GovernmentExecutive.com

Workforce planners should avoid stereotyping the needs and expectations of different generations of federal workers, experts at the Human Capital Management: Federal 2007 conference said on Wednesday.

Younger workers "want to be challenged, and they like to be treated with respect," said John Allison Jr., deputy director for human capital at the Defense Intelligence Agency. "They don't like to be lumped into this category, Generation Y, because it's made up with individuals.... If I address them as a generation, they turn me off."

Their aversion to being treated as a phenomenon rather than as individuals may stem from some of the assumptions about younger workers, including that they are self-centered or lack commitments to organizations or jobs, Allison said.

"Any generation that comes forward, a lot of people think they're the center of the universe," Allison said. "That group of people that marched into the workplace in the '70s was not humble, was pretty sure that long hair and bell bottoms were the way to dress; was pretty sure we had to give peace a chance."

In fact, the latest generation may not differ from their predecessors in terms of the things that attract them to federal service, said John Crum, acting director of the Merit Systems Protection Board's Office of Policy and Evaluation.

According to an upcoming MSPB study that will include a review of hiring records and a survey of 2,000 federal employees who were hired in 2005, young employees say they valued the stability of federal government jobs and the pensions and traditional benefits that come with those jobs as highly as their predecessors, and they value these even more highly than workplace flexibilities.

Younger employees also do not leave the government at higher rates than their predecessors, according to Crum.

"When we look at loss rates, the pattern has not changed in 50 years," he said. "We don't have an expectation of increased loss rates in the future. If you treat people well over the first three to five years, you're likely to be able to keep them."

John Palguta, vice president for policy at the Partnership for Public Service, said he was concerned that focusing too much on young, entry-level hires would leave the government short of mid-level employees who could step up and take on leadership roles.

"Part of the problem is, how deep is your bench?" Palguta asked. "If you've got great players on your bench and someone goes down, no problem. In the federal government right now, I think we have a very thin bench."

Crum said MSPB found that many new federal employees were not recent college graduates, and the government should consider the diversity of age in its incoming workforce.

"We do very diverse entry-level hiring," Crum said. "They're not so young, they're not so inexperienced. The average age of a new hire for an entry-level position in the federal government is 33. In 2005, we hired someone for an entry-level position at 84."

Ultimately, Crum said, age can tell agencies only so much about a potential federal employee.

"This generational perspective has some value, but it's been oversold," he said. "It's like taking a Myers-Briggs personality test, and you come out with a type, and you know all about yourself. It's not so predictive. It's not so prescriptive. But it's useful in understanding that people are not always the same as you."

COMMENTS

• Each generation as it emerged has been labeled with some glint of impending doom. I am getting old and still waiting for the doom generation. People should realize that constant refresh averts doom. Our country needs fresh young minds. As far as Gen-Y goes. Celebrate the freshness. Isn't this the biggest difference between young and old? To be honest it seems to me that the younger members of the workforce are the least like each other than any other group. They are more interesting than my peer group; they make me smile more often than my peer group; they approach the day more optimistic than my peer group; and they remind me of my peer group when it was their age. I am confident and ready to turn it over to them. Anna Posted November 23, 2007 6:26 AM
• While stereotyping individuals is a net loss for any manager or individual, generational classification is a tool and like a gun, knife, or baseball bat is only as productive or destructive as it is used. As a tool, it can shed light on glaring differences in developmental influences or expose thought processes that can blind a manager to a worker’s motivations and capabilities. Reading this article reminded me of two things. One is many of the recent debates between the advocates for and against the NSPS. This discussion seems to have gravitate along lines based on these so-called generations; but, to my way of thinking, seem more based on time of life and mental state issues. The following ARE generalizations but, perhaps, a bit of truisms. Optimistic youth seems more convinced of their innate ability to stand out in the crowd, thus earning the rewards promised by performance pay. More cautious oldsters seem to look at the potential for abuse and recognize that most of us comprise those masses less likely to distinguish themselves from the crowd. Still, anyone who is polarized to either extreme must be considered at least a tad blind for their lack of consideration for the opposition’s points. On the 2nd point: Demographic analysis can be used to impart glimpses of reasoning and psychological motivations based on environment, sociology, and history. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, while having no proven connection to age, has a demonstrable link between motivation and state of mind and body; which are often reflections of age and income. The Foundation series by Isaac Asimov was the first time I was exposed to the possibility of using demographics as science and, perhaps, the best scenario depicting the pitfalls of attempting direct application of such theories on a populace. While the point of this article, the negative aspects of generalization when applied to individuals, has many merits; please do not totally dismiss the benefits of demographic analysis when used as a tool to shine light where our minds fail to take us. And always remember, when someone has an agenda, they can prove anything with statistics. Tip off Posted November 21, 2007 10:02 AM
• I am happy to see GOVEXEC print more articles like this to clarify these issues in the Federal Workplace. I am in my early forties and mentor some of these 20's folks. Along the lines of what one contributor said, younger employees want interesting work for good money in a positive environment with transparent management. That means they are not going to be happy in a lot of offices today unless managers accentate the positives of working for the government, especially the fact that they have good security and may actually be around long enough to make a difference if they want to. Tommy Dee Posted November 21, 2007 5:46 AM