Content uploaded by Florina Pinzaru
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Florina Pinzaru on Jul 04, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
ISSN 2392-8042 (online) © Faculty of Management (SNSPA)
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y
versus Other Generations
Florina PÎNZARU
National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
30A Expoziției Blvd., Sector 1, 012104, Bucharest, Romania
florina.pinzaru@facultateademanagement.ro
Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU
Doctoral School in Economics and International Business
Bucharest University of Economic Studies
11 Tache Ionescu St., Sector 1, 010352, Bucharest, Romania
madalina.vatamanescu@yahoo.com
Andreea MITAN
National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
30A Expoziției Blvd., Sector 1, 012104, Bucharest, Romania
andreea.mitan@facultateademanagement.ro
Rodica SĂVULESCU
National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
30A Expoziției Blvd., Sector 1, 012104, Bucharest, Romania
rodica.savulescu@comunicare.ro
Alexandra VIȚELAR
National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
30A Expoziției Blvd., Sector 1, 012104, Bucharest, Romania
alexandra.vitelar@facultateademanagement.ro
Cosmina NOAGHEA
HART Consulting
2A Marasti Blvd., 3rd Floor, Sector 1, 011467, Bucharest, Romania
Cosmina.Noaghea@hart.ro
Mădălina BĂLAN
HART Consulting
2A Marasti Blvd., 3rd Floor, Sector 1, 011467, Bucharest, Romania
Madalina.Balan@hart.ro
Abstract. The present study intends to discuss the psychological profile of Generation
Y versus other generations. The differences between Millennials and other generations
are addressed in terms of values, personality characteristics, and reactions under
stress. The topicality and relevance of the research theme are supported by the fact
that most of the people who are currently employed in companies all over the world
are members of the Generation Y. This situation requires a proper investigation of the
characteristics and specificity of the so-called Millennials with a view to provide
174 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
organizations with pertinent inputs for designing well-informed policies and for
smoothly integrating Millennials in the workplace. To this end, Hogan Assessments
personality inventories were applied online to more than 1000 persons from
Generation Y (up to 29 years old) and more than 3000 persons from other generations
(above 29 years old). Among others, the findings show that Millennials are motivated
by recognition, public acknowledgment, instant and frequent positive feedback and
gratification. As they need balance between personal and professional life, as well as a
comfortable environment, they require a flexible work schedule, resent staying after
hours. Being motivated to become part of various social networks, work in various
teams, Millennials are able to easily find satisfaction in missions that involve
interactions with new persons coming from different cultures and geographical areas.
They are motivated by work in a nonconformist environment without strict rules and
traditional work approaches, they tend to challenge the status quo and they will not
be patient to keep the same job many years.
Keywords: Generation Y, Millennials, Hogan Assessments personality inventories,
workplace.
Introduction
Most of the people who are currently employed in companies all over the
world are members of the Generation Y. They have different occupational
values than previous generations, they have different expectations related
to the job and their particularities influence the recruitment strategies of
the companies to a great extent.
The theory regarding generations is based upon the idea of cohorts –
groups of people with particular beliefs and attitudes, who experience
similar problems and share similar experiences in a certain period of time.
Each generation is shaped by powerful external forces (that is, not
intrinsically linked to the personality of each member): media, economic
and social events, popular culture, values shared by families and friends and
used as guidance in action, etc. These forces create unique sets of values
that help researchers understand the differences between various
generations.
According to the literature concerning this topic, the Generation Y
comprises people born between 1977 and 2000, but there is no general
consensus regarding the date. For example, for Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman
and Lance (2010, p. 1120), this generation is born between 1982 and 1999,
but for Tapscott (2009, p. 16), the years to be taken into consideration
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|175
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
when trying to delimitate this generation are the ones between 1977 and
1997. Further differences come from the fact that the authors who have
addressed this topic have come with a variety of names for the age group.
The more frequently used denominations are “Nexters” (Zemke, Raines &
Filipczak, 2000), “Millennials”, “Echo-Boomers” or “Thumb Generation”
(Huntley, 2006), “MySpace Generation” (Rosen, 2007) and “NetGeners”
(Tapscott, 2009). Still, although there are many names give to the members
of this generation, all of the authors stress upon the fact that the use of the
digital technology impacts their lives to a great extent, the technological
coordinate standing for a distinctive and paramount feature.
It should be underscored that most of the studies regarding the Generation
Y have been undergone in the United States of America. Thus, the
characteristics depicted in the following section of this paper are mostly
representative for the people in this generation who live in the American
culture. Speaking of the Romanian Gen Y members, there are few studies to
relate to, but the extant research results encourage us to state that the
youngsters in Romania share similar values to the ones in the US or Europe.
A recent research shows that Romanian youngsters feel that they share
certain things with their coevals from all over the world (Petre & Săvulescu,
2015). However, there are elements specific to the local context that
influence the way these youngsters think and act, and perhaps the most
important of the factors that put a gap between the Romanian Gen Y
members and the members of the same generation living in other parts of
the world concerns the Romanian lag in the realm of digital technology use,
compared to other western countries.
Against this backdrop, the present study intends to discuss the
psychological profile of Generation Y versus other generations. The
differences between Millennials and other generations are addressed in
terms of values, personality characteristics, and reactions under stress. To
this end, the paper was structured as follows: the first section brings to the
fore extant theoretical insights on the topic as a prerequisite for the
hypotheses development; next, the material and method are depicted,
followed by results illustration, discussion and conclusions.
Literature review
The Millennials are considered to be digital natives, as opposed to the so-
called digital immigrants, who are members of other generations, who did
176 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
not have access to digital technology early in life, but who currently use
digital technology as means to pursue their interests, even though they do
not envision this type of technology as indispensable. Millennials find
themselves in the middle of a fast-paced information society and this fact
shapes their aspirations, needs and behaviors. Tapscott (2009, p.27)
believes that the Internet acts as a globalizing force that flattens the world,
makes distances shorter and eliminates distinct local characteristics
youngsters might have had in other times. This idea is supported by Palfrey
and Gasser (2008, p.5), who state that “digital natives have known only the
life where they are connected to each other and to the bits world”. All these
lead to a certain digital sophistication of the Gen Y members, that
encompasses multitasking and multi-screening. In short, youngsters and
technology have become inseparable and this fact has deep consequences in
every aspect of their existence, including or perhaps starting with their
workplace.
The extant studies portray the Generation Y in rather paradoxical images:
on the one hand, they are pointed out as individualistic and too much
cantered on their own needs (Twenge, 2009), but on the other hand, they
are presented as activists who are interested in the general good
(Greenberg & Weber, 2008). For a better understanding of their profile, the
influence of the families on their evolution should be discussed. At this level,
many research reports show that Generation Y members have had
helicopter parents, who educated them to believe that they are better than
others, while they got to control many aspects of the lives of their children.
While raising them to be competitive, they pushed them to take part in
various activities in children clubs and after-school classes. The whole self-
help literature and the focus on the self, which are a cultural trend that
started in the 80s and continued until this day, also influenced the way the
youngsters behave. However, the effects of the helicopter parenting and of
the focus on self-discovery lead them to building high levels of self-trust, but
also to be dependent on others (Lythcott-Haims, 2015). Here, the most
important generation feature is narcissism (as Twenge, 2009 writes),
leading to the “Generation Me” synonym for the Generation Y. This also led
them to be more extravert and more anxious and prone to depression
(Twenge, 2009, p.400).
The social and cultural changes that Gen Y faced during their formative
years have been described as a good medium for a high IQ to develop, but it
is believed they also influenced them to become less disciplined and to
generally reject formal hierarchy (Twenge, 2009). The generation appeared
in a post-communist period, without heavy differences between states,
which led them to reject the idea of us versus them thinking, at a global
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|177
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
level (Havas Worldwide, 2011, pp.4-5). In addition, they grew in a more
egalitarian society, where preconceptions started to be put aside (Twenge,
2009, p.399). These elements are reflected by the values of the Generation Y
members, who are more tolerant, more open and more diverse than any
other known generation in the US (Greenberg & Weber, 2008, p.133), a
generation that stresses upon the importance of sustainability, peace and
cultural diversity.
Gen Y members are flexible and want to be offered various options to
choose from (Huntley, 2006, p.16), but they want things to develop only as
they wish and they have a sense of entitlement, which is obvious in their
demands from the educational institutions and from the employers. They
reject strict rules and they are willing to innovate and to use the workplace
not as a safety belt, but as a launching platform. They like to be provoked, to
be allowed to make their own decisions, to implement and test their own
decisions, to be listened to and to receive positive feedback regarding the
successful initiatives they have.
Generation Y members do not accept inequality and, as far as taking a job is
concerned, they do not imagine they could be refused a promotion or any
other job opportunity on gender criteria (Cassells & Harding, 2007, p.4). It
is often possible for these people to be naïve and not prepared for the work
field, but Twenge (2009, p. 403) shows that universities often consider two
categories within Gen Y: the crispies, who reach the burnout point because
they are perfectionistic and work in excess, and the teacups, who can be
easily crushed by the colleagues or the boss, although their appearance
does not show the inner fragility.
Millennials face a paradoxical situation at work: 45% of them have a
utilitarian approach to work, while other research results underline the fact
that they need to find the purpose of their work related to the purpose of
their life (Havas Worldwide, 2011, p.25). Millennials need to find balance in
their personal and their working lives (Huntley, 2006; Zopiatis, Krambia-
Kapardis și Varnavas, 2012). They prove to be more mature in their
approach to handling money than other generations (Mihalcea, Săvulescu &
Mocanu, 2014) and they prefer a pleasing job (Zopiatis, Krambia-Kapardis
& Varnavas, 2012). They favour a workplace where they can entertain
themselves and where they would not feel work as a burden (Twenge,
2009, p.400). In their view, the traditional workplace does not exist; they
prefer horizontal communication and collaborative working, based on
projects and clear objectives, not on a strict working schedule (Erickson,
2008, p.60). This information points to a change that companies need to
make in their policies, along with implementing meritocracy (Havas
178 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
Worldwide, 2011, p.24). Some companies already understood these needs,
and the studies signed by Reynolds Lewis (2015) mention the names of the
companies offering a flexible working schedule, volunteering work
opportunities, extra benefits and encouraging creativity and innovation.
Managers who tend to favour the do as I said perspective while working
with their employees would face great challenges in the near future, as
more and more youngsters from this generation will come of age and enter
the work field (Cassells & Harding, 2007, p.4).
In Romania, we consider that the youngsters aged 29 and less belong to this
generation, and we use for this delimitation the criteria of ITC development
in Romania and the age group that the European Union uses in its official
documents to refer to the NEETs (15 to 29 years old). These youngsters are
genuine digital natives who are exposed to the same risks in the matter of
graduating from formal education, gaining professional training and
employability. Although there are studies, such as the one signed by the GfK
and launched in 2013, that point to the year 1989 as the starting point for
the Romanian Generation Y, as they use the socio-politic criteria to separate
generations, we believe that such a reduction in the age group is too
restrictive.
A report of the European Commission (Europa.eu, n.d.) shows that on
average, it is 2.5 more likely for a youngster below 25 to be unemployed as
compared to an older person, while in Sweden it probability goes up to 4
times more likely and in Great Britain, Belgium and Poland up to 3 times
more likely. However, by the year 2025, 75% of the employees will be part
of the Generation Y, and their exaggerated optimism, their need for constant
feedback and their lack of knowledge, in some cases, will heavily influence
the working environments (Nikravan, 2013).
The characteristics that the literature presents as relevant for the Romanian
Generation Y members, in relation to the work field and their attitude
towards work, points to an unrealistic self-image, which could be summed
up in the phrase I am beautiful and smart, I should be given a prize because I
exist. This belief is caused by the behaviour their helicopter parents had
towards them. Their parents were mostly emotionally unavailable during
their formative years and they concentrated upon gaining social status and
money, in the context of an economic crisis (during the 80s) and in the
context of a transitioning economy (during the 90s). This way, they taught
their children that money and social recognition are important; they taught
the children that they are entitled to have these assets, but they also
controlled their children, so they taught them to be dependent upon them
or others for positive feedback and for guidance. Entitlement is easily
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|179
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
recognizable in the unrealistic expectations youngsters have from their
friends (who should love them no matter how they behave), from a life-
partner (who should be perfect), and from the work field (where they
expect to find the job that fits perfectly their socio-professional needs and
aspirations). These expectations have been cultivated at home, by their
families, and by the popular culture, and they exceed reality by far (Urban,
2013; Leonte, 2014).
A recent study (see the interview with Andreea Coca, GfK representative, in
Calei, 2013) concerning the Romanian youth portrays them as superficial
and adepts of speed over depth. Youngsters do not have patience and they
ask for constant feedback. One significant difference between Romanian
Gen Y and the people belonging to the same generation who live in other
countries is that they are lazy and prefer to spend all their time with their
friends, online or offline. Their friends seem to be able to help them
maintain a desirable self-image, which contrasts with their rather fragile
self-esteem. At work, they expect managers to embrace their proposals, to
allow them to work on a different schedule, if they ask for it, to create their
own list of responsibilities at work. Over 50% of the youngsters who took
part in a survey stated that they would not work at all if they had enough
money (Leonte, 2014).
Although general tendencies can be observed when trying to depict this
generation, different profiles have been identified among the youngsters
under 29. A study conducted by Mitan (2014b) using Schwartz Value
Inventory (the 52 items variant) brought to light the idea that there are two
categories of Romanian digital natives: the Revolutionaries and the
Guardians. Revolutionaries want to discover the world; they are dominant,
curious and independent, with a great deal of self-esteem. They do not
expect help from others and they want to become influential in the society.
They are prepared to work a lot and to create a desirable public image for
themselves. They are hedonistic and they search for unusual life
experiences, so the author called then daunting thrill seekers. They reject
any constraint that religion and culture could impose over them, they
distance themselves from their cultural roots, but they also value security
and stability. They are pragmatic people and they have a utilitarian
approach to life.
Guardians are moderate individuals who accept their place in the world,
who do not have professional ambitions and who focus mainly on the
community they come from. They respect religion and tradition and they do
not search for adventure. They are disciplined, they value wisdom and they
search for beauty in everything around them. They believe in friendship and
180 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
they are willing to work for the good of their families and communities they
belong to. They are open-minded, they love nature, they are tolerant and
they do not understand the need for social status. To them, security is the
most important thing and they believe that belonging to a hive is the best
way to be secure.
As regarding the particularities Romanian youngsters have in a working
environment, there are some differences from the profile Tapscott made in
2009 (Mitan, 2014a). There are at least three profiles: the Enthusiasts, the
Rebels and the Pessimistic Individualists. The Enthusiasts are attracted by
the use of technology and they share the characteristics of Gen Y members
as pointed out by foreign literature: they are keen on using technology; they
are always connected online, even when they relax, they have chaotic work
schedules and they do not respect formal hierarchy, but they prove to be
competent. They need constant feedback from their managers and they
need leaders. Rebels are attracted by ITC and they are keen on using it, but
they are idealistic individuals who want to work for CSR oriented
companies and they want their work to bring a change in the world. They
are more independent than Enthusiasts and less interested in receiving
feedback at work. Pessimists are passive, disconnected from the ITC world
and not interested in personal development. They do not understand
technology well and they use it only superficially. They do not expect
managers to trust them and they do not ask for feedback, they are most
likely invisible employees, conformists who respect formal hierarchy and
do not want to do teamwork.
Studies show that managers often have unrealistic expectations from
Millennials, like expecting them to do more than they were told they would
be required to do when they first got the job (Giang, 2013). Further
problems rise from the use of technology. Although they are keen on
technology, they do not know how to operate older devices and managers
who do not understand their primary visual mind-set, tend to tell them
what to do instead of showing them (McBride, 2013), thing which creates
friction at work. Millennials believe that elder managers are wise, that they
could provide expertise and that they are willing to become their mentors
(Millennialbranding, 2013). Conversely, managers have a rather negative
perspective: they say that youngsters search for unrealistic recompenses,
that they lack ethics at work and that they are easily distracted. A recent
qualitative research conducted in Romania shows that Romanian managers
working with youngsters understand that they do not respond well to
coercion, but they are ready to follow a leader who inspires them to be
proactive. Also, youngsters tend to be motivated to work when they
understand why they are asked to do something and when they understand
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|181
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
that their work helps them to develop at a personal or professional level.
When they are in a crisis situation, they manage to get things done, discover
what they have done wrong and learn from the experience. The cited
authors show that according to Romanian managers, youngsters from the
Gen Y believe that all the other people around them must help them grow
and they do not make specific efforts at their job, being rather superficial.
The situation changes only when they feel their colleagues appreciate them
and when they understand the meaning of the work they are supposed to
do. A remarkable increase in productivity is present when they are allowed
to make their own decisions in their area of expertise.
Resuming the profile of the digital natives, we conclude that: they do not
want to follow a strict work schedule, they try to identify more efficient
ways to get things done, they feel they can give more than they are asked to
and they do not always feel respected by their older colleagues. This
situation upsets them because they prefer to work in teams, they expect
their manager to be their mentor, but not in an intrusive way; they believe
in meritocracy, although they do not believe in formal hierarchy, they ask
for transparency from the companies they work for, they promise more
than they deliver and sometimes they use the companies they work for as
launching platforms for their careers. Furthermore, they believe they know
better how things should be done and refuse the directions their superiors
give.
Hypotheses development
Starting from these insights, the present study intends to discuss the
psychological profile of Generation Y versus other generations. The
differences between Millennials and other generations are addressed in
terms of values, personality characteristics, and reactions under stress.
In this vein, consistent with Twenge (2009) – who describes Millennials as
being more extravert, but more anxious and with Calei (2013) – who
portrays Romanian Millennials as superficial and adepts of speed over
depth, with Twenge (2009), Urban (2013) and Leonte (2014) - who identify
narcissism and an unrealistic self-image as a characteristic of Generation Y,
we infer that:
H1: Millennials will get higher scores than other generations for the scales
indicating the ability to open and maintain relationships (Sociability and
Interpersonal Sensitivity) and lower scores for the ones referring to
emotional stability (Adjustment), results and processes orientation (Ambition,
Prudence), openness to ideas and learning (Inquisitive, Learning Approach).
182 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
H2: Millennials will display higher scores for all behaviors / reactions under
stress and pressure compared to people belonging to other generations.
H3: Millennials will have a higher need for recognition, hedonism, affiliation
and a lower need for tradition compared to other generations.
The advanced hypotheses are indicative of the Gen Y’s need for flexibility,
recognition and work-life balance (Huntley, 2006; Zopiatis, Krambia-
Kapardis & Varnavas, 2012) and are in line with the imperative that
organizations create an environment where Millennials can bring their best
contribution (Havas Worldwide, 2011; Reynolds Lewis, 2015).
Material and method
Participants
The convenient sample of this research was selected from among persons
with higher education, working in the urban environment, in private
companies, mostly multinational ones. The sample comprised over 1000
persons from Generation Y (up to 29 years old) and over 3000 persons from
other generations (above 29 years old). The number of subjects for each
personality inventory varies and, as such, the exact details or each sample
will be specified when discussing the results of each category.
Procedure
The study was conducted by a research team from the Faculty of
Management within the National University of Political Studies and Public
Administration (SNSPA). The database was provided by Hart Consulting
(the Romanian company owning the rights for distributing Hogan
Personality Inventories in Romania). The Hogan Assessments personality
inventories were applied online during several months.
Measures
The research employs psychological testing using Hogan assessment tools.
Hogan Assessments advance a multi-dimensional approach of the
personality targeting three key areas: individual values, strengths, and
risks. Scores are expressed into percentiles, allowing pertinent comparisons
to be performed.
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|183
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
Firstly, Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI) assesses personality and
predicts performances. The dimensions of the instrument are thoroughly
depicted in Table 1.
Table 1. Hogan Personality Inventory
Dimensions
Low scorers are…
High scorers are…
Adjustment
Responsive, easy to coach;
susceptible to stress
Stress tolerant, resilient;
feedback resistant
Ambition
Team-player; stays within
comfort zone
Assertive, self-initiating;
overly competitive
Sociability
Good listener; Socially
reactive rather than
proactive
Outgoing; can be perceived
as attention-seeking
Interpersonal
Sensitivity
Direct & objective; can be
overly critical, harsh
Warm, agreeable and
friendly; averse to conflict
Prudence
Adapts to ambiguity well,
impulsive
Detail oriented, follows
rules, executes plans;
inflexible
Inquisitive
Grounded in practicality; but
‘short-sighted’
Open, curious, seen as
strategic; lacks pragmatism
Learning
Approach
Hands-on learner; endures
training
Traditional ‘book-learner’;
can be perceived as know-it-
all
Secondly, Hogan Development Survey (HDS) assesses personal
characteristics associated with derailment and dysfunction. The dimensions
of HDS are thoroughly depicted in Table 2.
Table 2. Hogan Development Survey
Dimensions
Everyday Strengths
Risks
Excitable
Intense & energetic
Moody, inconsistent & unpredictable
Skeptical
Perceptive &
insightful
Cynical, distrustful & fault-finding
Cautious
Careful & thorough
Risk-averse & fearful of failure
Reserved
Independent &
businesslike
Socially withdrawn & unapproachable
Leisurely
Cooperative &
agreeable
Privately irritable & resistant
Bold
Confident & assertive
Exceptionally self-promoting & smug
Mischievous
Charming &
excitement-seeking
Risk-taking & untrustworthy
Colorful
Outgoing & socially-
skilled
Attention-seeking & dramatic
Imaginative
Innovative & creative
Eccentric, flighty, & impractical
Diligent
Detail oriented &
Perfectionistic & micromanaging
184 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
conscientious
Dutiful
Supportive & loyal
Eager to please & ingratiating
Thirdly, the Hogan Motives Values Preferences Inventory (HMVI) looks at
people’s core values essential for organizational and cultural fit. The
dimensions of HMVI are thoroughly depicted in Table 3.
Table 3. Motives, Values, Preferences Inventory
Dimensions
Recognition
Public acknowledgement and “pats on back”
Power
Being in charge and being perceived as influential
Hedonism
Fun, lighthearted and open-minded work environments
Altruistic
Helping others and providing excellent customer service
Affiliation
Networking, building relationships, social belonging
Tradition
Conservative cultures and strength of convictions
Security
Secure, predictable and risk-free work environments
Commerce
Managing finances, profitability, bottom-line focused
Aesthetics
Focusing on quality and product “look and feel”
Science
Analytic problem solving and working with technology
Results
In order to test the three hypotheses, T tests for independent samples have
been computed. The first hypothesis was partially confirmed: the
millennials (N=2255) had higher scores for Sociability and Interpersonal
Sensitivity compared to other generations (N=5343); they also displayed
lower scores for Adjustment, Ambition, and Prudence. Contrary to the initial
expectation, they had a higher score for Inquisitive, and there were no
significant differences for Learning Approach (p>0.05). The results are
presented in Figure 1.
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|185
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
57,7
56,0
53,4
56,7
59,8
53,9
50,1
58,9
54,4
56,4
54,8
52,8
58,7
53,0
Learning
Approach
InquisitivePrudenceInterpersonal
Sensitivity
SociabilityAmbitionAdjustment
Millennials Others
Figure 1. HPI mean scores for Millennials versus other generations
Examining the results for Adjustment, t(7596)=-3.975, p<.01, the mean
score reported by Millennials (m=50.11, sd=29.48) is significantly lower
than the mean score registered by people over 29 years old (m=53.03,
sd=29.16). For Ambition, t(7596)=-6.147, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score
(m=53.91, sd=31.26) was significantly lower than the mean score of the
people over 29 years old (m=58.68, sd=30.69), and for Prudence -t(7596)=-
4.300, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score (m=53.39, sd=28.02) was significantly
lower than the one of people belonging to other generations (m=56.43,
sd=28.12).
These results indicate that Millennials might show a lower level of sustained
energy, low resistance to pressure and stress, a more fragile self-esteem,
less determination in achieving results (especially when faced with
barriers), impatience when dealing with less appealing tasks or tasks
requiring a sustained effort, poorer attention for details and work quality.
Exploring the results for Sociability, t(7596)=9.673, p<.01, the mean score
of Millennials (m=59.85, sd=28.23) is significantly higher the mean score of
people over 29 years old (m=52.78, sd=29.43), and the same pattern is kept
for Interpersonal Sensitivity t(7596)=2.499, p<.05, where the Millennials’’
mean score (m=56.67, sd=30.26) is significantly higher than the one of
people belonging to other generations (m=54.76, sd=30.50). These results
support the hypothesis that Millennials have better abilities to open and
maintain relationships, to make a good first impression compared to people
186 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
belonging to other generations. The relationships they open and maintain
are not necessary face-to-face, they use technology in order to interact. At
this level, the findings are in line with Twenge’s (2009) evidence that
Millennials are more extravert, but more anxious.
Contrary to our initial expectation, the results show that for Inquisitive,
t(7596)=2.243, p<.05, the Millennials’ mean score (m=56.02, sd=28.62) is
significantly higher than the average of the people over 29 years old
(m=54.38, sd=29.35). It underscores that Millennials are quick learners of
new things in their area of interest, able to learn more easily with the
support of technology, and they are able to work on projects involving
intellectual challenges.
The second hypothesis was partially confirmed: Millennials’ (N=1401)
mean scores for 9 out of 11 measured behaviors under stress were
significantly higher than the mean scores of the people belonging to other
generations (N=3623). For two dimensions, there were no significant
differences (p>0.05): Reserved and Colorful. The results are presented in
Figure 2.
Figure 2. HDS mean scores for Millennials versus other generations
The results of Student T test for independent samples showed the following:
Excitable – t(2409)=4.065, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score (m=52.42,
sd=29.04) is significantly higher than the mean score of people belonging to
other generations (m=48.76, sd=27.27); Skeptical – t(2631)=5.763, p<.01,
Millennials’ mean score (m=56.76, sd=28.12) is significantly higher than the
mean score of people belonging to other generations (m=51.61, sd=29.17);
Cautious – t(2617)=5.353, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score (m=58.64,
sd=28.08) is significantly higher than the mean score of other generations
(m=53.87, sd=28.96); Leisurely – t(5022)=2.015, p<.05, Millennials’ mean
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|187
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
score (m=58.16, sd=29.42) is significantly higher than the mean score of
other generations (m=56.28, sd=29.67); Bold – t(2679)=6.507, p<.01,
Millennials’ mean score (m=63.98, sd=29.71) is significantly higher than the
mean score of other generations (m=57.79, sd=31.43); Mischievous –
t(5022)=5.751, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score (m=60.67, sd=29.37) is
significantly higher than the mean score of other generations (m=55.35,
sd=29.39); Imaginative – t(5022)=2.394, p<.05, Millennials’ mean score
(m=56.41, sd=28.81) is significantly higher than the mean score of other
generations (m=54.24, sd=28.83); Diligent – t(2713)= 7.687, p<.01,
Millennials’ mean score (m=63.42, sd=29.77) is significantly higher than
mean score of other generations (m=56.07, sd=31.91); Dutiful – t(5022)=
8.271, p<.01 Millennials’ mean score (m=57.10, sd=29.18) is significantly
higher than the mean score of other generations (m=49.48, sd=29.32).
In the area of low to medium risk, Generation Y employees are more
susceptible to ‘derail’ towards the negative side than their older workmates,
exhibiting a higher propensity to egocentrism and self-promotion, to
dominating those around them according to their own values, to risk and
challenges, being often more cynical. The findings are in line with the
international literature (Twenge, 2009) and local studies (Urban, 2013;
Leonte, 2014) emphasizing the narcissism and unrealistic self-image of
Generation Y. Furthermore, these results predict one of the following
attitudes displayed by Millennials in the workplace when they have to cope
with stress and pressure: easily aggravating and emotional under pressure
or when faced with overloaded intervals at work; excessively susceptible to
criticism; easily finding arguments to anything and therefore may appear
hard to persuade; avoiding to take responsibility or make decisive decisions
in equivocal situations are which may lead to criticism/failure; being
arrogant, sometimes behaving according to the “if not me, then who?”
principle; may be seen as resistant to suggestions and feedback, especially
when they perceive these as disputing their knowledge and capabilities;
may have a narcissistic attitude, overweighing their talents, experience and
knowledge, manipulative when dealing with failure or when trying to
obtain something; however, on long term such individuals are liable to
“achieve” a reputation of unreliable persons; may promise more than they
can deliver or may indicate impracticable deadlines only to obtain the
immediate appreciation; full of unusual, innovative, out of the box, but not
practical ideas; may slide to minor details which can have a negative impact
on the prioritization abilities and the focus on overall vision; becoming
dependent on authority, excessively compliant but, at the same time,
experiencing a feeling that they deserve more, are better or equal than/to
the top persons, that their opinion or solution would have been better
(highly arrogant).
188 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
In what concerns the third hypothesis, this was fully supported: Millennials
(N= 1206) had significantly higher scores for Recognition, Hedonism,
Affiliation and lower scores for Tradition compared to other generations
(N= 3474). The results are presented in Figure 3.
Figure 3. HMVI mean scores for Millennials versus other generations
The results of T tests for independent samples showed the following: for
Recognition, t(4678)=6.281, p<.01, Millennials’ mean score (m=55.61,
sd=29.16) is significantly higher than the mean score of other generations
(m=49.47, sd=29.30); Hedonism, t(2174)=7.848, p<.01, Millennials’ mean
score (m=58.01, sd=27.53) is significantly higher than the mean score of
other generations (m=50.71, sd=28.65); Affiliation, t(4678)=3.027, p<.01,
Millennials’ mean score (m=59.10, sd=29.00) is significantly higher than the
mean score of other generations (m=56.19, sd=28.58) whilst for Tradition,
Millennials’ mean score (m=51.42, sd=30.18) is significantly lower than the
mean score of other generations (m=55.89, sd=28.93), t(2024)=-4.487,
p<.01. There were not significant differences (p>.05) between Millennials
and their colleagues in terms of Power, Altruistic, Security, Commerce,
Aesthetics, and Science.
These results show that Millennials are motivated by recognition, public
acknowledgment, instant and frequent positive feedback and gratification.
As they need balance between personal and professional life, as well as a
comfortable environment, they require a flexible work schedule, resent
staying after hours. Being motivated to become part of various social
networks, work in various teams, Millennials are able to easily find
satisfaction in missions that involve interactions with new persons coming
from different cultures and geographical areas. They are motivated by work
in a nonconformist environment without strict rules and traditional work
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|189
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
approaches, they tend to challenge the status quo and they will not be
patient to keep the same job many years. The results are in line with the
international studies (Huntley, 2006; Zopiatis, Krambia-Kapardis &
Varnavas, 2012) that showed the importance of balance in the personal and
working lives of Millennials, as well as their preference for a pleasant job.
Discussion and conclusions
This study supports and brings to the fore specific details on the Millennials’profile
as defined by Twenge (2009), Calei (2013) and Mitan (2014a, 2014b). Putting
together the results of this study, a better understanding about the
personality profile of Millennials emerges, including key drivers, strengths,
and risk areas.
Millennials’ key motivational drivers are recognition, comfort and
interaction. They are usually focused on being in groups; they are outgoing
and succeed in achieving a good exposure within their social interactions.
Such persons are rather seeking to get involved in several various work-
related projects with social impact which can provide them with the
opportunity to enjoy themselves, to experience interesting circumstances
and to have time for personal hobbies and recreation (pronounced
hedonism).
They need a large variety of tasks and are easily bored in the absence of
diversity, new people around, new opportunities (which are not lacking on
the current labor market), it is natural that most members of Generation Y
are leaving early the entry level jobs (which are precisely involving those
behavioral attributes that are poorer in vase of these individuals). Also
confirmed by the international studies, this generation’s high level of
narcissism may point to more pronounced tendencies to overrate the skills,
knowledge and capabilities of its members, as well as their ability to achieve
a good exposure in short interactions, but with difficulties in their future
behavior.
Millennials will challenge the status quo; they will show adaptability,
openness to change and ideas. Being less focused the processes, rules and
work procedures, not appealed by projects and tasks involving details and
monotony, it is possible for this generation to be one with difficulties in
delivering correctly and on time at the work place, in establishing a
reputation of trustworthy persons who are delivering as promised, good
and quality results. The high emotional fragility of Millennials leads to a low
resistance to long term activities in work environments involving pressure,
190 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
stress and overload. Organizations have to understand that it is necessary
to provide a lot of support in the on boarding and daily management of this
generation.
All in all, Millennials seek freedom and guidance, they prefer clearly defined
items in the tasks given, and they get easily bored and prefer diversity. They
require work-life balance; they have a high level of arrogance and a lower
resistance to stress compared to their colleagues belonging to other
generations.
The findings of this study, in addition to the theoretical contribution, have
practical implications for organizations, offering them inputs for designing
well-informed policies in order to smoothly integrate Millennials in the
workplace. The tendencies presented based on the current research do not
replace nor ignore the individual differences that we encourage
organizations to measure scientifically, but they provide insights on the
expectations and preferences of an important portion of current and future
workforce.
References
Calei, O. (November 10th, 2013). Cum gândeşte şi ce vrea generaţia „Digital Natives”
[What Digital Natives think and like?]. Retrieved from
http://www.zf.ro/video/zf-live/video-zf-live-cum-gandeste-si-ce-vrea-
generatia-digital-natives-urmariti-inregistrarea-emisiunii-de-vineri-8-
noiembrie-cu-andreea-coca-consultant-gfk-romania-11646910.
Cassells, R., and Harding, A. (2007). Generation whY? AMP.NATSEM Income and
Wealth Report Issue 17. July 2007. Retrieved from
http://www.natsem.canberra.edu.au/publications/?publication=ampnatsem
-income-and-wealth-report-17-generation-why
Erickson, T. (2008). Plugged in: the Generation Y guide to thriving at work. Boston:
Harvard Business Press.
Europa.eu (n.d.). Policies on Early School Leaving in nine European countries: a
comparative analysis. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-
sciences/pdf/policies_early_school_leaving.pdf.
Europa.eu (October 22nd, 2012). Youth Infographic. Eurofound.europa.eu. Retrieved
from
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/emcc/labourmarket/youthinfographic.ht
m.
Giang, V. (2013). Why Gen Y Workers Have No Idea What Their Managers Expect
From Them. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/study-reveals-
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy|191
Vol.4 (2016) no.2, pp.173-192; www.managementdynamics.ro
expectation-gap-between-managers-and-their-workers-2013-
9#ixzz3Yb1RuxID.
Greenberg, E., and Weber, K. (2008). Generation We. How Millennial Youth Are
Taking Over America And Changing Our World Forever. Emeryville:
Pachatusan.
Havas Worldwide (2011). Prosumer Report. Millennials: The Challenger
Generation. Retrieved from
http://www.havas.com/insights/studies/actualites/millennials.
Huntley, R. (2006). The World According to Y: Inside the New Adult Generation.
Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin.
Leonte, C. (Producer). (May 12th, 2014). România, te iubesc!: Generația care a spus
nu serviciului de 8 ore. De ce tinerii din România nu își găsesc un serviciu
[Romania, I love you: the generation who said no to the eight-hour shift. Why
Romanian youngsters cannot find a job]. Retrieved from
http://romaniateiubesc.stirileprotv.ro/emisiuni/2014/sezonul-1/generatia-
care-a-spus-nu-serviciului-de-8-ore-de-ce-tinerii-din-romania-nu-isi-gasesc-
un-serviciu.html.
Lythcott-Haims (2015). The four cultural shifts that led to the rise of the helicopter
parent. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/the-rise-of-the-
helicopter-parent-2015-7.
McBride, T. (2013). Mistakes Managers Make with Gen Y in the Workplace. Retrieved
from http://themindsetlist.com/2013/01/5-mistakes-managers-make-with-
gen-y-in-the-workplace/.
Mihalcea, A., Săvulescu, R., and Mocanu, R. (2014). Generation Y as a Target for
Banking Communication. In Brătianu, C., Zbuchea, A., Pînzaru, F., Dinu, M.,
Oprea, D.A. (Eds.), Strategica International Academic Conference Proceedings.
Strategic Thinking in a Changing World (pp. 98-117). București:
Comunicare.ro
Millennialbranding (2013). Millennial Branding and American Express Release New
Study on Gen Y Workplace Expectations. Managers reveal criteria for
advancement and impressions of their Gen Y workers. Retrieved from
http://millennialbranding.com/2013/gen-workplace-expectations-study/.
Mitan, A. (2014a). Digital Natives Coming of Age: Challenges for Managers.
Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 2(2), 335-355.
Mitan, A. (2014b). Do Romanian Youngsters Envision a CSR-Oriented World? A
Research Regarding Digital NativesʼValues.InC.Brătianuetal.(Eds.).
Management, Finance, and Ethics (pp. 763-779). București: Tritonic.
Nikravan, L. (2013). How Should You Manage Gen Y?. Retrieved from
http://www.clomedia.com/blogs/1-ask-a-gen-y/post/how-should-you-
manage-gen-y.
Palfrey, J., and Gasser, U. (2008). Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of
Digital Natives. New York: Basic Books.
192 | Florina PÎNZARU, Elena-Mădălina VĂTĂMĂNESCU, Andreea MITAN, Rodica
SĂVULESCU, Alexandra VIȚELAR, Cosmina NOAGHEA, Mădălina BĂLAN
Millennials at Work: Investigating the Specificity of Generation Y versus Other Generations
Petre, D., and Săvulescu, R. (2015). Percepția luxului pentru generația Y din
România. O cercetare exploratorie. In Petcu, M. (coord.), Sociologia luxului
(pp. 265-301). București: Tritonic.
Pînzaru, F. and Mitan, A. (2015). Mangers versus Digital Natives Employees. A Study
Regarding the Perceptions of the Romanian Managers Working with
Youngsters. Paper presented at the XVI Eurasia Business and Economics
Society International Cofnerence, Bahcesehir University, TMB and IEAD,
Istanbul, Turkey, 27th-29th May 2015.
Reynolds Lewis, K. (2015). Everything you need to know about your Millennial co-
workers. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/2015/06/23/know-your-
millennial-co-workers/.
Rosen, L.D. (2007). Me, MySpace and I: Parenting the Net Generation. Hampshire:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown Up Digital. How The Net Generation is Changing Your
World. New York: McGraw Hill.
Twenge, J.M. (2009). Generational Changes and Their Impact in the Classroom:
Teaching Generation Me. Medical Education. 43, 398 – 405
Twenge, J.M., Campbell, S.M., Hoffman, B.J., and 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.
Urban, T. (2013). Why Generation Y Yuppies Are Unhappy. Huffington Post.
Disponibil la adresa http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wait-but-
why/generation-y-unhappy_b_3930620.html.
Zemke, R., Raines, C., and Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at Work. Managing the
Clash of Veterans, Boomers, Xers, and Nexters in Your Workplace. New York:
Amacom.
Zopiatis, A., Krambia-Kapardis, M., and Varnavas, A. (2012). Y-ers, X-ers and
Boomers: Investigating the multigenerational (mis)perceptions in the
hospitality workplace. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 12(2), 101–121.
http://www.hart.ro/en/
http://www.hoganassessments.com/
http://www.psychological-consultancy.com/products/hogan-assessments/
Received: February 22, 2016
Accepted for publication: May 24, 2016
