Generational differences at work? A meta‐analysis and qualitative investigation

Summary Despite substantive criticisms of generations and mounting evidence suggesting that “generational differences” do not exist, generational characterizations remain widely popular among academics and practitioners who use them to explain employee thoughts and behaviors. The current research examined academic literature as a source that may have contributed to perpetuating generational stereotypes. In Study 1, we meta‐analyzed the generations literature to examine the extent that findings in this research conveyed a sense that generational differences exist. Results of the meta‐analysis revealed few systematic, meaningful differences among generations on a variety of outcomes. To follow up on why the generations literature generally promotes the idea of systematic differences despite the mixed and limited evidence for them, in Study 2, we conducted a qualitative investigation of the meta‐analyzed articles, looking for explanations about why research and practice using generations persist despite the lack of evidence. Results of the qualitative analysis showed that researchers often discounted null or equivocal findings and seldom raised questions about the underlying concept of generations. Our findings reinforce that researchers and practitioners should continue to seek better explanations for differences among workers, investigate the origins of generational stereotypes, and work to understand why academics and practitioners continue supporting and propagating this questionable concept.