Introduction
Organizational leaders need to consider the widening employee age structure in today’s workforce and the influence of this diverse workgroup on collective employee performance. The broadening age structure is due to both the on-going entrance of younger workers and the continued employment of the aging workforce as a result of increased life spans and extensions in retirement ages (Burtless, Reference Burtless2013). Indeed, the number of older employees (45–64 years) is expanding faster than younger employees (15–24 years) (see Figure 1) and the US Bureau of Labor Statistics has recently extended the upper limit of the traditional working-age population from 64 to 74 years (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014). With the workforce’s broadening age structure, the frequency of multigenerational interactions naturally increases. In turn, this increased level of interaction intensifies potential generational differences (Ciampa & Chernesky, Reference Chuang and Liao2013). The generational differences are notable; both younger workforce entrants and existing workers report gaps between the generational groups’ different workplace viewpoints (Finn & Donovan, Reference Fiol and Lyles2013). For instance, employees from younger generations report heightened preferences for improved work/life balance and adoption of digital technologies as compared with other generations (Hershatter & Epstein, Reference Hershatter and Epstein2010; Finn & Donovan, Reference Fiol and Lyles2013). In further support of these different generational perspectives, a recent executive development publication asserts that ‘by all accounts (the recent workforce entrants) are unlike preceding generations’ (Brack, Reference Brack2012: 2). This potential divide is also recognized by researchers. Cennamo and Gardner state, ‘increasingly human resource specialists, managers and researchers are becoming interested in how to manage and work with people from different generations in the workplace’ (Reference Cennamo and Gardner2008: 891). Thus, we contend that it behooves management to capitalize on the potential benefits in these generational differences and avoid potential pitfalls in the changing workforce age structure.
Figure 1 The broadening workforce age structure. Reprinted from Engaging and Integrating a Global Workforce, by the Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved June 18, 2016 from http://futurehrtrends.eiu.com/report-2015/profile-of-the-global-workforce-present-and-future/. Copyright 2016, the SHRM Foundation, Alexandria, VA. Reprinted with permission
The complex nature of a multigenerational workforce emerges concurrently with global growth in knowledge-intensive and professional service sectors (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013). In these sectors, extant research depicts how successful employee performance depends upon reciprocal knowledge sharing (Aryee, Walumbwa, Seidu, & Otaye, Reference Aryee, Walumbwa, Seidu and Otaye2013), and how knowledge sharing is often heightened between colleagues of similar ages (Ellwart, Bündgens, & Rack, Reference Espedal2013). In contrast, employee age-based differences may prompt interpersonal conflict (Joshi, Dencker, & Franz, Reference Joshi, Dencker and Franz2011), which in turn, may diminish employee performance (e.g., De Dreu & Weingart, Reference De Dreu and Weingart2003; Ellwart, Bündgens, & Rack, Reference Espedal2013). Indeed, Joshi, Dencker, and Franz suggest that ‘age-based differences can be a basis for conflict at interpersonal and at work group levels’ (Reference Joshi, Dencker and Franz2011: 184). Unfortunately, this perceived divide amid generational viewpoints may only widen as the number of younger employees will increase to 46% of the workforce by 2020 (Lynch, Reference Lynch2008), with higher percentages expected in knowledge-intensive industries (cf. Finn & Donovan, Reference Fiol and Lyles2013, 80% in financial services). Moreover, despite extant research that identifies organizational level avenues to improved knowledge transfer (e.g., Argote, McEvily, & Reagans, Reference Argote, McEvily and Reagans2003; Van Wijk, Jansen & Lyles, Reference Webster and Sundaram2008) and antecedents toward organizational knowledge sharing (e.g., organizational culture and attitudes, Witherspoon, Bergner, Cockrell, & Stone, Reference Witherspoon, Bergner, Cockrell and Stone2013), less is known about specific management practices that could concurrently enable effective knowledge sharing and buffer deleterious consequences in a multigenerational workforce.
Thus, it benefits managers to better understand how specific management practices draw upon mutually beneficial multigenerational skillsets in order to increase collective knowledge sharing and avoid knowledge losses. Scholars have demonstrated the general relationship between high involvement management practices and service gains (Chuang & Liao, Reference Ciampa and Chernesky2010; Batt & Colvin, Reference Batt and Colvin2011) across all organizational employees (Sun, Aryee, & Law, Reference Sun, Aryee and Law2007). However, little attention has been given to understand how age diversity in a multigenerational workforce may affect employee performance differently in the presence of such practices. This gap is meaningful as an increasing number of both academic (Joshi, Dencker, & Franz, Reference Joshi, Dencker and Franz2011; Chaudhuri & Ghosh, Reference Chaudhuri and Ghosh2012) and industry reports (Finn & Donovan, Reference Fiol and Lyles2013) recognize the need to identify management practices that help engage and retain an effective multigenerational workforce. Addressing this gap, the paper’s purpose is to conceptualize how the use of salient management practices, including reverse mentoring, self-managed teams, and job rotation develops effective employee knowledge sharing behavior across the multigenerational workforce. Importantly, we contend that an intentional managerial focus on the unique skills and preferences of the distinct generations can create a complementary patchwork of overlapping, interconnected skills that can facilitate improved knowledge sharing across employees of any age.
In this paper, we draw on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Paroutis & Al Saleh, Reference Payne and Huffman2009), to extend what is known about the relationship between employee behavior, management practices, and knowledge-based outcomes (Lepak & Snell, Reference Lepak and Snell1998; Posthuma, Campion, Masimova, & Campion, Reference Posthuma, Campion, Masimova and Campion2013). This focus answers a call to understand generational plurality (Storberg-Walker, Reference Storberg-Walker2015) by conceptualizing how salient management practices optimize multigenerational employee knowledge-based capabilities. We conceptualize how the development of a unique employee behavioral capability, namely socio-technical flexibility, is the pivotal lynchpin between the use of management practices and effective multigenerational employee knowledge sharing. Wright and Snell (Reference Wright and Snell1998) originally described flexibility as the behavioral skill of employees to promptly adapt to dynamic contextual factors. Extending this concept to today’s digital technologies, we depict socio-technical flexibility as a means whereby employees from multiple generations with distinct workplace preferences interact and share their capabilities via multiple technologies and management practices in order to boost collective knowledge sharing. To this end, socio-technical flexibility is the enabling capability that transforms generational differences from potential discord into multigenerational knowledge gains.
The development of employee socio-technical flexibility has wide-ranging potential to enhance our understanding as to how diverse multigenerational cohorts can improve performance in today’s knowledge economy. We outline our conceptualization of how socio-technical flexibility contributes to improved multigenerational knowledge sharing in three steps (see Figure 1). First, we provide an overview of the distinct workplace characteristics of both the youngest workforce entrants and existing workforce members. Second, we describe how heightened multigenerational interactions and use of digital technologies can optimize knowledge sharing and collective learning gains through socio-technical flexibility. Third, we identify how increased employee interaction via the presence of select participatory management practices increases multigenerational socio-technical flexibility (Figure 2).
Figure 2 The value of socio-technical flexibility to effective multigenerational knowledge sharing
Differing Workplace Preferences In A Multigenerational Workforce
Before we can outline how multigenerational interactions enhance knowledge gains, it is necessary to first identify key workplace preferences of both the youngest and existing generations in the workforce. Our focus on two generational cohorts, namely younger workforce entrants and existing workforce members, instead of all generations (e.g., Baby Boomers, Gen X, etc.) is based on the known differences of pertinent characteristics of age-based generational identities (Joshi, Dencker, & Franz, Reference Joshi, Dencker and Franz2011). Joshi, Dencker, Franz, & Martocchio, (Reference Joshi, Dencker, Franz and Martocchio2010) reason that different generation’s age-based identity stems from the collective memories of shared historical events and cultural norms of the members’ formative years, which in turn, influence their current workplace experiences. Drawing on Joshi et al.’s (Reference Joshi, Dencker, Franz and Martocchio2010) age-based identity development, we contend that the younger generation’s use of different digital technologies in educational and home environments during their formative years serves to influence their current workplace preferences and experiences. A focus on generational groups naturally assumes generalized group actions (Valtonen, Dillon, Hacklin, & Väisänen, Reference Valtonen, Dillon, Hacklin and Väisänen2011); however, we believe outlining key workplace preferences of the generational cohorts may help management identify practices that facilitate fruitful workplace experiences across a multigenerational workforce.
First, the existing workforce members, including employees in the Traditionalists, Baby Boomers, and Gen X generations, include individuals born during World War II through the late 1970s. The formative experiences of these employees hinge on growing up during times of instability and uncertainty during the Vietnam and Cold Wars (Dries, Pepermans, & De Kerpel, Reference Egri and Ralston2008). The unpredictability during their developmental year drives a current preference for heightened levels of stability (McGuire, Todnem By, & Hutchings, Reference McGuire, Todnem By and Hutchings2007) and commitment (Benson & Brown, Reference Benson and Brown2011). For instance, these employees believe achievement stems from tenure and ‘paying one’s dues’ through job experiences and often define themselves through their careers (Dries, Pepermans, & De Kerpel, Reference Egri and Ralston2008; Benson & Brown, Reference Benson and Brown2011). With their focus on stability, existing workforce members often have demonstrated a lifetime commitment to a sole employer (McGuire, Todnem By, & Hutchings, Reference McGuire, Todnem By and Hutchings2007) and an individualistic orientation (Egri & Ralston, Reference Ellwart, Bündgens and Rack2004) in adulthood. In turn, the existing employees possess heightened levels of tacit job knowledge stemming from their personal efforts during long-tenured organizational employment.
On the other hand, distinct developmental experiences have also influenced the age-based identities of the youngest workforce entrants (e.g., Millennials and Gen Z). The primary difference between the youngest and existing workforce members’ characteristics hinges on the prevalence of digital technologies throughout the youngest entrants’ formative years and the emphasis on collective, other-focused learning opportunities driven by these new technologiesFootnote 1 (Hershatter & Epstein, Reference Hershatter and Epstein2010; Myers & Sadaghiani, Reference Myers and Sadaghiani2010; Rosen & Lara‐Ruiz, Reference Rosen and Lara‐Ruiz2015). Through their lifelong use of digital technologies, younger employees have developed competency with new technologies of real-time information gathering and shared communication, such as video sharing, texting, and blogging (Deal, Altman, & Rogelberg, Reference Deal, Altman and Rogelberg2010; Palfrey & Gasser, Reference Palfrey and Gasser2013; Wesolowski, Reference Van Wijk, Jansen and Lyles2014). Their knowledge of communication technologies facilitates a desire for dynamic involvement and transparency in sharing and receiving of real-time information about job roles and organizational developments (Finn & Donovan, Reference Fiol and Lyles2013; Kultalahti & Liisa Viitala, Reference Kultalahti and Liisa Viitala2014; Culpin, Millar, & Peters, Reference Culpin, Millar and Peters2015). The use of digital technologies has increased the cohorts’ preference for workplace opportunities where they desire on-going knowledge exchange via reciprocal, immediate feedback (Myers & Sadaghiani, Reference Myers and Sadaghiani2010). Notably, their experience in team activities leads to a preference for a collectivistic-focused participatory environment where they draw on knowledge and support in team-based tasks (Firfiray & Mayo, Reference Fu2016).
The aforementioned differences in the formative experiences between the existing workplace members and the youngest generational cohort have created a noticeable, often predominant difference in their workplace communication preferences (Twenge, Reference Twenge2010; Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, Reference Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman and Lance2010; Brack, Reference Brack2012; Cogin, Reference Cogin2012; Rosen & Lara‐Ruiz, Reference Rosen and Lara‐Ruiz2015)Footnote 2 . We purport one prominent difference, namely the existing workers’ preference for individual oriented, stable experiences maintained primarily through face-to-face communication (McGuire, Todnem By, & Hutchings, Reference McGuire, Todnem By and Hutchings2007; Proserpio & Gioia, Reference Proserpio and Gioia2007; Benson & Brown, Reference Benson and Brown2011) versus the newer generations’ preference for flexible, shared experiences via digital technology (Kultalahti & Liisa Viitala, Reference Kultalahti and Liisa Viitala2014; Firfiray & Mayo, Reference Fu2016), could serve as an impasse to effective coworker information exchange. The potential discord in these preferences could be especially damaging in knowledge-based roles where effective performance relies upon the trickle-down effect of tacit information sharing from experienced employees (Chuang & Liao, Reference Ciampa and Chernesky2010). Moreover, employees’ failure to embrace workplace technologies that incorporate real-time, synchronous job-related exchanges can equally compromise quality performance (Setia, Venkatesh, & Joglekar, Reference Setia, Venkatesh and Joglekar2013). Thus, based on these inconsistent preferences, we propose
Proposition 1: In the workplace, different preferences for use of digital technologies are present between the existing workforce members and the youngest entrants.
Development Of Employee Socio-Technical Flexibility
The potential for differing workplace preferences in a multigenerational workforce may heighten diminished performance outcomes; however, we conceptualize how the development of a new behavioral capability, namely socio-technical flexibility, instills effective multigenerational performance gains through innovative knowledge exchanges. Conceptualized in social exchange theory (Blau, 1964; Liao, Reference Liao2008), socio-technical flexibility is the behavioral skillset that may cultivate multigenerational employee knowledge sharing through mutual participation in various digital technologies. Next, we describe the development of socio-technical flexibility and its benefits to a multigenerational workforce.
Socio-technical flexibility
In their seminal article, Wright and Snell (Reference Wright and Snell1998) identify how strategic fit and flexibility in management practices garner malleable employee behaviors to meet changing workplace objectives. Their description of behavioral flexibility relies on the variety of behavioral scripts (i.e., routines based on personal experience) and the mechanisms to synthesize these scripts (i.e., teamwork, job design), which in turn, increases firm-level flexibility to organizational changes. We extend this general conceptualization to identify the importance of socio-technical flexibility across a diverse age range of employees. Socio-technical flexibility extends what we know about behavioral flexibility in two ways. First, socio-technical flexibility encompasses a distinct type of behavioral flexibility consisting of malleable interpersonal social skills that are developable in part by employee experiences in a technology-laden environment. Second, extending research that links successful employee performance to reciprocal knowledge sharing and colleague interaction (Sun, Aryee, & Law, Reference Sun, Aryee and Law2007; Wei & Lau, Reference Wesolowski2010; Aryee et al., Reference Aryee, Walumbwa, Seidu and Otaye2013), we argue that socio-technical flexibility is enhanced through heightened multigenerational employee interaction. Drawing on these new employee capabilities, the authors propose that socio-technical flexibility is the enabling behavioral capability that mitigates potential conflict and gaps from generational differences with beneficial multigenerational knowledge exchange.
Moreover, socio-technical flexibility may be especially valuable in knowledge-intensive sectors where change is routine and quality service provision depends upon flexible employee exchanges to meet customers’ unique needs (Barker & Härtel, Reference Barker and Härtel2004). For instance, differing customer communication styles requires employees to listen, reframe, and accurately convey relevant information to customers (Webster & Sundaram, Reference Wei and Lau2009) across different communication mediums (Fu, Reference Gonzales and Thompson2014). In knowledge-intensive roles, successful performance often depends on seasoned employees’ ability to share their tacit knowledge from past experiences to newer employees (Hammer & Barbera, Reference Harvey, McIntyre, Thompson Heames and Moeller1997). Thus, understanding how employees’ knowledge sharing capabilities develop through socio-technical flexibility, regardless of employee age or job tenure, is warranted.
History of socio-technical flexibility
Notably, the study’s emphasis on socio-technical behavior originates from early job design literature that examined job roles in a manufacturing context (Cooper & Foster, Reference Cooper and Foster1971; Trist, Reference Trist1981). The earlier scholarly focus was on the effectiveness of the system, in which ‘socio’ was defined as sequential employee responses to manufacturing system operations. In this study, we extend the original conceptualization beyond strict focus on controlled employee roles in automated manufacturing systems to emphasize the value of employee discretion and interpersonal interaction to increased knowledge sharing behaviors. This focus captures the benefit of malleable employee behavior within the changing digital technologies of the current workplace (Ortiz de Guinea & Webster, Reference Ortiz de Guinea and Webster2015). For instance, employees often have discretion over what technologies (i.e., email, text messaging, video conferencing) they use – or don’t use – in customer or coworker exchanges. Capturing the nature of today’s knowledge sector, socio-technical flexibility portrays how heightened reciprocity in interpersonal exchanges via various technological mediums develops employees’ skillsets and capabilities for enhanced knowledge sharing (Rusly, Yih-Tong Sun, & Corner, Reference Rusly, Yih-Tong Sun and Corner2014). Our conceptualization of socio-technical flexibility is characterized by two distinct behavioral characteristics that enhance knowledge sharing: mutual learning and innovative exchanges in changing environments, and ease in information access and fluid communication via multiple technologies.
Behavioral characteristics of socio-technical flexibility
Mutual learning and innovative exchanges in changing environments
We argue that effective employee knowledge sharing through socio-technical flexibility readily develops through two key mechanisms: mutual learning and innovative exchanges. First, through heightened colleague interaction employees accumulate knowledge and develop a mutual understanding of the needs of both colleagues and customers (Farmer, Van Dyne & Kamdar, Reference Ferris, Liden, Munyon, Summers, Basik and Buckley2015; Subramony & Pugh, 2015). Increased interaction and involvement between employees are primary sources of employee learning (Doornbos, Bolhuis, & Simons, 2004). For example, learning occurs when a younger employee witnesses how a seasoned colleague deftly responds to a customer complaint. Through these shared experiences and social exchanges, employees recognize relevant details that inform their understanding of others’ behaviors, which in turn, enhances employee knowledge of the workplace in general (Li, Harris, Boswell, & Xie, Reference Li, Harris, Boswell and Xie2011). Employees’ diminished uncertainties of others’ actions – regardless of age differences – allows for new understanding in workplace relationships, across both coworkers and customers (Ferris, Liden, Munyon, Summers, Basik, & Buckley, Reference Finkelstein, Allen and Rhoton2009; Rusly, Yih-Tong Sun, & Corner, Reference Rusly, Yih-Tong Sun and Corner2014). Thus, through socio-technical flexibility, an employee is capable of developing new learning and appropriately modifying one’s interpersonal interactions for effective responses to dynamic role obligations.
Second, socio-technical flexibility is also characterized by innovative information exchanges. We contend that employees develop innovative skillsets through mutual knowledge sharing and problem solving during multigenerational interaction. Similar to the ripple effect of learning found in both perspective taking (Grant & Berry, Reference Greengard2011) and contextual awareness (Lee Endres, Endres, Chowdhury, & Alam, Reference Lee Endres, Endres, Chowdhury and Alam2007), socio-technical flexibility strengthens employees’ collective knowledge base as employees perceive significant environmental events, recognize colleague’s capabilities and deficiencies, and readily provide appropriate services to assist with the needs at hand. For instance, the combination of existing members’ tacit organizational knowledge and younger entrants’ knowledge of communication technologies may lead to creative problem solving, where employees are capable of re-conceptualizing issues in order to find practical and novel service solutions to both colleagues and customers. To this end, socio-technical flexibility may provide employees with the capability to both generate timely and creative solutions that are useful across different organizational areas (Fu, Reference Gonzales and Thompson2014) and meet unique customer needs (Kimberley & Härtel, Reference Kimberley and Härtel2008).
Ease in information access via multiple technologies
Socio-technical flexibility also develops as digital communication mediums ease colleague knowledge sharing across both shared and dispersed locations. Technological advances continue to facilitate real-time employee access to organizational information through digital systems, such as human resources information systems, Open Source networks, and mobile computing (Lee Endres et al., Reference Lee Endres, Endres, Chowdhury and Alam2007; Marler & Fisher, Reference Marler and Fisher2013). Social media tools designed for the workplace (e.g., Yammer) also provide employees with digital forums for information exchange where colleagues can ask questions, solicit guidance, and share relevant workplace information to large numbers of coworkers in proximal and remote locations (Agarwal & Mital, Reference Ahn and Ettner2009). In turn, these synchronous digital technologies enhance continuous information exchange (Cramton, Reference Cramton2001).
We argue that the enhanced information exchanges via new digital technologies will develop employees’ technological capabilities across both generational groups. The evolution of new technologies directly draws upon the younger generations’ competencies with digital technologies (Hershatter & Epstein, Reference Hershatter and Epstein2010) and creates an opportunity for faster communication exchange between all employees through synchronous, real-time information sharing (Lepak & Snell, Reference Lepak and Snell1998). For instance, the advent of Web 2.0 mediums (e.g., social networking, mobile computing) and younger generations’ tech-savviness has led to their improved performance (Stratton, Julien, & Schaffer, Reference Stratton, Julien and Schaffer2014). However, we expect that the routine multigenerational interaction will facilitate new technological learning across all employees. For example, the use of texting facilitates immediate coworker information exchange about customers’ questions (Counts & Fisher, Reference Counts and Fisher2008). Likewise, video-conferencing via hand-held ‘smart’ devices provides continued interpersonal exchange in a visual format, which in turn, prompts new learning across all employees in dispersed worksites (Agarwal & Mital, Reference Ahn and Ettner2009). To this end, we contend that socio-technical flexibility developed through increased employee exchanges through synchronous technology mediums bridges potential multigenerational gaps to elicit shared competence in digital mediums and dynamic information exchange, which in turn, increases multigenerational knowledge sharing. Thus, based on our conceptualization of socio-technical flexibility, we propose
Proposition 2: Socio-technical flexibility is a behavioral skillset characterized by innovative responses and increased information exchange across both the existing workforce members and the youngest entrants.
Socio-technical flexibility and improved knowledge sharing
We contend that employee socio-technical flexibility, developed in part through the use of digital technologies, is of particular relevance to improved multigenerational knowledge sharing in knowledge-intensive jobs. Knowledge-intensive service industries (e.g., health care, financial services, sales, R&D) often demand employee responsiveness to around-the-clock services and require employee use of digital mediums for synchronous information sharing. In turn, immediate virtual access to sharing and receiving information provides employees with increased competencies and is developable through remote colleague interaction. In addition, the pervasiveness of digital technologies allows for employee discovery of relevant information beyond the scope of their organization. For instance, employee comments on online forums (e.g., computer coder forums on Reddit.com) provide freely accessible, novel suggestions to workplace challenges. As such, enhanced multigenerational colleague interaction in reciprocal information exchange, through both collocated and dispersed contexts facilitates employee capabilities to address workplace challenges. Based on this logic, we propose
Proposition 3: The presence of socio-technical flexibility in both the existing workforce members and the youngest entrants leads to improved multigenerational knowledge sharing in knowledge intensive service industries.
Enhanced Socio-Technical Flexibility Via Participatory Management Practices
We contend that employees’ socio-technical flexibility not only leads to improved knowledge sharing, but is also developable via managements’ use of select participatory management practices. These management practices address multigenerational workforce preferences and draw on complementary multigenerational skillsets. Recognizing that knowledge development readily occurs through workplace diversity (Fiol & Lyles, 1985), we propose that the management practices provide on-the-job learning situations where learning is seen as a collegial activity (Berings, Poell, & Simons, Reference Berings, Poell and Simons2005) that fosters employee cooperation and communication (Espedal, Reference Farmer, Van Dyne and Kamdar2005). Extending the known value of these management practices in other employee groups (Batt, Reference Batt2000), we outline how participatory management practices, including reverse mentoring, self-managed teams, and job rotation, explicitly benefit the widening workforce age structure by developing heightened socio-technical flexibility.
Reverse mentoring
Mentoring is best described as a personal relationship in which an experienced organizational member (usually older) serves as a role model for a less experienced organizational member (usually younger) (Harvey, McIntyre, Thompson Heames, & Moeller, Reference De Hauw and De Vos2009). Mentoring serves as both a method of career development and a retention strategy for newer and younger employees (Payne & Huffman, Reference Paroutis and Al Saleh2005; McNichols, Reference McNichols2010). However, older employees may not only be needed to mentor, but in need of mentoring as well (Finkelstein, Allen, & Rhoton, Reference Finn and Donovan2003). More recently, due to unique generational characteristics in the workforce and new market demands, ‘reverse’ mentoring has drawn on the different values and expertise of multigenerational employees to address the demands of new technology and global markets (Harvey et al., Reference De Hauw and De Vos2009; Chaudhuri & Ghosh, Reference Chaudhuri and Ghosh2012), and to provide a competitive advantage for both mentor and protégé (Gonzales & Thompson, Reference Grant and Berry1998). In this new mentoring form, a less tenured employee is paired with a more experienced employee with the concurrent goals of helping the older worker adapt to the new technology and providing the younger employee with knowledge gains about organizational processes (Harvey et al., Reference De Hauw and De Vos2009).
Importantly, reverse mentoring provides mutual benefits to both younger and more senior employees. On the one hand, reverse mentoring may help transfer the technological knowledge, energy, and enthusiasm of younger employees to more senior employees (Finkelstein, Allen, & Rhoton, Reference Finn and Donovan2003; Harvey et al., Reference De Hauw and De Vos2009). In contrast, reverse mentoring also lowers role ambiguity and benefits younger employees seeking prompt feedback and direction (Lankau & Scandura, Reference Lankau and Scandura2002). In turn, the mutual benefit from reverse mentoring facilitates complementary multigenerational learning. For instance, a younger employee’s technical savviness and need to learn company processes may complement an older employer’s limited technical expertise and increased tacit knowledge about such processes. The meaningful multigenerational relationships developed through reverse mentoring harnesses both generational similarities and differences to strengthen employee diversity (Ragins & Verbos, Reference Ragins and Verbos2007), boost retention (Marcinkus Murphy, Reference Marcinkus Murphy2012), and dismiss potentially deleterious age-related stereotypes (Lawrence, Reference Lawrence1988; Joshi, Dencker, & Franz, Reference Joshi, Dencker and Franz2011). In fact, the use of reverse mentoring has led to innovative performance gains across different industries as employees readily share and receive new information about process improvements (cf. Hewlett, Sherbin, & Sumberg, Reference Hewlett, Sherbin and Sumberg2009, Time Warner; Greengard, Reference Hammer and Barbera2002, General Electric). Thus, reverse mentoring is a functional, cost-effective, innovative collaborative learning practice to facilitate multigenerational relationships (Marcinkus Murphy, Reference Marcinkus Murphy2012) and enhance socio-technical flexibility in the workforce.
Self-managed teams
The use of self-managed teams in the job design literature has long been considered a valuable means to facilitate collective performance through greater discretion and autonomy in the team members’ roles (Stewart, Courtright, & Barrick, Reference Stewart, Courtright and Barrick2012; Posthuma et al., Reference Posthuma, Campion, Masimova and Campion2013). Specific to knowledge-intensive organizations, the use of self-managed teams has facilitated novel information sharing (Jong, Ruyter, & Lemmink, Reference Jong, Ruyter and Lemmink2004), enhanced operations through knowledge creation (Zarraga & Bonache, Reference Zarraga and Bonache2005), and improved employees’ timeliness and efficiency in meeting changing customer demands (Batt, Reference Batt1999). Despite earlier examination of the value of self-managed teams in the service sector (Batt, Reference Batt2000) and across different employee roles (Bell, Reference Bell2007), no known study has considered the impact of self-managed teams in a multigenerational workforce.
We believe this is a valuable conceptualization, as the decentralized framework of self-managed teams empowers employees from all generations to collectively share their ideas about team procedures and participate in decision-making processes (De Hauw & De Vos, Reference Dries, Pepermans and De Kerpel2010). The discretionary opportunities present in self-managed teams connects to the younger entrants’ desire for increased autonomy and responsibility in daily job roles through active involvement in peer learning and information sharing (Myers & Sadaghiani, Reference Myers and Sadaghiani2010). In addition, the success of self-managed teams often depends upon the tacit knowledge, peer-based monitoring, and leadership of the more experienced existing workforce members (Barker, Reference Barker1993). Incorporating preferences from both generational cohorts, self-managed teams create a performance framework that focuses concurrently on both individual and collective goals (Stewart, Courtright, & Barrick, Reference Stewart, Courtright and Barrick2012). Thus, the use of self-managed teams fosters a context where employees’ complementary generational skillsets help to avoid knowledge loss and instead enhance performance. Overall, these characteristics may facilitate interaction among multigenerational employees and increase socio-technical flexibility.
Job rotation
Job rotation is defined as the frequent lateral transfer ‘of employees between jobs in an organization’ that does not necessarily include upward mobility in the organizational hierarchy (Campion, Cheraskin, & Stevens, Reference Campion, Cheraskin and Stevens1994: 1518). Earlier research depicts job rotation as a proactive way to improve work experience and career development through role flexibility (Campion, Cheraskin, & Stevens, Reference Campion, Cheraskin and Stevens1994). Originally implemented in manufacturing systems, employees frequent rotation between repetitive, deskilled work roles was found to reduce boredom, fatigue (Lindbeck & Snower, Reference Lindbeck and Snower2000), and burnout (Maslach & Goldberg, Reference Maslach and Goldberg1999); and instead promote job learning and motivation by providing new experiences through sequential job movements (Morrison & Brantner, Reference Morrison and Brantner1992). These new experiences and socialization with different colleagues provides employees with better work adjustment, personal development opportunities, and ultimately, opportunities for promotion (Campion, Cheraskin, & Stevens, Reference Campion, Cheraskin and Stevens1994).
Job rotation also has novel outcomes in the current knowledge-intensive sector. The new technological advances and service roles have created jobs characterized by a wider arrangement of tasks and interpersonal responsibilities to customers and colleagues (Hsieh & Chao, Reference Hsieh and Chao2004). The diverse set of tasks in technology-laden roles lowers feelings of monotony and exhaustion, and leads to increased opportunities to acquire new work-related skills (Hsieh & Chao, Reference Hsieh and Chao2004). For example, Facebook embraces short-term work roles where employees are empowered to seek out job roles best matched to employee strengths (Albergotti, Reference Albergotti2014). In addition, moving beyond the traditional use of job rotation to develop managers (Campion, Cheraskin, & Stevens, Reference Campion, Cheraskin and Stevens1994), recent management systems reward creative thinking and encourage criticism from non-managerial employees, which in turn, deemphasizes the vertical hierarchy authority and expands the scope of job rotation (Albergotti, Reference Albergotti2014).
Drawing on the expanding range of job rotation, we believe job rotation may also provide new synergies across employees from different generational groups. First, job rotation is especially important for younger employees as they value autonomy and flexibility in the workplace (Southard & Lewis, Reference Southard and Lewis2004; Lowe, Levitt, & Wilson, Reference Lowe, Levitt and Wilson2008). Younger employees may also be more receptive to job rotation due their higher mobility expectations, desire for self-improvement through professional development opportunities (Myers & Sadaghiani, Reference Myers and Sadaghiani2010; Firfiray & Mayo, Reference Fu2016), and enthusiasm for novel workplace experiences (Finkelstein, Allen, & Rhoton, Reference Finn and Donovan2003; Harvey et al., Reference De Hauw and De Vos2009). Older employees may also benefit from job rotation. Experienced employees also desire and benefit from new and challenging opportunities (Hewlett, Sherbin, & Sumberg, Reference Hewlett, Sherbin and Sumberg2009), such as the new discoveries and benefits in rapidly changing technologies (Dewett & Jones, Reference Dewett and Jones2001). Moreover, through coworker interaction in job rotation all employees may experience the contagious effect of coworker enthusiasm (Ragins & Winkel, Reference Ragins and Winkel2011) and knowledge sharing for enhanced service performance (Chuang & Liao, Reference Ciampa and Chernesky2010). Thus, managers should consider the potential linkages between job rotation and heightened socio-technical flexibility in a multigenerational workforce.
To summarize, we believe that the aforementioned participatory management practices contribute to the development of socio-technical flexibility in a multigenerational workforce. The self-managed team design requires task interdependence among group members across functional areas (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, Reference Humphrey, Nahrgang and Morgeson2007) and the team’s self-directed nature requires employee malleability to participate in multiple job roles (Stewart, Courtright, & Barrick, Reference Stewart, Courtright and Barrick2012). In turn, self-managed team members often develop increased familiarity with organizational processes, cultural norms, and managerial expectations, all elements of critical learning for younger employees. The aforementioned management practices perhaps most strongly align with younger generations’ preferences for flexibility (Southard & Lewis, Reference Southard and Lewis2004; Lowe, Levitt, & Wilson, Reference Lowe, Levitt and Wilson2008); however, the success of these practices often depends on the tacit knowledge sharing of the existing workforce (Hammer & Barbera, Reference Harvey, McIntyre, Thompson Heames and Moeller1997). For example, job rotation as a flexible job role facilitates information gains as multigenerational employees efficiently share their knowledge through the development of new relationships in expanded job roles (Zarraga & Bonache, Reference Zarraga and Bonache2005). In this case, younger entrants’ success in flexible job roles requires an ability to recognize how experienced employees draw on tacit knowledge to successfully navigate various roles. In these practices, we believe employees from multigenerational cohorts will experience heightened levels of interaction and new learning, and in turn, develop socio-technical flexibility. Thus, we offer
Proposition 4: The existing workplace members and the youngest entrants involvement in the participatory management techniques leads to improved socio-technical flexibility.
Implications For Practice And Research
By embracing multigenerational differences, we conceptualize how management’s intentional use of select participatory management practices can lead to increased knowledge sharing from enhanced employee socio-technical flexibility. Our conceptual framework provides management with various means to meld differing generational perspectives, preferences, and skills into enhanced knowledge sharing across a multigenerational workforce. This extends our understanding of how management can be purposeful in improving employee learning within a widening age structure by facilitating employees’ shared experiences via participatory management practices. In turn, the shared knowledge across all generational cohorts draws on the tacit knowledge of existing employees, improves the contributions of the youngest entrants, and concurrently reduces potential knowledge losses and conflict in the widening workforce age structure (Batt & Colvin, Reference Batt and Colvin2011). We believe the participatory management practices will complement other factors known to enhance knowledge sharing, such as employees’ intentions and attitudes (e.g., motivation and organizational commitment), organizational culture, and extrinsic incentives (Witherspoon et al., Reference Witherspoon, Bergner, Cockrell and Stone2013).
In depicting our study’s framework, we identify valuable directions for future management research. First, we provide initial support for how management’s intentional focus on participatory management practices leads to enhanced socio-technical flexibility and increased knowledge sharing within a multigenerational workforce. We acknowledge that employee skill development also may occur through other means beyond the identified participatory management practices (Cullen & Turnbull, Reference Cullen and Turnbull2005). As such, future research should empirically examine the paper’s proposed relationships, consider their effectiveness in service intensive industries, and identify whether other management practices serve to enhance multigenerational effectiveness.
Next, we demonstrate how the emergence of socio-technical flexibility leads to increased knowledge sharing across multigenerational employees. In essence, our depiction of socio-technical flexibility outlines a novel set of behaviors that assists in developing a ‘differentiated workforce’ (Lepak & Snell, Reference Lepak and Snell1998) in the workforce’s widening age structure. Indeed, our focus on socio-technical flexibility as a type of employee flexibility extends Wright and Snell’s (Reference Wright and Snell1998) broad description of flexibility to describe how employees of all ages can develop new knowledge capabilities in the era of digital technologies. Given the continued changes in technology and its resulting influence on employees’ performance, one promising area for future research will be to empirically examine the link between employee socio-technical flexibility and multi-level performance gains (e.g., individual, work unit, organizational) across different types of technologies (e.g., synchronous technologies, Web 2.0).
In addition, the multigenerational workforce’s increased use of technologies may also provide organizational adeptness in the use of virtual teams in a global economy. The virtual service industry, demonstrating rapid expansion over the last two decades, consists of service delivery using new digital technologies for continuous information exchange to meet customer needs around the globe (Mesmer-Magnus, DeChurch, Jimenez-Rodriguez, Wildman, & Shuffler, Reference Mesmer-Magnus, DeChurch, Jimenez-Rodriguez, Wildman and Shuffler2011). Effective virtual performance and a growing reliance on virtual international project teams (He, Baruch, & Lin, Reference He, Baruch and Lin2014) are critical for business survival in face of the growing global competition. Future research should examine whether socio-technical flexibility effectively facilitates employees’ use of digital media and delivery of effective virtual support through multiple communication technologies in a global context.
Conclusion
The value of socio-technical flexibility depicts how heightened employee knowledge sharing is developed through salient participatory management practices. Connecting the management and workforce diversity literature, we show how an appreciation for a multigenerational workforce can bolster performance gains across all generational cohorts. It is our hope that the enhanced multigenerational employee connectedness via socio-technical flexibility will encourage academics and practitioners alike to embrace the plurality of a multigenerational workforce and develop their research and practice in meaningful new directions.
Acknowledgements
This manuscript is an original work that has not been submitted to nor published anywhere else. All authors have read and approved the paper and have met the criteria for authorship listed above. We believe our paper’s conceptualization of how select management practices can develop employees’ behavioral flexibility, namely socio-technical flexibility, across a multigenerational workforce aligns with the Journal of Management & Organization’s aims to provide a novel approach to facilitate heightened knowledge sharing in a diverse workforce.
