“<i>We aren't your reincarnation!</i>” workplace motivation across X, Y and Z generations
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose The primary purpose of this research is to examine generational differences in valuing the sources of employees' overall motivation in the workplace across Generation X, Generation Y and Generation Z with a view of assisting managers in making employment decisions and maintaining multigenerational staff. Design/methodology/approach The respondents in the study live and work in Canada and provided answers to self-administered online surveys between the fourth quarter of 2017 and the end of January 2020. To assess subjects' work motivation, the study employed Gagné et al. 's (2014) multidimensional work motivation scale (MWMS) alongside a three-item measure of employees' overall motivation (designed for this study). The authors assessed measures of validity and reliability and tested the hypothesis about generational differences in work motivation using structural equation modelling (SEM). Findings The six motivators regress differently to employees' overall motivation. Generation Z is more sensitive to amotivation than Generation X and Generation Y. Extrinsic regulation-material is a valid source of overall work motivation for Generation Z only. Only Generation X values extrinsic regulation-social as a source of employees' overall motivation. So is introjected regulation by Generation Y. Unlike Generation Z, both Generation X and Generation Y employees value identified regulation as a source of overall work motivation. Finally, intrinsic motivation contributes more to Generation Z employees' overall work motivation than it does for Generation X and Generation Y. Research limitations/implications Further work needs to be done to establish whether variations in valuing the sources of motivation may also be spawned by age or status of the respective groups. Future investigations can expand the authors’ focal theme to include additional organisational outcomes, alternative geographical settings and/or include country's economic development as an additional variable. Moreover, further research can address the implications of national culture on shaping generational differences in employee's motivation as well as aiding companies to redesign work tasks considering today's uncertainty as well as increasingly competitive, global environment (e.g. the rise of artificial intelligence). Practical implications It is vital to offer motivators that are valued by each of the three generations, i.e. X, Y and Z, before being able to attract the best candidates of each generation. Organisations should not only create an inclusive and understanding multigenerational working environment but also be able to communicate strong branding via new communication channels successfully (e.g. social media networks), which Generation Yers and Generation Zers utilise better than any other generation in employment. Finally, the authors suggest that service organisations with diverse generational composition should adopt new measures of workplace agility to survive interminable disruptions (e.g. the coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19] pandemic). Originality/value This is the first study of its kind to examine generational differences between Generation X, Generation Y and Generation Z in valuing workplace motivation from a western cultural perspective.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle