant, le carriériste et l’indépendant.

Mots-clés : Gen Z - Valeurs au travail – Profil - Étude quantitative -

Analyse par grappes.

Comprender los perfiles de los empleados de la Generación

Z a través de sus valores laborales

Esta investigación trata de responder a la pregunta: en

función de los valores laborales, ¿los empleados de la Generación Z

son homogéneos o hay diferentes perfiles? Se administró un enfoque

cuantitativo a través de una encuesta de cuestionario de empleados

activos de la Generación Z en línea a través de las redes sociales. Un

total de 152 empleados respondieron a nuestro cuestionario. El

análisis de conglomerados se lleva a cabo con el fin de verificar la

existencia de uno o más grupos homogéneos en relación con sus

valores de trabajo. Los resultados muestran que los perfiles de la

Generación Z no son homogéneos y se han identificado tres tipos de

perfiles: el funcionario-benevolente, el arribista y el independiente.

268

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Palabras clave: Gen Z - Valor de trabajo – Perfil – estudio

cuantitativo – Análisis de conglomerados.

Introduction

Generation Z also known as Gen Z, iGeneration or iGen,

post-millennials, Digital Natives, and Facebook-generation are many

qualifiers characterizing people born from 1995, who grew up in the

digital age, and who joined the workplace from 2017 (e.g., Arar and

Onerenb, 2018). They are heavily dependent on the digital world in

almost every aspect of their lives (Goh and Lee, 2018). Moreover,

social networks, vital for them, have induced an informal, individual,

and straight way of communicating (Agarwal and Vaghela, 2018).

According to Agarwal and Vaghela (2018), studies show that

Gen Z is not an extension of the Millennial. Indeed, Gen Z employees

are more entrepreneurial, trustworthy, tolerant (Schawbel, 2014;

Bridges, 2015) impatient, and agile than their predecessors (Bencsik et

al., 2016). Moreover, they are more realistic about their work

expectation, optimistic about the future (Bridges, 2015), more self-

focused (Twenge, 2013), and accept diversity (Goh and Lee, 2018).

Also, they are not afraid of continuous changes and look always for

new challenges and impulses continuously (Bencsik et al., 2016).

Hence, there are differences in work values compared to previous

generations (Twenge et al., 2010).

Gen Z will dominate the market in the next few years.

Employers will find themselves facing a generation that chooses a

career of their interest and does not meet any requirements (Bencsik et

al., 2016). Thus, it is crucial to understand the preferences of Gen Z to

create a good working environment (Agarwal and Vaghela, 2018).

These authors add that organizations should start focusing on how the

workplace needs to adapt for this generation.

Research on this cohort remains limited (Barhate and Dirani,

2021). Indeed, so far researchers are concerned with Gen Y employees

(e.g., Naim and Lenka, 2018; Torsello, 2019). According to Chillakuri

(2020 b, p. 1279), “the literature on Generation Z is at an emerging

phase”. Previous work focused on several themes such as the study of

the different and more salient expectations and features of new

generation Z compared to the previous ones and the ways of managing

269

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

them (Arar and Yuksel, 2015), their perceptions about working in the

hospitality industry (Goh et Lee, 2018), their current habits in using

smart technology, social media, and voice communication for personal

communication (Janssen and Carradini, 2021), Gen Z students’ career

aspirations and their future employers’ expectations (Barhate and

Dirani, 2021), etc. The study of the work values of Generation Z

remains little explored.

The literature presents Generation Z as a homogeneous set of

people with the same characteristics and values without an empirical

foundation. Agarwal and Vaghela (2018) tried to answer the question:

how do the work values differ within different groups of Generation

Z? As Gen Z was not available in the marketplace, this research was

carried out with students at an Indian university. The division of the

sample was based on gender. Thus, the literature is still silent on the

homogeneity or not of generation Z employees’ profiles. Then, this

research tries to answer the question: Based on work values, are

Generation Z employees homogeneous, or are there different profiles?

Tang (2019) highlights the need to consider the study

context. Hence, to answer this question, an exploratory quantitative

study was carried out among generation Z Tunisian employees.

1. – Theoretical framework

Work values are defined as the goals of what individuals

pursue in their work and which in turn influence their choices and

abilities (Ye, 2015). They predict what kind of attitude individuals

have towards different work positions (Ye, 2015). The work values

differ between generations (Dries et al., 2008; Ye, 2015) but it is

important to understand if they differ between individuals within the

generation itself (Jaskyte, 2014).

Recent research emphasizes the importance of five work

values (intrinsic, extrinsic, altruistic, status/prestige, and social)

(Cennamo and Gardner, 2008; Lyons et al., 2010; Twenge et al., 2010;

Agarwal and Vaghela, 2018). Lyons (2003) developed an early

version of a Work Value Scale (WVS) which was revised in 2010.

According to the new version, social and altruistic values are

combined under one value due to their similarity. This last scale,

which offers four work values (extrinsic values, intrinsic values,

prestige values (Status-Associated), and social/altruistic values) has

270

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

been mobilized in this research. The mobilized Work Value Scale

(WVS) is provided in the appendix.

 Extrinsic values

Extrinsic work values correspond to tangible aspects, such as

remuneration, social advantages, promotions, and job security (Lyons

et al., 2006). They represent the main factors influencing individuals

to work (Twenge et al., 2010). Sengupta (2015) emphasizes the

importance of other aspects, namely: power, focus on status,

hierarchical positions, and reward. Moreover, pursuits of a career,

status, and power are important extrinsic values for employees

(Vanteenkiste et al., 2007). With these extrinsic work values in

particular high incomes employees are more satisfied (Malka and

Chatman, 2003).

 Intrinsic values

The intrinsic work values concern mainly intangible rewards.

They refer to interest in work, stimulating professional activities, a

sense of achievement, continuous learning, and intellectual

stimulation (Ros et al., 1999; Lyons et al., 2010; Twenge et al., 2010).

Sengupta (2015) adds the importance of other values namely:

development, self-actualization, challenging projects, and growth.

They are a source of individual well-being (Ryan and Deci,

2000) and ensure psychological satisfaction related to work (Lyons et

al., 2006). Moreover, they significantly influence the motivation of the

individual to work (Twenge et al., 2010).

 Social/altruistic values

The pursuit of surpassing oneself values is expressed through

the work's social and altruistic values. Social values concern the

person’s relationship with colleagues, supervisors, and other people

(Lyons et al., 2006; Twenge, 2010). According to Ros et al. (1999),

work promotes positive social relationships to contribute to society.

Social values refer to leisure time, nurturing/fun environment, work-

life balance, and preferring friendly co-workers (Lyons et al., 2006).

Altruistic values refer to individuals who work to help others

and get triggered by helping society through their work (Twenge et

al., 2010). Employees with these values attach major importance to

contributing to society and the ambition to help others (Twenge et al.,

271

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

2010). According to Lyons et al. (2006), altruistic values are valued

by individuals who are stimulated to have a career in public service.

 Prestige values

Prestige values or status-associated refer to the influence and

power that an employee has over others (Super, 1970). Thus, these

values induce satisfaction and a feeling of superiority to employees

who compare themselves to their collaborators (Ros et al., 1999).

Individuals who prioritize these values work in organizations that

provide employees: achievement, advancement, status, recognition,

and independence (Ros et al., 1999). According to Cennamo and

Gardner (2008), individuals who are attracted to hard work and

achievement value status and extrinsic values, such as recognition of

loyalty and commitment.

2. – Research method

As this study aims to explore the work values of Gen Z, a

quantitative study is adopted. A questionnaire intended for active Gen

Z employees was administered online via social media without

limiting ourselves to specific sectors or jobs. The objective is to verify

whether Generation Z employees form a homogeneous group or rather

several professional profiles can exist according to their perceptions of

work values. Items measuring “work values” were drawn from the

measurement scale of Lyons et al. (2010). They were evaluated on a

five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Not at all important) to 5

(Essential). The respondent evaluates each item by answering the

question: To what extent is this item a top priority for you in your

work? The objective is to obtain an assessment of the work values of

each respondent.

The questionnaire was first pre-tested with 15 employees. A

total of 152 employees responded to our questionnaire. The

characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1 below.

272

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Table 1. Descriptive analysis of the sample

Number

Numbe

Gender (n =152)

Type of

contract

Male

42.1

Full-time

108

71.1

Female

57.9

Part-time

21.7

Year of birth

Temp

worker

0.7

1995

105

69.1

Contractual

6.5

1996

21.1

Actual

status

1997

6.6

Senior

11.8

1998

1.3

Middle

manager

1999

0.7

Employee

56.6

2000

1.2

Worker

0.7

+2001

Consultant /

Freelance

5.9

Level of education

Master

109

71.7

Sector of activity

Licence/ Bachelor

26.3

Bank and

insurance

15.8

Higher technician's

certificate/Professiona

l technician's

certificate

1.3

Administrat

ion

1.3

High school

0.7

Study,

consulting,

insurance,

accounting

services

16.4

Bachelor's degree (BA)

IT,

communica

tion and

new

technologie

department

32.2

Yes

151

99.3

Tourism

6.56

0.7

Transport

and

logistics

3.3

Entering work

Agricultural

, food,

distribution

273

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

industries

0-3 months

7.9

Oil industry

1.3

4-6 months

28.9

Automobile

industry

6-12 months

32.58

Materials

and

constructio

n industry

>1 an – 2 years

22.3

Health

3.3

> 2 years

9.21

Education

5.9

Cultural

producti

on and

industry

activitie

Other

Cluster analysis is carried out to verify the existence of one or more

homogeneous groups according to their work values.

3. – Results

This section is divided into two subsections. The first one is

devoted to the presentation of the descriptive analysis of variables.

The second one is devoted to the presentation of cluster analysis

which is carried out in two stages: a hierarchical analysis followed by

a dynamic cloud method to identify the profiles of GenZ.

3.1. Descriptive analysis of variables

Descriptive analysis of variables involves testing the

unidimensionality of measurement scales and verifying their internal

consistency. KMO test and Bartlett's sphericity test are performed

before Principal Component Analysis (PCA). The tests, as well as the

reliability, are summarized in Table 2 below.

274

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Table 2. Bartlett's sphericity test, KMO test and cronbach's alpha

Bartlett's

sphericity test

KMO

test

Cronbach's

alpha

Extrinsic value

0.849

0.819

Intrinsic value

0.870

0.832

Prestige values

0.661

0.648

Social value/

altruistic

0.667

0.632

For all variables KMO > 0.5 and Bartlett's sphericity of 0.000

(p<0.05), measurement scales are therefore factorizable (Kaiser,

1974). Cronbach's Alpha values show acceptable internal reliability of

the scales (Nunnally, 1978). Thus, PCA is performed on all variables.

Two criteria are taken into consideration for the PCA:

- Communalities: Items with a factorial contribution at least

equal to 0.4 are retained.

- Variance explained: To retain the factor, the variance must

be greater than 50%.

Table 3 below summarizes the factor structure of the

variables.

Table 3. Factor structure of the variables

Items

Factorial

contribution

Quality of

representation

EXT

EXT1

0.489

0.239

EXT2

0.550

0.303

EXT3

0.669

0.447

EXT4

0.656

0.430

EXT5

0.735

0.540

EXT6

0.748

0.559

EXT7

0.739

0.547

EXT8

0.709

0.503

EXT9

0.735

0.540

Total variance

explained

45,644%

INT1

0.621

0.386

275

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

INT

INT2

0.766

0.587

INT3

0.784

0.615

INT4

0.610

0.372

INT5

0.718

0.516

INT6

0.511

0.261

INT7

0.792

0.627

INT8

0.799

0.638

Total variance

explained

50,027%

PREST

PREST1

0.714

0.509

PREST2

0.670

0.449

PREST3

0.521

0.272

PREST4

0.814

0.663

Total variance

explained

47,317%

SOCIAL/ALT

SOCIAL/ALT1

0.738

0.350

SOCIAL/ALT2

0.592

0.626

SOCIAL/ALT3

0.791

0.545

SOCIAL/ALT4

0.681

0.463

Total variance

explained

49,607%

The quality of representation of items EXT1 and EXT2

measuring the variable "extrinsic values" (EXT) is <0.4. The

elimination of these items from the measurement scale allowed an

improvement in the factor contributions and the qualities of

representation of the items. The percentage of the explained variance

increased from 45.644% to 52.219%. Cronbach's alpha is 0.843,

indicating a high internal consistency level.

The quality of representation of items INT1, INT4 et INT6

measuring the variable "intrinsic values" (INT) is <0.4. The

elimination of these items from the measurement scale allowed an

improvement in the factor contributions and the qualities of

representation of the items. The percentage of the explained variance

increased from 50,027% to 62,015%.

Cronbach's alpha is 0.823, indicating a high internal consistency level.

276

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

The quality of representation of item PREST3 measuring the

variable “Prestige values” (PREST) is <0.4. The elimination of this

item from the measurement scale allowed a slight improvement in the

factor contributions and the qualities of representation of the items.

The percentage of the explained variance increased from 47,317% to

58,114%. Cronbach's alpha is 0.635, this is acceptable given the

reduced number of items.

The quality of representation of item SOCIAL/ALT1

measuring the variable “Social/ altruistic value” (SOCIAL/ALT) is

<0.4. The elimination of this item from the measurement scale

allowed a slight improvement in the factor contributions and the

qualities of representation of the items. The percentage of the

explained variance increased from 49,607 to 59,307%. Cronbach's

alpha is 0.652, this is acceptable given the reduced number of items.

3.2. Cluster Analysis

The objective is to subdivide the overall sample of young

workers of Generation Z into homogeneous sub-samples (classes).

Individuals with similarities in work values will be grouped into a

class (profile). Each class has a center representing a profile of

Generation Z and each individual also has a center. The method

consists of grouping the individuals where the distance between their

center and the center of the class is as close as possible. Two methods

are adopted using SPSS v.26 software: hierarchical cluster analysis

(Shmueli et al., 2007) and dynamic cloud method (McQueen, 1967).

Hierarchical cluster analysis involves gradually

agglomerating (combining) the two closest groups until there is only

one group left at the end, consisting of all the data groups. Three

clusters are identified. To improve the result obtained, the second type

of clustering method (Zhang et al., 1996) is carried out, namely:

dynamic clouds. This method uses the calculation algorithm « K-

Means » which involves randomly selecting K initial centroids where

K is a user-defined number of desired clusters c1, c2… ck (k = 3, and ci

represents the center of a class) (McQueen, 1967). Subsequently, each

point belonging to a data set would be associated with the nearest

centroid. The highest value cluster centers relate to a specific class

(Table 4).

277

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Table 4. Final cluster centers

Final cluster centers

Class 1

n= 8

Class 2

N=87

Class 3

N=52

EXT3

EXT4_

EXT5

EXT6

EXT7

EXT8

EXT9

INT2

INT3

INT5_

INT7

INT8

PREST1

PREST2

PREST4

SOCIAL/ALTRUI2

SOCIAL/ALTRUI3

SOCIAL/ALTRUI4

The ANOVA analysis is performed on the classes to check

whether the difference between the types of profiles is statistically

significant. The results in table 5 show that the selected profiles are

different for all values (p<0).

Table 5. Inter-class ANOVA

ANOVA

Cluster

Error

Sig.

Medium

square

ddl

Medium

square

ddl

EXT3

26,946

1,072

149

25,136

,000

EXT4

19,272

,788

149

24,471

,000

EXT5

15,436

,814

149

18,954

,000

EXT6

20,825

,563

149

37,018

,000

EXT7

31,113

,554

149

56,131

,000

278

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

EXT8

21,738

,668

149

32,564

,000

EXT9

21,928

,751

149

29,197

,000

INT2

20,952

,430

149

48,712

,000

INT3

13,444

,752

149

17,876

,000

INT5

27,683

,415

149

66,705

,000

INT7

22,813

,556

149

41,006

,000

INT8

15,201

,663

149

22,911

,000

PREST1

10,476

,598

149

17,531

,000

PREST2

10,218

,936

149

10,911

,000

PREST4

15,697

,817

149

19,225

,000

SOCIAL/ALTRUI2

10,762

,767

149

14,024

,000

SOCIAL/ALTRUI3

15,767

,955

149

16,503

,000

SOCIAL/ALTRUI4

22,449

1,208

149

18,589

,000

The results show the existence of 3 types of profiles that we

call respectively:

The civil servant-benevolent (class 1 - 8 individuals (5.2%).

They have the following work values:

- Prestige value: Power to organize and lead a team

- Social/altruistic values: Social interaction and Helping

individuals

- Extrinsic value: Job security

The careerist (class 2 - 87 individuals (57,23%)). They have

the following work values:

- Intrinsic values: Career advancement, Self-fulfilment, Interest in

work, and Continuous learning

- Extrinsic values: Access to information, Good salary, and

Recognition

- Social/altruistic value: Fun environment

- Prestige value: Have an impact on the organization

The self-employed (class 3 - 52 individuals (34,2 %)) with

the following work values:

- Intrinsic value: Diversification in the work

- Prestige value: Being able to influence the results of the

organization

- Extrinsic values: Flexible schedule with personal life, Work-life

balance, and Cooperative supervisor.

279

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

4. – Discussion

The objective of this article is to deepen the understanding of

Generation Z drawing their work values. Contrary to the mainstream

literature, the results show that the profiles of Generation Z are not

homogeneous and have identified three profile types: civil servant-

benevolent, careerist, and self-employed.

4.1. Civil servant-benevolent

According to this profile type, the employee tends to favor

the power to organize and lead a team (prestige value). Gen Z

believes that teamwork leads to productive work and the achievement

of organizational goals (Barhate and Dirani, 2021). Iorgulescu (2016)

claims that the need to work in a large team is a top priority. Gen Z

prefers a good, friendly, and cheerful team (Fodor and Jäckel, 2018).

In the same vein, Goh and Lee (2018) emphasize the importance of

team spirit.

Although the researchers mentioned above emphasize the

importance of teamwork, some articles reported Gen Z’s preference

for working individually. Indeed, the ready access to technology

makes Gen Z more individualistic in interpersonal interaction (Chicca

and Shellenbarger, 2018; Twenge, 2017). Several authors claim that

Gen Z prefers to work alone and rely on themselves (Puiu, 2017;

Silinevica and Meirule, 2019). According to Barhate and Dirani

(2021), “Gen Z suffers from being a team member, especially when

the team is ineffective and not achieving its goals at a pace

satisfactory to Gen Z”. These authors add that Gen Z may prefer to

work alone to achieve goals but still crave teamwork and social

contact to achieve holistic professional goals. Leon (2020) claims that

this generation is more suited to virtual teamwork.

There is a divergence in the findings: some authors say Gen Z

prefers to work individually, and others claim they want to work as a

team. This divergence is thus declined at the second and third work

values, namely social interaction and helping individuals (altruistic

values). Indeed, several authors claim that relationships at work are

essential to Gen Z (Fodor et al., 2018; Grow and Yang, 2018;

Hampton and Welsh, 2019). According to Hampton and Welsh

(2019), Gen Z employees want to build good working relationships

and social contact with their co-workers. They need to feel socially

280

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

supported by others at work (Pichler et al., 2021). In this context,

Barhate and Dirani (2021) emphasize the importance of collaboration

that would allow Gen Z to meet both organizational and personal

goals.

Although they prefer in-person communication (Schawbel,

2014; Goh and Lee, 2018), their hyperconnection to social media

caused them a deficit in social skills necessary for good face-to-face

communication (Combs and Twachtman, 2019). According to Pichler

et al. (2021), Gen Z seems prone to individualism in terms of learning,

communication, and interpersonal interaction. In the same vein, Leon

(2020) adds that Gen Z spends more time alone. Hence, they are less

likely to enjoy the camaraderie (Twenge, 2017) and more likely to be

anxious that the group members will not perform their tasks (Schlee et

al., 2020).

The last work value of the civil servant-benevolent profile is

job security (extrinsic value). This is explained by the importance of

supportive work conditions for Gen Z employees (Shore and Shore,

1995). Indeed, they are very attracted to job security due to being

raised in the uncertain economic times of the Great Recession era

(Iorgulescu, 2016).

Only 8 individuals (5.2%) represent the profile of the civil

servant-benevolent. They want to lead a group and emphasize the

importance of the social aspect (social interaction and mutual aid) and

safety at work. This result could be explained by the fact that these

respondents could be seniors of Gen Z who are very influenced by

Gen Y.

4.2. Careerist

The concept of "careerist" appeared in the work of Bencsik et

al. (2016) who mentioned that the young people of Gen Z have

different expectations in their workplaces to emphasize their potential

since they have an excellent level, especially in both technological and

linguistic fields. The intrinsic values of these employees mainly

concern continuous learning and career advancement while having

an interest in the work, and a feeling of self-fulfillment. Gen Z

prefers informal learning methods that are both autonomous and

cooperative (Barhate and Dirani, 2021). In the same vein, Grow and

Yang (2018) demonstrate that Gen Z’s attraction to organizations will

allow learning through networking since they favor the combination

281

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

of autonomy in learning. This ensures career development (Barhate

and Dirani, 2021). Indeed, Gen Z employees expect to continually

learn to successfully advance their careers (Iorgulescu, 2016). Hence,

employers must deal with a generation that will choose a career of

their interest (Bencsik et al., 2016). Moreover, they have strong career

desires (Bencsik et al., 2016; Deloitte, 2019). Career advancement

opportunities in an organization are considered the top priority of Gen

Z individuals (Iorgulescu, 2016; Parry and Battista, 2019). Leon

(2020) highlights the importance of career resilience for Generation Z.

Moreover, Bohdziewicz (2016) emphasizes the preference for

Generation Z employees to build links by principles of network or

evolve according to a lateral career rather than a hierarchical career.

In addition to a rapid career progression, Gen Z employees

feel a strong sense of entitlement to good job assignments (Parry and

Battista, 2019) perceived achievements, and self-realization

(Silinevica and Meirule, 2019).

The extrinsic values of a careerist profile are access to good

information as well as the benefit of recognition and a good salary.

Gen Z employees approve of the need to be informed and to have their

ideas heard and acknowledged (Bridges, 2015). They desire the

managers not to hide information, to listen to their ideas, and to value

their opinions (Schawbel, 2014). Besides, they would need

gratification for a job well done (Deloitte, 2019) to keep them

“motivated and engaged in the workplace making it an effective

retention strategy for organizations” (Barhate and Dirani, 2021). In the

same vein, Wayne and Casper (2012) emphasize the importance of

attractive compensation. Accordingly, companies such as IBM,

Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Deloitte attract employees by

offering a good pay and work environment (Glassdoor, 2019).

The last work value of a careerist profile is working in a fun

environment (social/altruistic value). Indeed, a friendly work

environment is important for Gen Z employees (Bridges, 2015). For

this reason, some multinational companies consider the “work

environment” as an important factor in attracting staff (Glassdoor,

2019).

282

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

4.3. Self-employed

According to the self-employed profile, the employee would

like to influence the results of the organization (prestige value). In

addition, it tends to favor diversification in the work (intrinsic

value). This could be explained by the fact that this generation was

born and raised with technology, which has favored very skilled

“multitasking” employees (Bridges, 2015; Combs and Twachtman,

2019). In the same vein, Levickaite (2010) states that this

technologically literate generation has been shaped to multitask.

Finally, the extrinsic values of a self-employed profile are a

cooperative supervisor, a flexible schedule with a personal life, and a

Work-life balance. Research shows that Gen Z workers need social

support from supervisors (Chillakuri, 2020 a) and a flexible schedule

(Bridges, 2015; Glassdoor, 2019). Also, Gen Z is expected to have a

work-life balance (Wayne and Casper, 2012; Bohdziewicz, 2016; Arar

and Onerenb, 2018; Fodor and Jäckel, 2018; Hampton and Welsh,

2019).

Several studies have shown that this generation likes to work

with flexible times (Mitchell, 2008). Boone et al. (2020, p.200)

emphasize the importance of flexitime which is a “scheduling system

that allows employees to choose their hours, within certain limits”. In

their surveys, Deloitte (2019) and Puiu (2017) show that employees

expect to choose their work hours and want a work-life balance.

Indeed, working flexibly provides an opportunity for workers to set

their daily programs with other family members (Boone et al., 2020).

Thus, organizations that promote and promise work-life balance are

more likely to attract and retain Gen Z employees (Fodor and Jäckel,

2018; Barhate and Dirani, 2021). Otherwise, Gen Z might exert

pressure on organizations to facilitate work-life balance (Bohdziewicz,

2016).

Conclusion

The purpose of this research is to explore whether Gen Z

employees in companies have the same professional values or there

are rather different profiles. A cluster analysis of 152 employees is

carried out to verify the existence of one or more homogeneous

groups about their work values. The results show that the profiles of

283

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Gen Z are not homogeneous and have identified three profile types:

the civil servant-benevolent, the careerist, and the self-employed. The

different work values according to each profile category are

summarized in table 6 below:

Table 6. Work values according to Gen Z profile categories

The civil servant-

benevolent

The careerist

The self-

employed

Extrinsic values

• Employment

Security

• Have a good

salary

• Advance in

career

• Have the

recognition of

a job well

done

• Obtain good

information to

work

• Have a

flexible

schedule

with

personal life

• Have a work-

life balance

• Have a

supervisor-

cooperative

Intrinsic Values

• Have an

interest in the

job

• Continuous

and

“connected”

learning

• Feel a real

self-

fulfillment

• Have

diversificati

on in the

work (multi-

tasking)

Social

values/altruistic

• Individualistic but

open to social

interactions

• Enjoy helping

individuals

• Work in a

friendly

environment

(good-natured

atmosphere)

Prestige values

• Ability to organize

and lead a friendly

and cheerful team

• Have a

significant

impact in the

organization

• Be able to

influence the

results of the

organization

284

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Employees of the civil servant-benevolent profile represent

5.2% of the total sample. This group of individuals shares the

professional values of Generation Y. This result could be explained by

the fact that these respondents could be seniors of Gen Z who are very

influenced by Gen Y. Employees of the careerist profile represent

57,23% of the total sample. This group does not attach importance to

power and job security and differs from employees of the first profile

mainly by their desire for continuous learning and belonging to a fun

working environment. Finally, 34.2% of employees represent the self-

employed profile. This group of individuals prioritizes work-life

balance.

This research has theoretical and managerial contributions. At

the theoretical level, the results of this research call for the design of a

differentiated policy for the management of training and careers for

the three categories of profiles of Generation Z. However, despite this

differentiation, it should not lose sight of maintaining an overall

coherence of the training and career management policy at the level of

the organization. Indeed, according to Bulut and Maraba (2021, p.1),

« although it does not mean that each person in the same generational

cohort thinks in the same line and has the same values or beliefs

exactly, there is a general pattern in way of behaving and thinking due

to breathing the same atmosphere in terms of place and time ».

In addition, this policy, which is both differentiated and

coherent, should be accompanied by regular monitoring of the

evolution of the three categories of Gen Z profiles. Indeed, the weight

given to the different values can change over time and the passage

from one category to another could occur.

At the managerial level, this categorization of employees

would allow leaders to consider these values when recruiting. Indeed,

the proposed profile categories attract leaders' attention to consider the

different values specific to each candidate when recruiting. Therefore,

it's recommended that managers draw up a mapping of employees

recruited according to their work values. Such mapping allows them

to manage groups of individuals within the organization in a

personalized way. For example, they mobilize different employee

motivation factors according to their profile categories. Thus, they

adopt situational leadership adapted to the professional values of the

employee profiles. This mapping will also be used in implementing

career management adapted to the different employees within the

285

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

organization. Indeed, for careerists, for example, it is always necessary

to think of making them progress on two dimensions at the same time:

 The technical dimension to allow them to flourish in the

exercise of their functions and to remain up to date at the

technological level.

 The functional dimension to access higher positions with

more responsibilities and thus meet the characteristic:

"Have a significant impact in the organization".

However, the self-employed are more interested in flexibility

in the working hours and the way working (e.g., four days by week

with partly remote) to satisfy one of their extrinsic values: "Have a

work-life balance”. Particular attention must be given to managing

their career by allowing them to evolve technically in their field or in

fields allowing them to give meaning to their work. Such career

management will allow considering job rotations to promote the

diversification of their tasks, remote work, and management by

objectives to ensure some flexibility. Technological evolution and the

assignment to new functions in line with this evolution would allow

them to create more value for the organization and thus satisfy their

prestige value: “Be able to influence the results of the organization”.

Notwithstanding these contributions, this study has

limitations. The first relates to the non-homogeneity of the

respondents. Indeed, given the limited number of Gen Z employees

who have just entered the workforce, we did not limit our study to a

particular industry. This could influence our results.

The second limitation concerns the not considering variables

that could influence the results, essentially gender. Thus, we

recommend in future research to carry out this same study by studying

employees of Generation Z working in the same company or a

particular activity sector. Also, we recommend integrating control

variables such as gender and culture. A qualitative study via

interviews with Gen Z employees belonging to the same company or

activity sector is also recommended to understand the needs of each

profile group.

286

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

REFERENCES

Agarwal, H., & Vaghela, P. S. (2018). Work values of gen z: Bridging the gap

to the next generation. National Conference on Innovative Business

Management Practices in 21st Century.

Arar, T., & Öneren, M. (2018). Role of talent management in career

development of Generation Z: a case study of a telecommunication

firm. International Academic Journal of Social Sciences, 05(01),

28–44. https://doi.org/10.9756/iajss/v5i1/1810004

Arar, T., & Yuksel, I. (2015). How to manage Generation Z in business life?

Journal of Global Economics, Management and Business Research,

4(4), 195–202.

Barhate, B., & Dirani, K. M. (2021). Career Aspirations of Generation Z: A

Systematic Literature review. European Journal of Training and

Development, 46(1/2), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejtd-07-

2020-0124

Bencsik, A., Juhász, T., & Horváth-Csikós, G. (2016). Y and Z generations at

workplaces. Journal of Competitiveness, 6(3), 90–106.

https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2016.03.06

Bohdziewicz, P. (2016). Career anchors of representatives of Generation Z:

Some conclusions for managing the younger generation of

employees. Human Resource Management, 6(113), 57–74.

Boone, L. E., Kurtz, D. L., & Berston, S. (2020). Contemporary business

(14th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

Bridge, T. (2015). 5 ways the workplace needs to change to get the most out of

Generation Z. Retrieved June 20, 2020, from

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3049848/5-ways-the-workplace-needs-

to-change-to-get-the-most-out-of-generation-z

Bulut, S. (2021). Generation Z and its perception of work through habits,

motivations, expectations preferences, and work ethics. Psychology

and Psychotherapy: Research Study, 4(4).

https://doi.org/10.31031/pprs.2020.04.000593

Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2018). Generational differences in work values,

outcomes and personas/organization value fit. Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 23(3), 180–184.

Chawbel, D. (2014). Gen Z Employees: The 5 attributes you need to know.

Retrieved June 20, 2018, from

http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/236560v

Chicca, J., & Shellenbarger, T. (2018). Connecting with Generation Z:

Approaches in Nursing education. Teaching and Learning in

Nursing, 13(3), 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2018.03.008

287

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Chillakuri, B. (2020a). Understanding Generation Z expectations for effective

onboarding. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 33(7),

1277–1296. https://doi.org/10.1108/jocm-02-2020-0058

Chillakuri, B. (2020b). Examining the role of Supervisor support on

Generation Z’s intention to quit. American Business Review, 23(2),

408–430. https://doi.org/10.37625/abr.23.2.408-430

Combs, S., & Twachtman, C. (2019). Birth of the multi-potentialities: Being

undeclared in Generation Z. Retrieved June 20, 2018, from

https://apps.nacada.ksu.edu

Deloitte. (2019). The Deloitte global millennial survey 2019. Retrieved

September 20, 2021, from

https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-

deloitte/articles/millennialsurvey.html

Dries, N., Pepermans, R., & De Kerpel, E. (2008). Exploring four generations’

beliefs about career: Is “satisified” the new “successful”? Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 907–928.

https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810904394

Fodor, M., & Jaeckel, K. (2018). What does it take to have a successful career

through the eyes of Generation Z - based on the results of a primary

qualitative research. International Journal of Lifelong Education

and Leadership, 4(1), 1–7.

https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ijlel/issue/39629/468944

Glassdoor. (2019). The next generation of talent: Where Gen Z wants to work.

Retrieved September 20, 2021, from

https://www.glassdoor.com/research/studies/gen-z-workers/

Goh, E., & Lee, C. (2018). A workforce to be reckoned with: The emerging

pivotal Generation Z hospitality workforce. International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 73, 20–28.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.01.016

Grow, J. M., & Yang, S. (2018). Generation-Z enters the advertising

workplace: Expectations through a Gendered lens. Journal of

Advertising Education, 22(1), 7–22.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1098048218768595

Hampton, D., & Welsh, D. (2019). Work values of Generation Z nurses.

Journal of Nursing Administration, 49(10), 480–486.

https://doi.org/10.1097/nna.0000000000000791

Iorgulescu, M. (2016). Generation Z and its perception of work. Cross-

Cultural Management Journal, 18(1), 47–54.

Janssen, D., & Carradını, S. (2021). Generation Z Workplace communication

Habits and Expectations. IEEE Transactions on Professional

Communication, 64(2), 137–153.

https://doi.org/10.1109/tpc.2021.3069288

Jaskyte, K. (2014). Individual and work values of nonprofit, public, and

business employees: how similar or different are they? Human

288

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Service Organizations, Management, Leadership & Governance.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03643107.2013.866606

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1),

31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291575

Leon, R. (2020). Strategies for Business Sustainability in a Collaborative

Economy. IGI Global.

Levickaite, R. (2010). Generations x, y, z: How social networks form the

concept of the world without borders (the case of Lithuania).

LIMES: Cultural Regionalistics, 3(2), 170–183.

Lyons, S., Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2006). A comparison of the values and

commitment of private sector, public sector, and parapublic sector

employees. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 605–618.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00620.x

Lyons, S., Higgins, C., & Duxbury, L. (2010). Work values: Development of

a new 3-dimensional structure based on confirmatory smallest space

analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(7), 969–1002.

Lyons, S. T. (2003). An exploration of generational values in life and at work

[Doctoral dissertation]. Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.

MacQueen, J. B. (1967). Some methods for classification and analysis of

multivariate observations. In L. M. Le Cam & J. Neyman (Eds.),

Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical

statistics and probability.

Malka, A., & Chatman, J. A. (2003). Intrinsic and Extrinsic work Orientations

as Moderators of the Effect of Annual Income on Subjective Well-

Being: A Longitudinal study. Personality and Social Psychology

Bulletin, 29(6), 737–746.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029006006

Mitchell, D. A. (2008). Generation Z: Striking the balance: Healthy doctors

for a healthy community. Australian Family Physician, 37(8), 665–

672.

Naim, M. F., & Lenka, U. (2018). Development and Retention of Generation

Y Employees: A Conceptual framework. Employee Relations, 40(2),

433–455. https://doi.org/10.1108/er-09-2016-0172

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill Companies.

Parry, E. (2019). The Generation Z in Great Britain- High standards and

demands. In C. Scholz & A. Rennig, Generations in Europe: Inputs,

Insights and Implications. Emerald Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78973-491-120191013

Pichler, S., Kohli, C., & Granitz, N. (2021). DITTO for Gen Z: A framework

for leveraging the uniqueness of the new generation. Business

Horizons, 64(5), 599–610.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.021

289

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Puiu, S. (2017). Generation Z – an educational and managerial perspective.

Young Economists Journal/Revista Tinerilor Economisti, 14(29),

62–72.

Ros, M., Schwartz, S. H., & Surkiss, S. (1999). Basic individual values, work

values, and the meaning of work. Applied Psychology, 48(1), 49–71.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1999.tb00048.x

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination Theory and the

facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-

being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68

Schlee, R. P., Eveland, V. B., & Harich, K. R. (2020). From Millennials to

Gen Z: Changes in student attitudes about group projects. Journal of

Education for Business, 95(3), 139–147.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2019.1622501

Sengupta, A., Bamel, U., & Singh, P. (2015). Value Proposition Framework:

Implications for Employer Branding. DECISION, 42(3), 307–323.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40622-015-0097-x

Shmueli, G., Patel, N. R., & Bruce, P. C. (2007). Data mining for business

intelligence: Concepts, Techniques, and Applications in Microsoft

Office Excel with XLMiner. Wiley.

Shore, L. M., & Shore, T. H. (1995). Perceived organizational support and

organizational justice. In R. S. Cropanzano & K. M. Kacmar,

Organizational politics, justice, and support: Managing the social

climate of the workplace (pp. 149–164). Westport, Quorum.

Siliņēviča, I., & Meirule, L. (2019). Generation Z enters into the Latvian

business environment. Journal of Social Sciences, 1(11), 97–107.

https://doi.org/10.17770/lner2019vol1.11.4317

Super, D. E. (1970). Work values inventory. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

Tang, F. (2019). A critical review of research on the work-related attitudes of

generation Z in China. Social Psychology and Society, 10(2), 19–28.

https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2019100203

Torsello, D. (2019). Generation Y workers: An empirical framework for

cultural and organizational aspects. Employee Relations, 41(6),

1330–1347.

Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational

differences in work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology,

25(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9165-6

Twenge, J. M. (2013). The evidence for generation me and against generation

we. Emerging Adulthood, 1(1), 11–16.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696812466548

Twenge, J. M. (2017). IGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are

Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and

Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for

the Rest of Us. Simon and Schuster.

290

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010).

Generational differences in work values: leisure and extrinsic values

increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of

Management, 36(5), 1117–1142.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352246

Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemiec, C. P., Soenens, B., De Witte, H., &

Van Den Broeck, A. (2007). On the relations among work value

orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes: a

Self-determination Theory approach. Journal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology, 80(2), 251–277.

https://doi.org/10.1348/096317906x111024

Wayne, J. H., & Casper, W. J. (2012). Why does firm reputation in human

resource policies influence college students? The mechanisms

underlying job pursuit intentions. Human Resource Management,

51(1), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21461

Ye, L. (2015). Work values and career adaptability of Chinese university

students. Social Behavior and Personality, 43(3), 411–421.

https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2015.43.3.411

Zhang, T., Ramakrishnan, R., & Livny, M. (1996). BIRCH: An efficient data

clustering method for very large databases. ACM SIGMOD Record,

25(2), 103–114.

291

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Appendix

The Lyons Work Values Survey (LWVS)

Revised 25-item Format

Lyons, S. (2003). An exploration of generational values in life and at

work. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carleton University, Ottawa,

ON, Canada.

INSTRUCTIONS:

The following questions deal with the various factors that people

consider to be important in their work. People use these factors in

making important decisions about their jobs and careers. They are not

all considered to be equally important and different people place

importance on the different factors. Please read each of the items

listed in the section below and indicate HOW IMPORTANT each

would be to you in deciding whether to accept a potential job or stay

in a job. Please try to think about jobs in general, rather than your

actual current job.

Not at all

important

Somewhat

important

Important

Very Important

Absolutely

essential

1. Having BENEFITS (e.g. vacation pay, health/dental

insurance, pension plan, etc.) that meet your personal needs

2. Doing work that makes a SIGNIFICANT IMPACT on the

organization

3. Having the AUTHORITY to organize and direct the work of

others

4. Working on tasks and projects that CHALLENGE your

abilities

5. Having management that provides timely and constructive

FEEDBACK about your performance

6. Working with agreeable and friendly CO-WORKERS with

whom you could form friendships

7. Working in an environment that is lively and FUN

8. Having the opportunity to CONTINUOUSLY LEARN and

develop new knowledge

9. Having the assurance of JOB SECURITY

292

DECODING GEN Z EMPLOYEE PROFILES:

REVEALING WORK VALUES

10. Having HOURS OF WORK that are convenient to your life

11. Doing work that you find INTERESTING, exciting and

engaging

12. Having the FREEDOM to make decisions about how you do

your work and spend your time

13. Working in an environment that allows you to BALANCE

your work life with your private life and family

responsibilities

14. Having access to the INFORMATION you need to do your

job

15. Doing work that is PRESTIGIOUS and regarded highly by

others

16. Doing work that affords you a good SALARY

17. Doing work that provides change and VARIETY in work

activities

18. Working where RECOGNITION is given for a job well

done

19. Doing work that allows you to USE the ABILITIES you

have developed through your education and experience

20. Having the opportunity for ADVANCEMENT in

your career

21. Doing work that provides you with a personal sense of

ACHIEVEMENT in your accomplishments

22. Doing work that allows for a lot of SOCIAL

INTERACTION

23. Having the ability to INFLUENCE organizational outcomes

24. Working for a SUPERVISOR who is considerate and

SUPPORTIVE

25. Doing work that allows you to HELP PEOPLE

293

AMIRA SGHARI, WAFI CHTOUROU, SARRA GHATTAS

Work Value Indices

Based on: Lyons, S., Higgins. C., & Duxbury L. (2010). Work values:

Development of a new 3-dimensional structure based on confirmatory

smallest space analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 969–

1002

Instrumental

Cognitive

Benefits (BEN)

Challenge (CHA)

Feedback (FBK)

Continuously Learn (CLN)

Job security (SEC)

Freedom (FRE)

Hours of work (HRS)

Variety (VAR)

Balance (BAL)

Use Abilities (ABI)

Information (INF)

Advancement (ADV)

Salary (SAL)

Achievement (Ach)

Recognition (REC)

Interesting work (INT)

Supportive Supervisor (SSU)

Social/Altruistic

Prestige

Co-workers (COW)

Impact (IMP)

Fun (FUN)

Authority (AUT)

Social Interaction (SOC)

Prestigious (PRE)

Help People (HLP)

Influence (IFL)

294

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.

Generation Z and its Perception of Work through Habits, Motivations, Expectations Preferences, and Work Ethics

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2021

Sefa Bulut

Career aspirations of generation Z: a systematic literature review

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2021

Purpose: This paper aims to explore the career aspirations of individuals belonging to the Gen Z cohort, i.e. born between 1995 and 2012. Design/methodology/approach: This paper is a systematic review of the literature. The authors accessed five databases to collect literature for review. The databases included were Academic Search Ultimate, Business Source Ultimate, ERIC and Google Scholar. Keywords used to conduct the search process were as follows: career development, career aspiration, generation Z, Gen Z and iGen. The authors imported all articles to RefWorks, read article abstracts and decided on whether to include or exclude the article in the review. Findings: Based on this systematic review, the authors found that intrinsic and extrinsic factors determine Gen Z's career aspirations. Further, based on past studies' predictions, the authors concluded that Gen Z has well-defined career expectations and career development plans. Research limitations/implications: Gen Z is the newest generation to enter the workforce. With limited research on this cohort, this study synthesized the existing knowledge of Gen Z students' career aspirations and their future employers' expectations. All research around Gen Z is currently focused on students, and hence, it is challenging to predict their workplace behavior. In this work, the authors provided organizations and practitioners guidelines to be prepared with Gen Z's expectations as they enter the workplace. Originality/value: This systematic literature review synthesizes empirical research from around the world on career aspirations related to Gen Z.

DITTO for Gen Z: A framework for leveraging the uniqueness of the new generation

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2021
Bus Horiz

Generation Z (or Gen Z) represents 24% of the U.S. population and is very different from earlier generations. A higher proportion of Gen Zers are earning college degrees, and they are now moving to the next phase where they will constitute the predominant majority of the incoming workforce. Gen Z faced an unusual set of technology-driven circumstances while growing up, and thus bring a distinct set of characteristics to the workplace. We offer a new research-based framework—DITTO, which encapsulates specific recommendations for organizations on diversity, individualism and teamwork, technology, and organizational supports. DITTO serves as a useful mnemonic to help managers recall specific ways to support Gen Zers and leverages the strengths of Gen Zers to benefit the organization and the workforce. Research shows that Gen Zers bring unique characteristics to the workplace, such as being more open to diversity and more individualistic and technology-driven than other generations. To the extent that companies use the DITTO framework, the more attractive they should be to Gen Z workers; but the principles of this framework also extend beyond Gen Zers to existing workforce with similar efficacy—and hence the DITTO moniker—and should accordingly lead to increased productivity and competitive advantage.

Examining the Role of Supervisor Support on Generation Z's Intention to Quit

Article

Full-text available

Nov 2020

Bharat Chillakuri

The purpose of this research is to examine Generation Z’s unmet expectations and work-related boredom and its impact on their intention to quit. The study investigates the moderating role of the supervisor support in the relationship between work-related boredom and intention to quit. This research advances the understanding of the adverse effects of employees' unmet expectations and work-related boredom. Generation Z joins the organizations with unrealistic expectations of work that, in turn, promote lower levels of commitment and higher turnover, and therefore warrants more research. Data were collected from 336 Generation Z respondents working in the information technology industry. The data were analyzed using least square regressions and bootstrapping techniques. The findings confirm that supervisor support moderates the relationship between work-related boredom and employees’ intention to quit such that if the degree of supervisor support is higher, then the relation is weaker. HRM practitioners need to be candid in explaining the job description and job specifications during the interview; more importantly, organizations need to address the expectations even before they are hired. The findings indicate that high supervisor support buffers the adverse effects of unmet expectations and work-related boredom. The study suggests that coaching could be an effective tool to support Generation Z’s aspirations and well-being in the workplace. Therefore, organizations should make coaching a key element in the organization’s culture and part of a manager's job.

Understanding Generation Z expectations for effective onboarding

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2020
J ORGAN CHANGE MANAG

Bharat Chillakuri

Purpose Organizations have long recognized that focusing on the onboarding experience is vital to the success of the employee and the organization. Organizations are confronted with inter-generational issues as they prepare to accommodate Generation Z in the workplace. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the expectations of Generation Z from the onboarding program so that the organizations are better equipped to welcome the new cohort. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts the interpretive approach to understand the subjective opinions, thoughts and conversations of the respondents. The study adopted an interpretive research approach for two main reasons. First, in the absence of empirical evidence, such a type of approach is helpful when the study aims to understand the subjective experience of individuals, and often can help in theory construction. Second, the approach helps uncover unknown facts and relevant research questions for further research. Findings The results from the study can help organizations to fine-tune the onboarding program that meets the needs of Generation Z. The study identified six essential variables that could be addressed in the onboarding enabling the new hires to quickly onboard the organization. Research limitations/implications Data were collected from the students who are pursuing final year of masters in business administration. Since the respondents are business students findings cannot be generalized to the rest of the cohort as these respondents had a fair idea of what to expect from the organizations. Practical implications The study presents six important themes for designing and managing an effective onboarding program for Generation Z. It is important to note that the inter-generational differences are natural, and organizations have to live with it. HR professionals have to bear in mind that this is also an opportunity to revisit, redesign and readjust their onboarding programs to suit the new employees. Originality/value The literature on Generation Z is at a nascent stage. Empirical studies on Generation Z were conducted to understand their expectation, beliefs and attitude. However, studies related to their expectations during the new hire orientation programs are absent. The present study could be one of the first studies in helping both managers and the HR function in understanding the expectations of Generation Z.

Generation Y workers: An empirical framework for cultural and organizational aspects

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2019

Davide Torsello

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the different and sometimes controversial aspects of Generation Y workers’ behavior at the workplace and to provide real-life answers to human resource management and the study of employee relations. Design/methodology/approach The study makes use of an empirical research framework to assess dominant preferences, values and patterns of behavior in workplaces where Generation Y employees have demographic relevance. The main research questions that this paper will address are: RQ1: What are the main features of organizational culture that are deemed functionally important to their job satisfaction by Generation Y workers? RQ2: Which are the general societal and generational values that affect most prominently their behavioral responses to duties and tasks in the workplace? RQ3: How do millennial workers perceive the gap between a real and an ideal organization in which they work in interactional and behavioral terms? The methodology includes a survey and interviews conducted in a multinational corporation based in Budapest. The theoretical framework is the one developed by Margaret Mead (1970) on value preferences and their generational change. Findings When generational values and behavioral patterns are not in harmony with the proper organizational cultural aspects of the company high attrition rates become manifest. Generation Y workers can be defined as cofigurate culture (Mead, 1970) in the sense that this generation encapsulates innovative aspects in some bridging features to the previous generation (Generation X). This is one of the aspects that may account for the conflicting social and work values that characterize work relations between Generation Y and X employees. Moreover, because of the three different domains on which work satisfaction is built (social, organizational and cultural) Generation Y workers will aim to strike a balance between expectations, ideas about what a good organization should look like and real-life experiences. Research limitations/implications Since the research concerns only one company case study, its scope is limited. In particular, empirical approaches to the study of employee relations with Generation Y workers are still few and more research is needed to fill this gap. Practical implications Millennial workers are not simply part of a different generation, as they actually share some value aspects and orientations of the previous generation. The practical implication is that the behavioral and organizational features that bridge Generation X and Y preferences should be detected in order to improve employee relations. Second, paying attention to the social, cultural and organizational features that Generation Y workers deem as important when describing their daily work experiences, it is possible to limit miscommunication and reduce attrition rates. Social implications The study of generational features and tendencies at the workplace is an important social field since it brings new insights into work relations and leadership. Treating the Generation Y as a cofigurate culture helps to bring together cultural and social preferences with values built on the workplace and in the social context of belonging. Originality/value The paper provides an original contribution to the study of generational, social and organizational aspects concerning the daily work experience of millennials in a corporation. The study builds an empirical framework in which the value aspects that shape the everyday reality of employee relations are measured and triangulated with qualitative data from ethnographic interviews. This paper can be of interest both to academic and to practitioners, thanks to its strong practical application to human resource management.

Generation Z Workplace Communication Habits and Expectations

Article

Jun 2021

Background: People born between 1995 and 2012, referred to as Generation Z, grew up alongside significant technological advancements in communication. This cohort's oldest members are now entering the workforce. Literature review: Although the merits of generational research have been questioned, Generation Z's personal communication preferences and habits demonstrate unprecedented technological experiences and expectations in the workplace. Research questions: 1. What are Generation Z's current habits in using smart technology, social media, and voice communication for personal communication? 2. How does the current workplace communication environment appear through the lens of Generation Z? 3. Do the personal communication habits of Generation Z conflict with current workplaces? Methodology: The study reports on a 207-participant exploratory survey and 6 interviews with Generation Z members in January-March 2020. The survey included multiple choice and open-ended questions regarding respondents' personal and workplace communication habits and expectations. The interviews allowed further investigation of survey responses. Results: Working Generation Z respondents hold unexpected attitudes and behaviors, including awareness of the negatives of technology use, differences in personal preferences and professional behaviors, self-regulation of technology use, and concern for boundaries between personal and work life. Conclusion: Generation Z's ability to adapt to current workplace norms may slow changes in workplace communication. Their awareness of disruptive communication habits could make positive changes to workplace communication in the future. Employers should resist negative generational stereotypes and develop new communication policies to reflect current and future-looking technology use. This study was completed prior to COVID-19 and does not include pandemic-related workplace technology changes.

WORK VALUES OF GEN Z: Bridging the Gap to the Next Generation

Article

Dec 2018

GENERATION Z ENTERS INTO THE LATVIAN BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT

Article

Oct 2019

There are five different generations in the Latvian labour market. Each generation has its own values and life experience. Recent research has shown that generation Z entering the labour market is significantly different from previous generations. They have different approaches when it comes to purchasing, choosing a career, working attitude, and so on. Therefore, research is needed to understand what changes this generation will bring to the business environment in the years to come. The aim of this research study is to investigate some of the different aspects of generation Z behaviour in the labour market. This research study includes theoretical and empirical parts. Findings of various theoretical studies on distinctive values and attitudes of generation Z have been investigated. The empirical study compares the values of different generations and highlights the differences between the generations in the labour market. Recommendations are made for successful integration of generation Z into the business environment.

Work Values of Generation Z Nurses

Article

Oct 2019
J NURS ADMIN

Objectives: To determine the work values of Generation Z nurses, a new generation in the current workforce. Background: A new generation of nurses is now part of the nursing workforce. Generation Z nurses, born in 1995 (aged ≤24 years), will bring new expectations and ideals about life and work into healthcare work settings. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional survey design was used to assess the work values of traditional baccalaureate Generation Z nursing students using the Lyons Work Values Survey. Results: The work value component ranked most important by participants was social/altruistic, followed by instrumental/extrinsic, cognitive/intrinsic, and prestige. Conclusion: Helping people and having a job that is interesting and engaging while also offering job security and good benefits were the most important future Generation Z nurse work values.