EXPLORING DIFFERENT GENERATIONS: A PHENOMENOLOGICAL

STUDY ON CONFLICT MANAGEMENT IN THE WORKPLACE

By

Miriam C. Harris

STEVEN JEDDELOH, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

CLIFFORD BUTLER, PhD, Committee Member

LAURA MARKOS, PhD, Committee Member

Barbara Butts Williams, PhD, Dean, School of Business and Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

July 2015
 ProQuest Number: 3722198

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 3722198

Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
© Miriam C. Harris, 2015
 Abstract

The large and diverse generational workforce working in the federal government

underscore the importance of understanding the lived experiences of U.S. federal

government managers in managing possible generational conflicts. The purpose of this

transcendental phenomenological study was to understand the lived experiences of U.S.

federal government managers and how they managed workplace conflicts among the

Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials whose direct reports are from different

generations. The researcher interviewed 15 managers who worked for three distinct U.S.

Department of Defense (DoD) agencies located in the southern part of the United

States. Among the participants, four were from the Baby Boomers generation, nine were

from the Generation Xers, and two were Millennials. The researcher also conducted brief

informal observations. Content analysis of interview data and field notes revealed that

managers observed and experienced differences in work goals, ethics, and attitudes

among the three generations, which can lead to conflicts. However, generational

conflicts were acceptable as long as leaders knew how to manage effectively. This

implies that the U.S. federal agencies’ managers must understand the goals, ethics, and

attitudes of all of their followers so the appropriate motivational strategies can be used

and effective interpersonal communication can be facilitated. By exploring the lived

experiences of the managers, the study shows that the Department of Defense can be

embroiled with generational conflicts, which can negatively affect interactions within the

department and the department’s productivity.

 Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated to my younger sister, Mia, my niece, Gabrielle and

my Goddaughter, Giovanna; know that you can achieve all of your dreams. Focus and

keep moving forward! To all the young ladies (and anyone) who have been denied a fair

education opportunity and/or to those who think your goals are far beyond reach, you can

do all things with God’s help. You can achieve and succeed; do not give up!

iii
 Acknowledgements

I have come this far by faith and persistence. It has been a journey, but I thank
God for the strength and tenacity to complete this milestone. To God be the Glory!
To my family, thank you, and I love you. From the earliest of my existence even

until now, thank you, Dad and Mom for your undying love, prayers, example, motivation,

and for your relentless sacrifices, provisions and support. Thanks, Dad, for confirming

and reminding me that I was destined to complete this milestone. Mom, for that extra

nudge every time you called and asked if I had completed a task which motivated me

when I did not think I had another once of energy, thanks so much. Both of you were

encouraging and have contributed to the completion of my dissertation. Thank you, my

dear siblings for your love, inspiration and encouragement. Older siblings, thanks for

raising the bar and setting the example that we can fulfill our dreams because our destiny

is great and our success is “Unstoppable.” My younger siblings, you motivate me to

ensure that I do not drop the baton but achieve and continue to inspire you and others. To

my bother-in-law, Dr. Carey Hines, other family and my friends, your encouragements,

any assistance granted to me, and your patience have not gone unnoticed; I appreciate

you.

Dr. Godwin Igein, thank you for getting me on the right track with this. Dr. Nurul

Aman, thank you for being a friend and for all of your assistance and encouragements.

Dr. David Gorman, words cannot express the full extent of my gratitude to you for all of

your encouragements and contributions throughout this journey; I learned so much from

you. You were a “God-send.” As always, thanks so much! Thank you to all of the

managers and those who assisted; this study would not have been possible without your

iv
participation. Dr. Laura Hutt, as my academic advisor, thank you for believing in me,

your advice, and always supporting me. Dr. Steven Jeddeloh, you too were a “God-send.”

Thanks so much for your leadership, invaluable contributions and support as the chair of

my committee and dissertation mentor. I would not be at this point at this time if God had

not orchestrated our relationship. Dr. Cliff Butler, thanks for always supporting and

assisting me along this journey, and Dr. Laura Markos, thank you for your contribution to

the best committee a PhD student could hope for. Although at times very challenging,

much of my knowledge, the quality of this dissertation, and its completion is in great part

a result of your expertise and support.

v
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………….iv
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... .1
Introduction to the Problem ............................................................................................ 1
Background of the Study ................................................................................................ 2
Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................ 5
Purpose of the Study ....................................................................................................... 7
Rationale ......................................................................................................................... 7
Research Questions ......................................................................................................... 9
Significance of the Study .......................................................................... ……………10
Definition of Terms....................................................................................................... 11
Assumptions and Limitations………...………………………………….…………....13
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework.............................................................................. 14
Organization of the Remainder of the Study ................................................................ 17

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 19

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 19
Theoretical/Conceptual Framework…………………………………………………...19
Generations in the Workplace ....................................................................................... 20
Generational Characteristics in the Workplace............................................................. 24
Generational Work Values and Goals……………………………………………..…..30
Generational Leadership ............................................................................................... 36
Managing Workplace Diversity .................................................................................... 39
Impotance of Motivation............................................................................................... 42
Managing Workplace Conflicts .................................................................................... 46
Literature Summary ...................................................................................................... 63

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 65

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 65

vi
 Research Design............................................................................................................ 66
Phenomenological Design ............................................................................................ 66
Sample........................................................................................................................... 67
Setting ........................................................................................................................... 70
Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 71
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 73
Validity and Reliability ................................................................................................. 76
Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................. 78

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS .................................................................................................. 80

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 80
Description of the Sample ............................................................................................. 81
Research Methodology ................................................................................................. 82
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................ 83
Researcher (Participant) Observations ........................................................................ 110
Summary ..................................................................................................................... 115

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 117

Introduction……………………………………………………………………..……117
Summary of the Results .............................................................................................. 118
Discussion of the Results ............................................................................................ 122
Implication of the Study Results ................................................................................. 125
Limitations .................................................................................................................. 135
Recommendations for Further Research ..................................................................... 137
Conclusions…………...…………………………..………………………….………138
References ....................................................................................................................... 140
Appendix A. Statement of Original Work………………………..…………...………..162
Appendix B. Data Analysis Table………………………………………………...……164
Appendix C. Interview Guide……….…...………………………………………...…...165

vii
 List of Tables

Table 1. Basic Demographics of the Sample………………………………………….…81

Table 2. Workplace Conflicts Experienced by U.S. Federal Government Managers…...84

Table 3. Experience of U.S. Federal Government Managers Managing the Effects of

Workplace Generational Conflicts on Work Performance………………………………94

Table 4. Experience of U.S. Federal Government Managers in Diffusing the Challenges

and Conflicts Attributed to Generational Differences…………………………..……...102

viii
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem

In 2013, one Department of the federal government and its related agencies

employed more than 3.6 million individuals, including civilian personnel, active

personnel, retired personnel, standby personnel, and ready reserve personnel (ICF

International, 2013). The Millennials were the largest generational cohort within this

branch of the federal government, representing over 80% of the population (ICF

International, 2013). In contrast, Baby Boomers and Generations Xers represented less

than 20% of this Department of the federal government (ICF International, 2013).

Civilian employees are usually older than those providing uniformed services, with 58%

of them belonging to the generation of Baby Boomers. This is partly because retirees are

taking advantage of the veterans' hiring preference benefits and getting government-

related jobs after they offered their uniformed services (Employment of Veterans in the

Federal Executive Branch, 2010).

The differing values, beliefs, professional aspirations, and life experiences of

these generations have contributed to conflict within the workplace (Bowes, 2012;

Graves, 2013). Baby Boomers and the Generation Xers perceive that Millennials receive

preferential treatment (J. B. James, Swanberg, & McKechnie, 2007). Conversely,

Millennials believe their age inhibits their professional growth (Gargoline, 2012). The

1
researchers concluded that each generation believed it experienced age-related

discrimination (J. B. James et al., 2007).

Prior studies found that generational conflicts challenged the leadership styles of

managers across various sectors and industries (Hammill, 2005; Hannam & Yordi, 2011).

However, by providing training and increasing awareness of generational differences,

managers enabled a multigenerational cohort to manage conflicts, improve interpersonal

communication, and respect each other’s beliefs, attitudes, and preferences thereby

increasing job satisfaction and employee performance (Behfar, Peterson, Mannix, &

Trochim, 2008; Nelson & Quick, 2011; Von Bonsdorff, 2011). The researcher sought to

understand the lived experiences of federal government managers who led a

multigenerational workforce and how they managed workplace conflicts among Baby

Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials. This chapter provides the background of the

study, the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the rationale for this study,

the research questions, the significance of this study, definitions of the key terms, the

assumptions and limitations of this study, and the theoretical/conceptual framework that

supported this study.

Background of the Study

Seeking to increase productivity in an age characterized by rapid technological

advancements and expanding global competition, organizations have transitioned from a

hierarchical power structure to a flat one (Ghosh & Chaudhuri, 2009; Graves, 2013;

Harber, 2011). Organizations that utilize a hierarchical power structure ensure that each

person has clearly defined roles and expectations and is subordinate and accountable to a

person or entity (Brooks, 2010; R. W. Schultz, 2010). The hierarchical power structure

2
provides more opportunities for advancement within an organization and increases

accountability among all levels of the organization, but its bureaucratic structure limits

ingenuity and is inflexible to rapid global changes (Brooks, 2010; Harber, 2011).

Conversely, the flat organizational structure empowers employees, fosters creativity,

expedites interpersonal communication within the organization, removes bureaucratic

constraints, and encourages teamwork; however, it does not clearly define roles, limits

accountability, impedes long-term growth, and places too much responsibility on a leader

(Langdon, 2012; Mclean, 2014; R. W. Schultz, 2010).

The transition from a hierarchical organizational structure to a flatter

organizational structure has resulted in organizations and leaders creating a culture that

promotes workforce collaboration (Angeline, 2011; Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010; Twenge,

2010). Changes in workplace demographics include an aging workforce that seeks to

work additional years because of financial considerations, resulting in a multigenerational

workforce comprised of individuals who represent three distinct generational cohorts:

Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials (DelCampo, Haney, Haggerty, &

Knippel, 2012; K. A. Williams, 2011). These generational cohorts work in environments

characterized by rapid technological advancement and innovation (Hannam & Yordi,

2011). The distinct values, goals, beliefs, behaviors, communication styles, preferences,

and experiences of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials combined with the

need for unilateral collaboration within organizations increase the likelihood of conflicts

within an organization (Allah, 2011; Cannon & Broach, 2011; Harber, 2011; Niemczyk

& Ulrich 2009; Winograd & Hais, 2008).

3
 Evolving workforce demographics, the widespread utilization of technology,

global economic competition, and rapid innovation have forced organizations to

reexamine how they manage their workforce (Hammill, 2005; Hannam & Yordi, 2011;

Perry & Hanvongse, & Casoinic 2013). The primary responsibilities of managers are to

understand and positively respond to the diverse needs and preferences of a

multigenerational workforce, to develop a keen understanding of each generation’s skills

and talents, to cultivate a work environment that respects differences among generations,

to incorporate appropriate motivational strategies, and to increase worker productivity

(Allah, 2011; Graves, 2013; McQuerrey, 2013; R. W. Schultz, 2010).

Hindering the ability of managers to execute these responsibilities successfully

and creating conflict within the workforce are the distinct needs, preferences, goals, and

skills of each generational cohort (Graves, 2013; Harber, 2011). Baby Boomers are loyal,

diligent, regimented, independent, achievement-oriented, and highly competitive

individuals who adhere to a hierarchical power structure (Harber, 2011; Hillman, 2013).

Generation Xers are opportunistic, creative, flexible, technologically proficient, and

service-oriented individuals who seek a harmonious balance between their home and

work life (Hillman, 2013; Twenge, 2010). Millennials are egocentric, assertive,

technologically advanced, and goal-oriented individuals who seek rapid advancement

within organizations (Graves, 2013; Twenge, 2010)

Bass (1999) concluded that changes in the organizational hierarchy prompted a

paradigm shift in leadership from a transactional leadership style to a transformational

leadership style. Bass further asserted imaginative, empathetic, and adaptive leadership

guided positive change and lessened the anxiety associated with change processes. By

4
creating this type of an environment, leaders enable management and generational

cohorts to engage in open dialogue, rectify conflict among generations, and create a

culture that reflects a mutual understanding and respect of generational differences

(Zemke, Raines, & Filipczak, 2000). Although researchers investigated generational

conflicts and the conflict management practices of managers in various industries

(Bowes, 2012; Gargoline, 2012), there is limited research investigating the conflict

management practices of U.S. DoD managers as they manage the intergenerational

conflict in the workforce.

In summary, there are several key distinctions between the hierarchical

organizational structure and the flat organizational structure. The centralized

characteristic of the hierarchical organizational structure means that mid-level

management is responsible for multiple divisions within an organization and their

respective managers and employees; conversely, the decentralized characteristic of the

flat organizational structure eliminates mid-level management and shifts autonomy to

employees (L. A. Gibson, 2012; R. W. Schultz, 2010). With respect to the decision-

making process in an organization, the hierarchical model is unilateral in nature with a

clearly defined protocol while the flat model is lateral or collaborative in nature (L. A.

Gibson, 2012).

Statement of the Problem

The various generational cohorts in the workforce provide diversity and

contribute strength to the workplace (Shultz, 2010); however, the distinct values, desires,

preferences, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals who represent different generational

cohorts—Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials—create conflict in the

5
workforce and challenge U.S. federal government managers' leadership styles.

Millennials, who are the newest generation in the workforce, present unique challenges

for Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and managers because of their desire for rapid

advancement within the organization and for immediate and specific feedback pertaining

to performance (Luby, 2012; Nazari & Emami, 2012; R. J. Schultz & Schwepker, 2012).

This type of an organizational culture cultivates an unhealthy work environment and

hinders the success of the organization (Nazari & Emami, 2012).

To counter the negative impact of generational differences, researchers

recommended that managers implement conflict management strategies that promoted a

greater understanding of generational differences, increased interpersonal communication

within a multigenerational workforce, and embraced the strengths of each generation

(Bowes, 2012; Hillman, 2013). While researchers investigated the impact the

generational differences had on team and organizational outcomes (Hillman, 2013; Myers

& Sadaghiani, 2010), there is limited research that addresses how U.S. federal

government managers resolve generational conflict in the workplace. The integral roles

that the various agencies of the federal government have in the United States and the

large workforce that includes a diverse generational workforce underscore the importance

of understanding the lived experiences of U.S. DoD managers and how they managed

workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials. By

implementing effective conflict management strategies, managers bridge the generational

gap and create the requisite conditions for achieving organizational and individual goals.

6
 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study was to understand the

lived experiences of U.S. federal government managers and how they managed

workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials. The aims

of this study were to elucidate the differences that existed among these generations, to

develop a clearer understanding of how these differences contributed to conflict within

the workplace, and to identify strategies that minimized conflict within the workplace.

Rationale

By investigating the lived experiences of U.S. federal government managers, the

researcher provided new knowledge regarding the phenomenon of intergenerational

conflict within one department of the U.S. federal government. While researchers

identified factors that contributed to generational differences and strategies for effectively

managing these differences across various industries (Armstrong, 2010; Gargoline,

2012), they had had not investigated generational differences and strategies for managing

these differences within one branch of the federal government. With this in mind,

research investigating generational differences and strategies for managing generational

conflicts within three agencies of the U.S. DoD lags behind research conducted across

various sectors. This gap in the literature provided a rationale for investigating the factors

that contributed to conflict within three agencies of the DoD and strategies that addressed

these differences. Given that individuals from different generational cohorts experience

conflict because of their varying beliefs, values, and preferences, generational differences

can negatively influence change in the workforce (Armstrong, 2010; Jakubek, 2013; K.

L. Williams, 2014)

7
 The researcher used a qualitative approach and a phenomenological design to

develop a clear understanding of the lived experiences of U.S. DoD managers and how

they managed conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials. The

qualitative approach utilizes is an inductive strategy, focused on understanding a

phenomenon based on the meaning that people construct, provides rich descriptions of

the phenomenon, and uses the researcher as the primary instrument for data collection

and analysis (Moustakas, 1994). “Phenomenology is the study of the life-world—the

world as we immediately experience it pre-reflectively rather than as we conceptualize,

categorize or reflect on it” (Van Manen, 1990, p. 9). A phenomenological design is

appropriate when the researcher seeks to describe the elements, to identify the themes,

and to explain the essence of the phenomenon under investigation as well as individuals’

lived experiences (Heidegger, 1972; Moustakas, 1994).

The phenomenological design is the most appropriate method for comprehending

the specific experiences of individuals and obtains a complete understanding of a

phenomenon from the eyes of the individuals who experienced such (Christensen &

Brumfield, 2010). Kafle (2011) identified three distinct phenomenological traditions:

existential, hermeneutic, and transcendental. Kafle found that “existential

phenomenology stresses on the description of everyday experience as it is perceived by

the consciousness of the individuals” (p. 188). Unlike hermeneutic and transcendental

phenomenology, existential phenomenology discourages the bracketing out of the

researcher’s presuppositions, allowing the researcher to provide descriptive accounts of

the individual’s experiences and to promote a deeper understanding of the phenomena

(Kafle, 2011; J. L. Williams, Collingridge, & Williams, 2011).

8
 In the hermeneutic phenomenology tradition, the researcher relies on perception

to provide a thorough description of a phenomenon and to uncover hidden meanings

(Kafle, 2011). These hidden meanings can be present in the inflection of a person’s voice

and in the choice of his or her words (Kafle, 2011; Moustakas, 1994). The aim of the

transcendental phenomenology tradition is to describe the essence of individuals’

experiences and to identify common themes that characterize the essence and the

meaning of the phenomenon in the everyday lives of those involved (Seamon, 2000).

Conklin (2007) discussed the applicability of transcendental phenomenology in the

professional setting by stating “this method has true potential to leverage the tools,

knowledge, skills, and abilities that the professional brings to her craft” (p. 35).

The transcendental phenomenological design was appropriate for this study

because it allowed the researcher to understand the lived experiences of U.S DoD

managers and how they managed workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generations

Xers, and Millennials. By understanding the lived and shared experiences of the

managers, researchers provided insight to managers so they might improve organizational

practices. Chapter 3 provides a more thorough description of the qualitative approach and

the transcendental phenomenological design as well as this study’s sampling, data

collection, and analysis procedures.

Research Questions

Research Question: What is the experience of U.S. federal government managers

in managing workplace conflicts attributed to generational differences among the Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers, and the Millennials who work together in one agency?

Investigative RQ1: What are the workplace conflicts experienced by U.S. federal

9
government managers that can contribute to generational differences between Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Investigative RQ2: What are the experiences of U.S. federal government

managers when it comes to managing the effects of workplace generational conflicts on

work performance of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Investigative RQ3: What are the experiences of U.S. federal government

managers in diffusing the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational differences

between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Significance of the Study

Changes in organizations’ leadership hierarchies have caused intergenerational

conflicts among employees (Graves, 2013). Twenge (2010) sought to understand the

roles of management as well as the intergenerational factors that contributed to conflict

within the workplace. J. W. Gibson, Greenwood, and Murphy (2009) believed that when

leading and interacting with different generations, managers should consider generational

differences in values, beliefs, and behaviors. While prior studies investigated

intergenerational differences and their impact on organizational outcomes (Graves, 2013;

Lester, Standifer, Schultz, & Windsor, 2012), there is limited research investigating the

lived experiences of managers who work for the U.S. DoD. The goal of this study was to

provide a comprehensive understanding of conflicts that occurred within the workplace

among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials. A study investigating both the

attitudes and the behaviors of different generations was pertinent because it identified

strategies for managing a multigenerational workforce thereby increasing worker

productivity (Roodin & Mendelson, 2013). According to Deal, Altman, and Rogelberg

10
(2010), empirical research provides a clearer understanding of the phenomenon and

eliminates misconceptions.

Definition of Terms

Definitions are important; they provide a better understanding of the underlying

meaning of specific terms included in research. The following definitions will assist with

understanding the terms used in this study:

Baby Boomers. Born between 1946 and 1964, Baby Boomers represent the

largest generational cohort in the United States (Facts and Statistics, 2011). Welch (as

cited in Graves, 2013) stated, “Boomers have a strong work ethic, and they generally

hold high appeal for employers” (p. 23). In the workplace, Baby Boomers are diligent,

loyal, competitive, and highly motivated employees who seek professional stability as

well as professional advancement based on merit (Hillman, 2013; Langdon, 2012).

Generation Xers. Generation Xers, born from 1965-1980, represent a smaller

segment of the workforce population than the Baby Boomer generational cohort (Harber,

2011). They possess critical and creative thinking skills, desire independence in the

workforce, and seek balance in their personal and professional lives (Harber, 2011).

Generations Xers are technologically proficient and do not possess a strong sense of

loyalty to a company (Graves, 2013; Harber, 2011).

Laissez-faire leadership. Laissez-faire leadership is the absence of leadership,

resulting in employee dissatisfaction and ineffectiveness (Bass, 1999).

Leadership. Northouse (2013) defined leadership as “a process whereby an

individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse, p. 5).

11
Leadership prompts change in others by developing a vision, communicating goals,

cultivating ingenuity, and satisfying needs (Northouse, 2013).

Manager. In regard to this study, the researcher defined a manager as one who

leads a group of individuals who represent distinct generational cohorts and work within

the same organization (Osborne, 2011).

Millennials. The Millennials, also referred to as Generation Y, were born

between 1981-2000 (Harber, 2011; Langdon, 2012). Graves (2013) described Millennials

as “both high performance and high maintenance; they have a great sense of self-worth,

seek self-fulfillment, are unreceptive to the annual performance review” (p. 26); in

addition, they are technologically proficient, utilize various types of technological tools

in their personal and professional lives seek rapid advancement within the workforce to

succeed (Harber, 2011).

Multigenerational workforce. A multigenerational workforce refers to the

generational cohorts present within organizations and includes Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, and Millennials (Allah, 2011; Gargoline, 2012).

Transactional leadership. Leaders who utilize transactional leadership provide

the subordinate with a clear understanding of performance expectations as well as the

rewards for achieving and the consequences for not achieving predetermined expectations

(Bass, 1999). Transactional leadership consists of two factors: contingent reward and

managing-by-exception (Bass, 1999).

Transformational leadership. Leaders who practice transformational leadership

promote a unified organizational culture, exhibit actions that align with the company’s

mission, encourage followers to challenge beliefs, promote collaboration across all levels

12
of the organization, and encourage followers to take ownership for their work (Bass,

1999). This leadership style includes the following five factors: (a) idealized influence

behaviors, (b) idealized attributed, (c) inspirational motivation, (d) individualized

consideration, and (e) intellectual stimulation (Bass & Avolio, 2004).

Workplace Conflict. For the purpose of this study, the construct of workplace

conflict included differences in communication preferences (the use of technology vs.

face-to-face meeting), work values/attitudes (a work-centric perspective vs. a balanced

perspective), career aspirations (opportunities for advancement vs. the desire to make a

difference), and power/influence among generations (Graves, 2013; Hillman, 2013;

Twenge, 2010).

Assumptions and Limitations

This section provides a discussion of this study’s assumptions and limitations.

Prior to interviewing participants, there were several assumptions concerning the target

population. The first assumption was that U.S. DoD managers would provide honest

feedback about their experiences managing conflict among Baby Boomers, Generation

Xers and Millennials. The researcher also assumed that conflicts in values, beliefs,

behaviors, communication styles, and experiences existed among Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, and Millennials who worked for the U.S. DoD managers. A final

assumption was that leadership styles of U.S. DoD managers affected workplace conflicts

among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials and the techniques they utilized

to either address or diffuse conflicts and challenges affected the behavior of these three

generational cohorts. While members of each generation exhibit common characteristics,

traits, and attitudes, managers should not stereotype their employees (Perry et al., 2013).

13
For this study, the researcher assumed the experiences of federal government managers

would focus on conflicts due to generational differences.

The study also had several limitations. A limitation of this study was the use of a

random purposeful sampling procedure. While the random purposeful sampling

procedure facilitated the selection of participants who experienced the phenomenon in the

natural setting, it decreased the generalizability of findings to non-governmental settings

(Suri, 2011). Therefore, there was no way to generalize the findings of this study to other

settings in which the focus was to identify effective techniques and strategies for

managing workplace conflicts and differences among a multigenerational workforce from

the perspective of managers. Another limitation was the subjectivity of interpreting

participants’ experiences thereby making it difficult to establish credibility and

verification.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

The construct of individualism-collectivism provides a framework for

understanding generational differences in the workplace (Armstrong, 2010). In LeFebvre

and Franke (2013) stated, “The individualism-collectivism construct is useful as a

mechanism for systematically describing ways in which cultures differ. The construct is

helpful for understanding how culture influences not only what people think but also how

they think” (p. 133). Although they are part of a singular construct, individualism and

collectivism are at opposite ends of a continuum, with individualism focusing on personal

goals and collectivism focusing on group goals (Hofstede, 1980; Triandis, 1995). Within

the work setting, individuals from various generational cohorts demonstrate varying

degrees of either individualism or collectivism (Riaz, Zulkifal, & Jamal, 2012).

14
Individualism

Cultures characterized by individualism advocate individual goals over group

ones and endorse adherence to group values and beliefs when individuals meet their

needs and desires (Mills & Clark, 1982; Triandis, 1995). Within a work setting, members

of generational cohorts who exhibit the characteristics associated with individualism have

a myopic focus on advancement at the expense of both personal and professional

relationships, perceive that education is a means for professional advancement, and

eschew organizational norms and values (Earley & Gibson, 1998; Hofstede, 2011; Riaz et

al., 2012). Baby Boomers possess an unrelenting desire to succeed as well as a strong

work ethic, believe their hard work and dedication should lead to advancement, and

prefer a hierarchical chain of command (Cogin, 2012; Tolbize, 2008).

Collectivism

Cultures characterized by collectivism promote interconnectedness among their

members, establish a collective vision, stress adherence to group goals rather than

individual ones, and encourage shared values and beliefs among individuals (Hofstede,

2011). Within a work setting, members of generational cohorts who exhibit the

characteristics associated with collectivism derive their identity from their association in

a group, value interpersonal relationships over professional aspirations, and willingly

adopt the prevailing organizational norms and values of the organization (Hofstede, 2011;

Riaz et al., 2012).

Although individuals both exhibit individualistic and collectivistic characteristics

to varying degrees, they generally display either more individualistic or collectivistic

ones (Earley & Gibson, 1998; Triandis & Gelfand, 2012). Factors such as cultural norms

15
and values, family backgrounds, and socioeconomic conditions influence the extent to

which individuals exhibit more individualistic or collectivistic characteristics (Triandis &

Gelfand, 2012). The current workforce consists of individuals who represent distinct

generations and display both individualistic and collectivist characteristics (Armstrong,

2010). When these individuals, who display both individualistic and collectivist

characteristics, work together, conflict occurs (Armstrong, 2010). However, by

identifying strategies that reduce conflict, organizations cultivate a respect for

individuals’ preferences (Armstrong, 2010).

Significant economic, historical, and social events informed and shaped the traits,

beliefs, and preferences of each generation (Graves, 2013; K. A. Williams, 2011).

Generation Xers prefer an organization that incorporates a more collaborative leadership

structure, do not trust those in leadership positions, believe that ability is more important

than loyalty, recognize the importance of having a balance between a professional and a

personal life, are technologically proficient, flourish in an organization that encourages

ingenuity, and do not possess a strong sense of loyalty to an organization (Borges,

Manuel, Elam, & Jones, 2010; Cogin, 2012; Leiter, 2009; Tolbize, 2008). Millennials, the

most confident and technologically savvy generational cohort, want to work for

organizations that promote collaboration, encourage ingenuity, and provide professional

guidance from competent mentors and opportunities for learning, growth, and

advancement (Cogin, 2012; Gursoy, Maier, & Chi, 2008).

If not managed correctly, differences among generations can negatively impact

organizational performance (Hillman, 2013); however, by developing an understanding

of generational differences in the workplace and implementing strategies that address

16
these differences, managers provide a foundation for improving organizational

performance (Bowes, 2012; Hillman, 2013). These strategies include facilitating

interpersonal communication among generations, allowing team members to create

meeting agendas, encouraging team members to share pertinent information, and

cultivating one-on-one relationships with members from each generational cohort

(Bowes, 2012).

Finally, demonstrating an interest in each team member’s professional

development, identifying his or her strengths and weaknesses, and developing a plan for

each team member are the essence of successfully managing a multigenerational

workforce (Bowes, 2012; Hillman, 2013). Using a theoretical framework of

individualism-collectivism, the researcher explored the lived experiences of U.S. DoD

and investigated how they managed workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, and Millennials.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

In Chapter 2, the researcher identifies and describes the generational cohorts, the

predominant leadership styles, and the generational conflicts in the workplace, and the

strategies for identifying, managing, and resolving intergenerational conflict in the

workplace. Chapter 2 also presents the findings of researchers who investigated the

phenomenon of intergenerational conflict in the workforce. Chapter 3 provides an

overview of the qualitative transcendental phenomenology, this study’s data collection

and analysis procedures, the researcher’s role throughout the study, and the related

procedures for ensuring trustworthiness, credibility, dependability, transferability, and

confirmability for the proposed study. Chapter 4 provides the results of the inquiry.

17
Chapter 5 provides a summary and discussion of the results, a synthesis of the findings

and the related research, the theoretical and professional implications of the researcher’s

findings, the limitations of this study, recommendations for further research, and the

researcher’s conclusions.

18
 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

The purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study was to explore the

lived experiences of U.S. federal government managers and how they managed

workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials. The

primary aims of this study were to illuminate the differences that existed among these

generations, to help managers understand how these differences contribute to conflict

within the workplace, and to identify strategies that could minimize discord within the

workplace.

The literature review provides the themes related to the topic and identifies the

gap in the literature, which is how the managers are managing generational conflicts in

the U.S. federal government. The literature review also identifies and describes the

various generations, the generational values and goals, the generational leadership styles,

the generational conflicts, and the conflict prevention and resolution strategies for

managing generational conflicts in the workplace.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Earley and Gibson (1998) stated, “Individualism-collectivism refers to the social

connectedness among individuals. The extent of social integration varies across

societies” (p. 266). The theory can be used for understanding how cross-cultures

function within the organizational context or in this case, different generations. The self

19
representation model claimed that work behavior can be shaped by culture, management,

practices and self-motives. Individualism-collectivism is said to be manifested in an

individual's self-identity through his/her basic motives behind his or her actions.

Collectivism and individualism are at opposite ends of a continuum, with collectivism

focusing on group goals and individualism emphasizing personal goals (Hofstede, 1980;

Triandis, 1995). Cultures characterized by collectivism promote interconnectedness

among individuals, group goals rather than individual ones, uniformity between

individual and group goals, and shared values and beliefs among individuals. In contrast,

cultures characterized by individualism advocate individual goals over group ones,

conflict between group and individual goals, and adherence to values and beliefs when

individual needs and desires are met (Triandis, 1995; Mills & Clark, 1982).

Generations in the Workplace

Within the workplace, whether the organization is linked to the public or the

private sector, multigenerational human factors often affect the culture and environment

of organizations (Cannon & Broach, 2011). One of the main characteristics of the

modern workforce is being multigenerational (Hannam & Yordi, 2011). Because of the

extended working years and fiscal situations affecting the American workforce,

researchers claimed that at least three generations are working side-by-side in the same

organization (DelCampo, Haney, Haggerty, & Knippel, 2012). The modern workforce is

also rapidly growing and evolving, and it is dealing with fast-growing technological

change and innovation (Hannam & Yordi, 2011). Because age is one of the most basic

social categories affecting general human interactions (Posthuma, Wagstaff, & Campion,

2012) and one of the main factors within society affecting the assignation of roles as well

20
as the granting of power and prestige, generational differences in the workforce can affect

office politics (Comperatore & Nerone, 2011).

According to Fullerton and Dixon (2010), leaders need to consider the growing

and evolving workforce, particularly one that is growing increasingly older and

multigenerational. Generational differences can shape everything at work, from recruiting

employees to building teams to dealing with workplace changes to motivating and

shaping productivity (Hammill, 2005). These researchers concluded that generational

backgrounds influence how people communicate (Fullerton & Dixon, 2010). The

generations they belong to can affect their attitudes and behaviors in the workplace, their

expectations of leaders and organizations, as well as the ways and means that they can be

motivated by their managers (Hammill, 2005).

As such, generational differences can often lead to misunderstandings, and

ultimately, affect office politics, resulting in high employee turnover (Comperatore &

Nerone, 2011). Managers need to manage generational differences and conflicts to

reduce major confrontations and misunderstandings in the workplace. According to

Hammill (2005), managers who recognize and understand the different needs of an age-

diverse workforce can improve workplace productivity. Managers need to be aware of

the unique characteristics of different generations.

Hammill (2005) stated that although the workforce is consistently comprised of

multiple generations, managers have to deal with three generations working close

together. In addition, there is a rapid influx of technologically savvy employees who

work with employees who are not as technologically savvy or exposed to new

technologies. Managers need to deal with cultural, social, and attitudinal changes coming

21
from younger employees and manage these while managing older employees with

different mindsets and behaviors (Hammill, 2005).

According to Hannam and Yordi (2011), the presence of a multigenerational

workforce and the emergence of new technologies in the workplace are changing how

employers manage their workforce. Managers should understand that each generation

possesses unique worldviews, priorities, motivations, and career aspirations (Hannam &

Yordi, 2011). Hannam and Yordi (2011) claimed that managers who can understand how

to manage generational differences might utilize the strengths of each generation to their

organization’s advantage. If managers understand the differences of their employees,

they can take advantage of the multigenerational workforce. Employers, whether in the

public or private sectors, can reduce employee turnover, build collaborative teams, and

deal with future challenges better (Hannam & Yordi, 2011).

The generation concept is not new (Kersten, 2002). According to Kersten (2002),

Baby Boomers have established the generation concept in the late 1960s. However,

generational differences are more pronounced and more complex today, making it

difficult for different employees from varying generations to communicate and work well

together (Kersten, 2002). Hammill (2005) stated that by understanding the generational

differences and traits, managers could significantly improve the interaction among

employees of different generations. Hammill claimed that all generations have some

common traditional work values. However, the generations differ on their views on the

role of managers, their understanding of the loyalty concept, their technological

competencies, and how much time they think they should devote to their jobs and tasks to

say that they have done a good day’s work (Hammill, 2005). Employees of different

22
generations also differ in their personal lifestyles and social values. As such, these affect

how they view and perceive public policy and political alignment. These differences in

their values constitute the generation gap; however, managers are cautioned against

stereotyping employees based on their generations (Hammill, 2005). Even though

members of each generation tend to show common characteristics, traits, and attitudes,

managers should not stereotype their employees according to these tendencies because

there are still going to be some exceptions (Perry et al., 2013).

R. J. Schultz and Schwepker (2012) identified three generations in the current

workforce: Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials, with Baby Boomers and

Millennials having the largest representation in the workforce. Born between 1940 and

1964, Baby Boomers are self-sufficient, diligent individuals who witnessed and changed

the political, cultural, social, and civil landscapes in America (Bransford, 2011; Myers &

Sadaghiani, 2010). Generation Xers, those born between 1965 and 1979, grew up during

an era characterized by political, economical, and social instability (Bransford, 2011;

Hui-Chun & Miller, 2005; Luby, 2012). The Millennial generation includes individuals

who were born between 1980 and 2000 (Bowes, 2012; Graves, 2013). The Millennial

generation “is closely associated with an increase in technological advancements…and

they are considered to be the first ‘connected’ generation” (Bransford, 2011, p. 15).

Although recent estimates place the respective numbers for each generation

differently, the population of the Millennial generation exceeds or equals that of the Baby

Boomer generation (Schullery, 2013). The Millennial generation can sometimes be the

largest cohort in the nation’s history or the Baby Boomers, depending on where the exact

date for each generation is placed, with a significant difference in estimates resulting

23
from a difference of just 2 or 3 years (Debevec, Schewe, Madden, & Diamond, 2013).

Moreover, the Millennials enjoy a distinct advantage in terms of technology that is not

found in most of their older counterparts (Debevec et al., 2013).

Generational Characteristics in the Workplace

Baby Boomers

Different generations have different perceptions of their work in business settings.

Smola and Sutton (2002) claimed Baby Boomers are likely to think they can do as they

want because anything is possible. Because of their perception, they want everything and

are willing to make the sacrifices in order to achieve everything they desire. They do not

view breaks or retirement as a weakness like the younger generation (Gursoy et al.,

2008). They believe strongly of what they can do that they are often change resistant.

Baby Boomers believe that their methods are correct; they are very particular on details

(Gursoy et al., 2008). According to Cogin (2012), Baby Boomers perceive retirement as a

work style, not as a lifestyle. In addition, this group of employees thinks their talents and

skills are influential (Cogin, 2012; Hill, 2004). Baby Boomers are also very optimistic

and believe in personal gratification (Leschinsky & Michael, 2004). According to Cogin

(2012), because Baby Boomers believe in their capabilities, they have a tendency to

regard themselves highly compared to other generations. Still, Baby Boomers are also

the ones who suffered the most when the economy weakened because they lost their

professional careers and the jobs they had been doing their entire lives. Baby Boomers

also like to work more because they know that they can live longer and need additional

income for retirement (Cogin, 2012; C. J. Collins, Hanges, & Locke, 2004).

24
 Cogin (2012) believed that Baby Boomers acquire training and learning uniquely

from the younger generations because of their unique experiences. Baby Boomers can

learn much easier in tactile learning environments; they learn more if they are given

hands-on opportunities and using real materials in which necessary knowledge and skills

can be acquired (Cogin, 2012). Even though Baby Boomers are confident about their

skills and capabilities, they still respond well to authority figures. They would prefer for

someone to give them direction. They value having a set chain of command within the

organization for which they are working (Tolbize, 2008). Tolbize (2008) claimed that

Baby Boomers like achieving success through structured processes of learning. They

want to follow a systematic process to attain a specific goal in their jobs. Baby Boomers

however, do not like to constantly receive feedback from peers and colleagues as they

work through their goals (Tolbize, 2008).

Generation X

Unlike Baby Boomers, Generation Xers are not as stringent and diligent (Gursoy

et al., 2008). Generation Xers also do not prioritize their professional lives as much as

Baby Boomers do. They do not like the hierarchy in the organizations and do not treat

senior professionals seriously. They think that one’s skills and talents are more important

than one’s age or seniority level.

They also believe that good work is deserving of immediate promotions and raises

(Gursoy et al., 2008). Generation Xers believe in working in order to live as opposed to

how Baby Boomers who believe in living to work. For the Generation Xers, work is

important because it provides a way for them to enjoy their lives. Few in this generation

will sacrifice their life for their occupation (Gursoy et al., 2008).

25
 The individuals classified in Generation X are born from mostly early Boomer

parents. These individuals identify themselves with parents who have careers (Borges et

al., 2010). While Generation Xers are busy, they will find time for their family (Szamosi,

2006). Observing organizational downsizing and restructuring has helped shape

Generation Xers’ means-to-an-end work attitude and work-to-live approach (Leiter,

2009; Zemke et al., 2000).

Generation Xers employees are independent, resilient, flexible, and adaptable

(Murphy, 2007; Dowd- Higgins, 2013). They saw the birth of the Internet, and as a result,

the majority of them are technically proficient in the workplace. Generation Xers,

however, are usually skeptical and resistant to authority (Murphy, 2007). Generation Xers

look for flexibility and stimulation in their work. If they were to find a job unchallenging

or boring, Generation Xers may change jobs, resulting in job insecurity (Rodriguez,

Green, & Ree, 2003). Because of their Baby Boomer parents being retrenched from the

organizations that they had worked in their entire lives, Generation Xers lack

commitment to their employers (Cogin, 2012). Unlike the Boomers, Generation Xers

strive for positions that allow opportunities for improvement, competition, ventures,

monetary rewards, and a balance in work and personal life (Szamosi, 2006; Zemke et al.,

2000).

Unlike the Baby Boomers, who attach particular significance to hands-on

learning, Generation Xers tend to place significance on the structure of their learning

(Leiter, 2009). Generation Xers need to know their schedule for learning. They must

understand the elements of a lesson and the steps the educator will take to achieve a

learning outcome (Leiter, 2009). It is also quite important for them that these steps and

26
learning processes are continuous, as they value the development of their skills and

capacities (Tolbize, 2008). In contrast to Baby Boomers, Generation Xers distrust

authority figures and have no problem questioning their superiors (Tolbize, 2008). What

is more, they value feedback regarding their skills and tasks, making them better at

teamwork and team learning when compared to Baby Boomers (Tolbize, 2008).

Job security may comprise another significant goal for Generation Xers. Because

many Generation Xers already possessed technical expertise when they entered the

workforce, they had a distinct advantage over many of their Baby Boomer co-workers.

Conversely, many Baby Boomers have postponed their retirements; this leaves many

Generation Xers longing for promotional opportunities. Because Generation Xers grew

up in two-income families, they tend to weigh the pros and cons of almost everything in

life. The sense of uncertainty most Xers grew up with, nevertheless, contributed to many

in this generation making family and close friends their number one priority. Most

individuals in this generation confirm they made their family and home life more

important than their finances (Djamasbi, Siegel, Skorinko, & Tullis, 2011).

Millennials

The last generation is the Millennials. Researchers suggest that Millennials are

still learning the ropes of the real world (Gursoy et al., 2008). Even though they still have

a lot to learn about the workplace and themselves, most Millennials have a high level of

self-confidence and self-esteem (Gursoy et al., 2008). Millennials are surer of

themselves than the previous three generations. They value professional development

and seek this from the mentors they respect highly. Among the three generations, they

are the most eager to learn. They do not believe in the status-quo and will constantly

27
question it (Gursoy et al., 2008). The Millennials thrive on creative challenges; they

want to show what they can do and want to make an impact as early as their first day of

work (Cogin, 2012).

The individuals from the Millennial generation are the first to be born during the

information age (Cogin, 2012). As described by Cogin (2012), Generation Y is the first

generation forced to cope with increasingly broken families, as almost one-third of

Generation Y were living in single-parent homes (mostly fatherless) in 1993.

Furthermore, the four most controlling factors dominating this generation are crime, the

media, economic issues, and the changing shape of the family. According to Djamasbi et

al. (2011), the 10 most influential factors shaping Generation Y are: technology driven

rapid changes, ignorance of stability and tradition, lack of support and lack of support

from a surrounding community, excessive media information, vanished demarcation of

gender roles, and devaluation of life. The Millennial individuals have conventional

beliefs, optimism, trust, determination, and a heroic spirit (Djamasbi et al., 2011).

The Millennial generation is characterized by a sense of empowerment that is

partially a legacy of the nurturing care they received compared to past generations. In

this regard, Pardue and Morgan (2008) emphasized that, “Many are the treasured children

of parents who rediscovered the importance of family values, along with the necessity of

vigilance and responsibility. They are predicted to be the next great generation” (p. 75).

In addition, the well-intentioned but potentially misguided overprotection that many

Millennials have experienced has also affected their sense of self-worth and self-esteem

in ways that can adversely affect their ability to transition into a college-level

environment. For instance, Pardue and Morgan (2008) suggested that, “Measured by

28
traditional developmental milestones, Millennials appear less mature than previous

generations, and many express doubt surrounding their own academic abilities and

readiness for college” (p. 75).

Notwithstanding this constraint, Millennials are largely well equipped to pursue

whatever academic endeavors suit their preferences and use this knowledge to good

effect in their future workplace. For example, Pardue and Morgan (2008) added that,

“Millennials are technologically competent, effortless with cell phones, PDAs, and iPods.

They are described as optimistic, assertive, positive, friendly, cooperative team players

who gravitate toward group activities” (p. 75). Just as Millennials and Generation Xers

may prefer team environments, Baby Boomers may prefer a more top-down approach to

management. The overarching theme that emerges from the research concerns the effect

of the age of information on those who have been immersed in it since birth. In this

regard, Pardue and Morgan (2008) observed that Millennials had problems with

communicating using traditional channels. They also have difficulty focusing on one task

at a time.

While this may be painting the Millennial generation with a very wide brush,

these observations do highlight the fundamental attitudinal differences that may exist

with respect to preferred learning styles, which will have implications for human resource

managers and supervisors. Across the board, an older and more experienced generation

in the workforce has much to offer to those who aspire for excellence in their respective

professions. Because resources are by definition scarce, it is vitally important to draw on

this pool of knowledge and experience of the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers to

facilitate the process for the Millennial generation.

29
 There is a growing body of research concerning the Millennial generation as

members of the workforce. However, there remains a relative paucity of timely and

relevant research on the importance of capturing the priceless tacit knowledge within

organizations (Pardue & Morgan, 2008). This multi-generational model can be

conceptualized as existing along a continuum of leadership responsibilities in the

workplace, with the organization’s top leadership team likely being comprised of typical

older Baby Boomers or Generation Xers. On the other hand, middle-level management

and supervisory positions are occupied mostly by younger Baby Boomers, Generations

Xers, and older Millennials and entry-level positions being comprised primarily of

younger Millennials (Pardue & Morgan, 2008).

Generational Work Values and Goals

Just a few decades ago, people were not living long enough to be overly

concerned about multigenerational workforce issues and the normal workforce model

involved younger and better-educated workers being available on a regular basis to

replace the aging and retiring workforce (Nelson & Quick, 2011). Currently, people are

living much longer, making the need for a reevaluation of multiple generational

workforce issues an increasingly timely and valuable enterprise (Nelson & Quick, 2011).

For example, Piktialis (2007) reported that, “As Baby Boomers enter their 50s and 60s,

many organizations have found that they needed to reexamine the old labor force model

whereby older workers were continually replaced with a larger number of younger and

better educated workers” (p. 76). Furthermore, the old labor force model has been

especially challenged by the unprecedented presence of three generational cohorts in the

30
workplace (Bernstein, Alexander, & Alexander, 2008). Bernstein et al. (2008)

concluded,

It is the largest demographic shift since women and members of minority groups

began entering the workforce in significant numbers several decades ago. Not

surprisingly, the implications are as profound now as they were then. (p. 17)

This reexamination of traditional workforce management methods has also

become especially important because of the sometimes-markedly different views and

values that each generation brings to the workplace. In this regard, Piktialis (2007)

stated,

Many companies have developed age profiles of their employees only to discover

a multigenerational workforce with up to three generations working alongside

each other (either currently or in the very near future). Each generation comes to

the workplace with different values, preferences, and attitudes toward work. (p.

77)

In some cases, organizations have formulated adaptive approaches in an effort to

respond to these new workplace realities, while other organizations are pressing for more

substantive changes in workforce design and administration (Piktialis, 2007). Given the

vastly different influences that shaped each of these generations, their respective values

and attitudes will have a major impact on their work ethic and goals (Fabre, 2005;

Piktialis, 2007). According to Winograd and Hais (2008), each generation has its unique

personality traits and political perspectives. A generation usually covers 30 to 40 years,

which is why they experience several realignments, affecting how they view public

policy and how they act within their organizations. Each generational cycle usually

31
coincides with a specific political cycle (Winograd & Hais, 2008). Political perspectives

range from being idealist, reactive, civic, and adaptive. Baby Boomers are usually

idealists. Those belonging to Generation X are usually reactive. Millennials are

considered civic. Those born after 2003 are considered as the most adaptive (Winograd

& Hais, 2008). These perspectives can affect how they work. Niemczyk and Ulrich

(2009) claimed that each generation demonstrates unique work attitudes, work ethics, and

managing preferences. These generational differences should not be taken lightly, as

they can shape the way employees act and cooperate in teams. These differences can

cause miscommunication and misunderstandings, which can lead members in a team to

work concurrently but not collaboratively, resulting in adverse outcomes. Organizational

success is therefore dependent on managing these differences (Gravett & Throckmorton,

2007).

While the Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials strengthen and

diversify the workforce, R. J. Schultz and Schwepker (2012) found that Millennials’

values, goals, and behaviors present distinct challenges to managers’ leadership styles.

Specifically, the authors concluded that Millennials’ desire for balance perplexes

managers. R. J. Schultz and Schwepker elucidated the disconnect that exists between

Millennials and managers. They believed Millennials desire immediate, specific, and

constant managerial feedback that expedites their advancement within the organization.

Shultz and Schwepker also found that Millennials ascribe to the belief that one’s ability

should determine advancement within an organization, as opposed to one’s professional

and educational experiences. Conversely, Baby Boomers endorse the notion that

Millennials need “to pay their dues” (Shultz & Schwepker, 2012, p. 35).

32
 Hui-Chun and Miller (2005) investigated the work habits and preferred leadership

styles of three distinct groups within the current workforce: (a) Baby Boomers, (b) the X

generation, and (c) the Millennial generation. They described Baby Boomers as a group

of people born between 1945 and 1964 who have influenced social and economic

changes. Hui-Chun and Miller categorized the X generation, also referred to as the Xers

or “baby busters” (p. 35), as individuals born between 1965 and 1980. Hui-Chun and

Miller found the label of “baby buster” was a result of the precipitous drop in birth rates

that occurred between 1965 and 1980. Finally, they described the Millennial generation

as individuals born after 1980. They are the most recent generation to enter the

workforce and their impact within society is evolving (Hui-Chun & Miller, 2005).

When Hui-Chun and Miller (2005) compared the work characteristics of the Baby

Boomer and Xer Generation, they concluded that each generation demonstrated distinct

characteristics with respect to its values, attitudes, and expectations in the workforce

setting. For example, they found that Baby Boomers were diligent, cooperative, staunch,

balanced, and loyal workers who respected formal procedures and aspired to advance

themselves based on their performance. In contrast, Hui-Chun and Miller found that

Generation Xers were technologically proficient, skill-oriented, independent, and relaxed

workers who desired rapid advancement and had an entrepreneurial spirit.

Baby Boomers are likely to lack technological skills, as today's computing technology

was only a thing of science-fiction novels when they first entered the workforce,

according to Eisner (2005). Both generations have an innate dislike of change and

believe that the way things were done in the past should continue. For this reason, they

often actively shun technology.

33
 Generation Xers are far more technologically perceptive than Baby Boomers.

They also fully understand that they are only as marketable as their technical skills, so

they have a tendency to keep them as current as possible (Eisner, 2005). This is a

generation that is online all of the time, getting their newspapers online rather than in

print and creating blogs and podcasts to increase communication, with an increasingly

on-the-go audience (Hatchmann, 2008).

Needless to say, the Millennials are the most technologically savvy generation.

They were kids who were weaned on the Internet and would shake their heads in

amazement if they were to see a computer start with a 5 1/4” floppy DOS disk or a person

back roll a printout from a thermal printer. Their unprecedented access to information

has made them also an extremely literate and educated generation that is continually

connected. They are the multi-tasking generation (Chen & Choi, 2008). Eisner (2005)

cited a 2003 study that found Millennials consumed 31 hours of media within a 24-hour

period, due to multi-tasking.

Montgomery (2000) added that the Millennials “also are the first to grow up in a

world saturated with networks of information, digital devices, and the promise of

perpetual connectivity” (p. 145). Likewise, Wesner and Miller (2008) pointed out that

the Millennial generation has been exposed to rapid technological advances. They are

sometimes called the Connected or Net generation. As a result, they are unafraid of new

technologies. Unlike earlier generations in the workplace, they are normally the ones

excited about the use of technology and are often the first to spread the word about new

gadgets and technologies (Wesner & Miller, 2008).

34
 Luby (2012) underscored the effective attributes that Millennials possess and

believed that Millennials overall are more comfortable with the use of advancing

technologies for obtaining management education. Millennials also claimed that their

professional growth is largely dependent on pursuing advanced management education.

However, Millennials “require a higher level of direction that includes increased

leadership and oversight and feedback, as well as positive reinforcement” (Luby, 2012,

pp. 2-3).

By contrast, the Baby Boomers may not possess such skills and attributes.

However, despite not having these skills, Baby Boomers are not afraid to work long

hours for their organization and are typically very loyal, even resulting in ruthlessness

when necessary (Eisner, 2005). Generation Xers are not as organizationally committed

as Baby Boomers. They are the generation that pioneered the free-agent workforce and

understand that the only means of garnering job security is through keeping skills current

(Eisner, 2005). They see each job as a steppingstone to a new opportunity (Gursoy et al.,

2008). Each new position is a learning opportunity to enhance their marketability (Chen

& Choi, 2008).

Chen and Choi (2008) also surmised that Millennials are not as organizationally

loyal as the Baby Boomers. This occurs for a variety of reasons. Millennials have been

raised on minute rice and a fast food society, making them expect rapid promotion and

development. They, like Generation Xer, have high expectations of their employers. In

addition, they are addicted to change. These factors make them prone to changing jobs as

they see fit for more opportunities and to make a difference in the world, without too

much of a second thought.

35
 These generational values and differences are not only witnessed in the business

setting or private workplaces. Tang, Cunningham, Frauman, Ivy, and Perry (2012)

assessed the relationship between work-related attitudes and work commitment of public

organizations’ employees and how the generations they belong to affect this possible

relationship. The authors gathered data from Baby Boomers and Generation Xers

employees who worked for the National Recreation and Park Association in the US. Tang

et al. found that leisure ethic was linked positively to effective commitment among Baby

Boomer employees. On the other hand, love of money was linked to effective

commitment among Generation Xers. However, for both generations, career tenure has a

positive relationship to commitment levels. Commitment levels of male Generation Xers

are more likely than female Generation Xers to be influenced by their salary. This cannot

be seen among the Baby Boomers (Tang et al., 2012).

Generational Leadership

The generations also produce different types of leaders. Burns (1978) identified two

distinct leadership styles within organizations: transactional and transformational. The

exchange that occurs between leaders and followers characterizes the transactional

leadership style. This exchange involves leaders establishing clear expectations for tasks

and followers receiving either rewards for successfully completing tasks or consequences

for not completing tasks. He believed the exchange that occurs between leaders and

followers is omnipresent in organizations. While transactional leadership addresses

individuals’ lower-level needs such as health and security, it does not address followers’

higher-level needs (Burns, 1978).

36
 Baby Boomer leaders believe in seeking consensus and micromanaging their

followers. Even though they have struggled and strived to climb up the corporate ladder,

a lot of Baby Boomers had found themselves not being able to reap the rewards of their

hard work because of economic factors such as downsizing and restructuring in their

respective corporations (Eisner, 2005). Leaders in the Baby Boomers generation want to

take charge and be in control. They believe that they deserve to command their followers

because of the long days and hours they devote to their work and the high level of effort

they put in for their organizations (Gursoy et al., 2008).

Leaders from the Generation X thrive in forming goals and planning strategically

for their followers and organizations (Eisner, 2005; Gursoy et al., 2008). Even those who

are not leaders yet will use friends holding leadership positions as a way to be involved in

the decision-making processes and strategies of the organization, even without coming to

possess a title. Generation Xers believe that modern organizations need to be flexible in

order to be effective and successful, so they embrace and demand change (Gursoy et al.,

2008).

Lastly, Millennial leaders are still quite young; therefore, their young age is

exhibited through their leadership skills. Millennial leaders are more likely to include

their followers when making decisions for the organization because they believe in

collective action. They prefer having a committee to help them lead. Unlike leaders

belonging to the Generation X, Millennial leaders do not demonstrate distrust of

centralized authority. These leaders also have strong will to see things through and

strategies carried out for the betterment of their organizations (Gursoy et al., 2008).

37
 Salahuddin (2011) also found that leadership style differs among the generations.

Salahuddin reviewed current literature on leadership style and generational differences to

determine if a particular leadership style is more preferred by a specific generation and

how this preference affected organizational success. Through structured interviews of

individuals from different generations, Salahuddin found differences and similarities in

leadership styles of the generations. Generation Xers value honesty as a core value and

believe that communication is very important. In contrast, Baby Boomers value self-

commitment. Generation Xers value working with others. Reiss (2012) also investigated

leadership styles and found that significant differences exist between Generation Xers

and Millennials when it comes to their self-reported leadership style.

Although Xers may have inherited a reputation as being an unstructured,

unknown, and challenging generation, their diversity somehow has become one of their

most defining characteristics. “More ethnically diverse than generations before them, the

“PC’ or ‘politically correct’ movement of the early 1990s may be seen as reflective of

their [Xers’] tolerance for differences, quest for justice, and acceptance of those from

diverse backgrounds” (MetLife Mature Market Institute, 2010, p. 2). In addition, many

Generation Xers have a distorted sense of devotion to their employers and commitment to

their workplace, unlike Baby Boomers. Employers have realized that Generation Xers

constitute one of the first generations of individuals who refuse to become workaholics

and forfeit their family lives. As they began to initiate a balance in their work and family

lives, Xers ultimately began to make their generation authentic and self-sufficient (Cogin,

2012).

38
 Managing Workplace Diversity

A diverse workforce may present challenges for managers, especially when

devising methods for motivating members of different generational cohorts. It is evident

that workers from different age groups have differing preferences in terms of work

environment and motivation strategies. Some of the motivation strategies employed does

not work for all employees due to differences in age. However, with proper management

techniques, a manager can harness diversity to the advantage of the organization. This is

possible through motivation of employees of all ages (Von Bonsdorff, 2011). Motivating

employees ensures that they work efficiently. Motivation for workers ensures positive

reaction because their beliefs, attitudes, and thoughts are considered. The reaction

directed to organizational operations contributes to organizational welfare. A workplace

with different age groups is crucial because it creates an environment with diverse skills

emanating from each generation. With proper motivation of the workforce, the skills and

talents from different generations are brought to the table (McQuerrey, 2013).

Millennials are likely to possess immense knowledge of new technological business

media such as social networking, while older employees may have experience with

working in environments where traditional means of communication are evident

(McQuerrey, 2013).

According to Kapoor and Solomon (2011), workplaces consisting of different

generations must make adjustments to create an environment conducive for all employees

to be productive, regardless of their generation. Kapoor and Solomon claimed that

employers must determine the different characteristics of each generation present in the

workplace. Moreover, employers must facilitate a work environment that would aid in the

39
productivity levels of each and every generation. Employers must provide all the

employees, regardless of their generations, with the requisite knowledge and skills to

understand their co-workers of different generations as well, even if they have

characteristics unlike their own. To manage diversity of the different generations,

managers can also offer mentor programs, diversity training, and improved and more

open methods of communication (Kapoor & Solomon, 2011).

An organization that respects diversity in the workplace can table these skills to

the organization’s advantage. When planning to motivate employees, managers should

study the behaviors of different age groups and devise succinct motivational strategies.

According to American Association of Retired Persons (AARP, 2007), different

generations exhibit diverse workplace characteristics, which influence organizational

performance. The Generation Xers exhibit various characteristics useful for

organizational development. Generation Xers adapt to work situations and exhibit

technological literacy, independence, and creativity. However, the Generation Xers may

also show negative aspects; for example, they may fail to trust authority or become

skeptical. To motivate this generation, managers should allow them to perform their

tasks with minimum supervision (AARP, 2007). However, despite the positive outcomes

experienced in organizations due to diversity, there have been challenges associated with

diversity.

Not all people are optimistic about the significance of diversity because of the

variance in the success seen in various organizations that have employed diversity (Hertel

et al., 2013; Parry & Tyson, 2010). Critics believe that the costs and issues associated

with workforce diversity, in an organization, are too big to overlook. For instance,

40
Chrobot-Mason and Aramovich (2013) claimed that when employees believe there is

equal access to opportunities and fair treatment, they are less likely to leave the

workplace. If diversity is well managed, employees are likely to show higher rates of

organizational commitment, feel empowered, and be innovative.

Motivation of a diverse workforce enables employees to display their talents,

which contributes to the achievement of organizational goals. In addition, motivated

employees are able to increase their individual potentials, which is a fundamental aspect

for quality of operations in organizations. To ensure maintenance of a diverse working

environment, managers have a responsibility to foster healthy relationships between

different generations (Hertel et al., 2013; Parry & Tyson, 2010). Managers should have

adequate diversity management skills to ensure diverse inputs from a diverse workforce.

The effort of a diverse workforce improves competitive advantage for organizations that

recognize diversity. It is also evident that diversity training ensures that employees do

not reject the idea of diversity (Kunze, Boehm, & Bruch, 2013). In the event that

workers do not have knowledge on the importance of age diversity in organizations,

tensions may arise, leading to conflicts and low productivity. Although diversity training

fosters employee motivation and organizational productivity, critics have asserted that

poor management of training programs and poor preparation of trainers can influence an

employee’s performance negatively. This is because employees can develop bad

attitudes towards diversity, hence influencing their quality of service (Guillaume,

Dawson, Woods, Sacramento, & West, 2013). Motivation of all generations in an

organization ensures that all their needs are dealt with, leading to job satisfaction (Nelson

41
& Quick, 2011). Satisfied employees are not likely to display unfavorable behaviors that

result in organizational conflict.

Importance of Motivation

The most important challenge for the organizations today is identifying ways to

integrate three different generations in the workplace by balancing the contributions of

the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, in light of the harsh reality that they are

becoming fewer in number. As the Baby Boomers continue to retire, they will by

necessity be replaced with younger workers, who will be confronted with an entirely

different set of challenges as they assume upper management roles (Piktialis,

2007). With this, the literature has provided that motivation in the mutigenerational

workplace is important (Nelson & Quick, 2011; Von Bonsdorff, 2011). Pitt-Catsouphes

(2007) emphasized that, “Workplace attitudes and values affect organizational decision-

making as well as employee job satisfaction. Virtually all employees want to be treated

with respect at the workplace, regardless of the stage of their careers” (p. 51). Likewise,

Bernstein et al. (2008) pointed out that, respect and being motivated is wanted by all

employees, regardless of their ages and their generations.

Motivation in the mutigenerational workplace is important (Nelson & Quick,

2011; Von Bonsdorff, 2011). Employees must be aware of age diversity and through

training, understand how to avoid and resolve conflicts. According to Nelson and Quick

(2011), motivated employees are more unlikely to fight because of age diversity.

Conflicts are unlikely to occur because every employee understands the preferences,

beliefs, and attitudes of every generation (Nelson & Quick, 2011). If managers respect

their unique beliefs and attitudes, it is possible to resolve conflicts amicably (Von

42
Bonsdorff, 2011). This is because some decisions from managers can exacerbate

conflicts instead of solving them. For managers to manage diversity, they must be well

versed with motivating and empowering their diverse workforce by giving them

information on what is happening in their organizations and giving them a sense of being

valued (Salahuddin, 2011). Conflicts in the workplace are responsible for lower

productivity due to poor morale and frustration.

Conflicts can be reduced through motivation in cases where the management

recognizes the efforts of all generations (Salahuddin, 2011). For example, Millennials

are more comfortable when employers recognize their efforts through involvement in

decision-making (Salahuddin, 2011). They like it when managers incorporate a

participative style of management, which means managers are allowing employees to

offer their ideas and feedback. This reduces conflicts because employees’ talents as well

as their ideas are respected. Managers have a responsibility of availing required

resources for an organization to operate efficiently (Salahuddin, 2011). Motivating the

workforce can reduce conflicts because it involves recognizing each generation’s

contributions in the workplace. It is evident that motivation ensures that employees are

directed to the requirements of various generations, which is important in the creation of

employee loyalty as well as retention (Salahuddin, 2011).

Apart from reducing conflicts, motivated employees are going to be more

productive. Organizations that acknowledge diversity of the workforce are aware of the

importance of motivation. They, therefore, ensure communication among different

generations in an attempt to promote productivity. Retention prevents brain drain

because employees do not have to seek work from other organizations (Messmer,

43
2001). This is important because an organization preserves its knowledge across various

generations. Bennett, Pitt, and Price (2012) also found that

if organizations actively facilitate learning among its multigenerational workforce and

adapt their culture to meet the demands of all the employees and resolve all their

conflicts, regardless of their generation, they would have more productive employees.

Another important reason why motivating the multigenerational employees is

necessary is because this can help in the marketing efforts of the organization. This is

because the organization can benefit from the diverse marketing skills of all

generations. The Baby Boomers, which is the oldest generation in the workforce, possess

traditional marketing skills, while Millennials have an understanding of technological

marketing tools such as Facebook and Twitter. When all employees are motivated, these

skills become useful for organization success. The diverse workforce is able to attract

customers from different settings and ages (Nelson & Quick, 2011).

Motivation and managing a multigenerational workplace goes hand in hand

because it also makes the workforce feel respected. Motivation offers flexibility in

organizations, a situation that is important for workers because it creates a respectable

and flexible workplace (Nelson & Quick, 2011). A flexible work environment allows

employees to conduct themselves in a manner of their choice, as long as they feel

motivated for conducting themselves in that way. Restrictions that influence the morale

of workers are detrimental to the welfare of the organization. In addition, motivating a

diverse workplace creates a supple organizational structure, which makes work easier

(Robbins, 2009). Flexible organizations ensure proper communication between the

management and the workers. Lower-level managers are able to interact with top-level

44
managers without conflicts. Flexibility allows employees to offer services from different

locations, even from home. This motivates employers to improve their quality of work to

improve organizational performance. A flexible organization structure ensures

satisfaction of customers because services are offered from a different perspective (Von

Bonsdorff, 2011).

The organizational also benefits from a motivated, multigenerational workplace

because it would be able to tap into the diverse talents and skills of its employees (Nelson

& Quick, 2011). Motivation determines the contribution of staff in organizational

operations. In a diverse environment, interaction of staff becomes a challenge, especially

when the staff consists of different generations. Motivation of a diverse workplace

ensures understanding of diversity by all staff members, hence improving interactions

among members. This contributes largely to the success of the organization (Nelson &

Quick, 2011). Motivation of an age diverse workplace is important in organizations that

wish to utilize the diverse skills of all generations. These skills help an organization to

improve in terms of productivity, retention of workers, promotion of innovation, and

marketing of organization products and services. Although motivation of the workforce

has led to positive outcomes, some researchers assert that diversity can lead to negative

outcomes, especially when managers lack strong diversity management skills (Nelson &

Quick, 2011).

In today’s globally competitive environment, organizational success highly

depends on having effective employee motivation, especially if the organization is

composed of different generations and conflicts are highly likely. The classical

perspective of management is considered analytical and rational, where employees’

45
feelings are not given sufficient attention (Njoroge & Yazdanifard, 2014). However, the

researchers found that it is crucial now for organizations to motivate their employees not

only through the usual monetary reward systems for a multigenerational workforce. In

motivating today’s human capital, organizations have to be able to engage the minds of

the employees as well as capture their hearts, no matter what their generations are.

According to Njoroge and Yazdanifard, managers should be socially and emotionally

intelligent to transform generational challenges and conflicts into positives. Managers

should attend to the needs of the diverse employees.

This section showed that although a set of best industry practices has not been

developed to date within the federal government concerning how best to facilitate a

multigenerational workforce into becoming more productive and less engaged in

conflicts, a growing body of evidence confirms that irrespective of any other differences,

everyone shares certain common needs and wants in the workplace and one of these is

the need to be motivated and respected (Nelson & Quick, 2011; Njoroge & Yazdanifard

2014; Von Bonsdorff, 2011). The next section will present the literature on the strategies

of how to manage workplace conflicts in particular.

Managing Workplace Conflicts

Conflict is a product of human nature and can manifest itself in a variety of forms

(Rahim, 2015; Slaikeu & Hasson, 1998). It is a costly phenomenon for organizations,

resulting in lost productivity, decreased morale, and increased employee turnover.

(Rahim, 2015; Slaikeu & Hasson, 1998). Improved communication within the

organization and conflict training are both effective ways to prevent conflict from taking

hold and negatively affecting employees. This is followed by a discussion of early

46
detection of conflict in the workplace. As stress is a leading cause of conflict, the signs

of stress are overviewed in this section. Lastly, effective resolution of workplace conflict

is presented. Conflict resolution strategies are specific strategies employers may wish to

utilize. As each conflict is unique, so too must be the strategy. However, no matter

which strategy is utilized to facilitate conflict resolution, active listening must be a part of

the process.

In today's hyper-competitive, increasingly globalized business world,

organizations have to operate as efficiently and effectively as possible. One of an

organization's most valuable resources to remain competitive is their human resources

(Seabrooke, 2011). In addition, organizations are increasingly turning towards teams to

facilitate productivity. When workplace conflict arises and is not adequately managed, it

negatively affects morale and productivity. This can result in not only lost profits for the

organization, but also increased employee turnover, which further affects organizational

effectiveness and efficiency. For this reason, managing workplace conflict is critical to

the organization (Seabrooke, 2011).

As Wienclaw (2015) noted, rarely do employees have the opportunity to work

completely alone. S. D. Collins and O'Rourke (2005) joked that “If you want to avoid

conflict at work, you can. All you have to do is find a job that doesn't require you to have

any contact with people” (p. 1). Even employees who work independently or

telecommute often have to interact with customers, suppliers, and other employees.

However, when there is more than one party involved in a situation with interests in the

outcome, workplace conflicts are likely to arise (Sikes, Gulbro, & Shonesy, 2010). The

primary source of conflict may typically be some form of a communication factor.

47
Misunderstanding information, cultural differences among employees, differences in

perceptions and interpretations, and poor listening can all result in barriers to

communication. Different communication styles may also add to the challenge (Sikes et

al., 2010).

Sikes et al. (2010) used the example of an employee whose communication style

means that when a conflict arises, they express their feelings and views with a raised

voice. An employee who is more reserved may see this communication style as

aggressive and arrogant. In addition, the more forceful employee may see the restrained

employee as untrustworthy, if they feel the employee is not fully expressing their

feelings. These same misinterpretations can also result in false opinions regarding the

intent of either of the party's communications.

The structural category of workplace conflict usually comes from elements of the

employees of the organization and the organization itself. This includes the background

of employees and organizational infrastructure. For organizations using teams,

participation levels of team members and the size of work teams utilized fall into the

structural category of conflict resolution strategies (Sikes et al., 2010).

Individual values, goals, needs, and motives fall into the personal category of

conflict sources. The individual's level of self-esteem is another factor that falls into the

personal category. Last, “an individual's perception of the situation that is significantly

different from that of another team member's may also bring about conflict” (Sikes et al.,

2010, p. 16).

These three elements manifest into several forms of workplace conflict that affect

employees and employers. Workplace conflict can include interdependence conflicts,

48
goal incompatibility and differentiation, and resource scarcity. One common form of

workplace conflict manifests itself as workplace bullying (Sikes et al., 2010).

Seagriff (2010) defined workplace bullying as the “repeated mistreatment of a

'Target' (the recipient or victim of the bullying) by a harassing bully (a supervisor or co-

worker) that is motivated by the desire to control the Target” (p. 576). A secondary

definition of the term cited by Seagriff (2010) is the “repeated, unreasonable actions of

individuals (or a group) directed towards an employee (or a group of employees), which

is intended to intimidate and creates a risk to the health and safety of the employee(s)” (p.

576).

Bullying can manifest in a variety of ways. It can include non-physical activities

such as discrimination, non-status harassment, humiliation, innuendo, harming another's

credibility and reputation, malicious isolation, and intimidation. Bullying is also often

expressed through physical activities. Seagriff (2010) noted that part of the challenge of

workplace conflict stems from today's culture. As an example, popular culture makes

bullying, for example, seem like an acceptable behavior. “Shows like American Idol and

House use bullying partially for comic effect” (Seagriff, 2010, p. 575). It is not

surprising that these popular culture entertainment behaviors spill over into the

workplace.

Bullying in the workplace is a significant problem for employers and employees.

“Twenty-three million Americans experience workplace bullying within their work

lifetimes” (Seagriff, 2010, p. 575). With the economic challenges Americans face,

tensions in the workplace are also on the rise, as employees increasingly worry that their

49
jobs are in jeopardy. This fear over possibly losing their job means that many employees

will not risk reporting bullying to their employers.

Interdependence conflicts, as mentioned, are another common type of workplace

conflict. This type of conflict centers on an employee’s dependence of another person’s

assistance, input, or output to perform their job (Kankanhalli, Tan, & Wei, 2006). In

other words, task interdependence varies depending on the extent to which an employee

needs materials, information, or support from their workplace peers to do their job.

“Task interdependence alters the course and consequences of conflict. Some have

asserted that because high task interdependence implies the need for intensive

interactions among members, it creates more opportunities for conflict” (Somech,

Desivilya, & Lidogoster, 2009, p. 363).

Task interdependence offers organizations many benefits. Somech et al. (2009)

noted that organizational teams with high task interdependence may employ competitive

strategies that can maximize their resources and power. High task interdependence also

increases the interaction between team members and provides an incentive for employees

to collaborate. When interdependence is high, typically these members communicate

more often. They are also physically closer and influence and support each other

regularly. For this reason, task interdependence positively affects the communication

between employees and the level of collective planning needed to coordinate the

integration of tasks (Somech et al., 2009).

Goal incompatibility, or when two or more parties in a situation have competing

goals, is another common source of workplace conflict. Wienclaw (2015) noted that,

50
 Goal incompatibility becomes an even stronger source for potential conflict in

situations in which there are financial rewards for achieving one's goals since, in

such situations employees tend to be more motivated to achieve their own goals at

the expense of others. (p. 741)

Differentiation is also a factor in goal incompatibility, according to Wienclaw

(2015). Differentiation centers on divergent attitudes, beliefs, backgrounds, training, and

experiences. These factors often result in goal incompatibility and the increased

tendency for workplace conflict.

Resource scarcity can also lead to workplace conflict, as can ambiguity and

communication challenges. Fae (2007) described resource scarcity as conflict between

the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots.’ Wienclaw (2015) gave the example of multiple

technicians needing the same laboratory equipment, and the conflict that is likely to arise

if the two technicians are forced to share. Ambiguity can also lead to conflict because it

increases the likelihood that one party may interfere with another, which could lead to

increased office politics. When effective communication does not exist, this further

complicates matters and increases the chance of conflict (Wienclaw, 2015).

Sikes et al. (2010) noted that the increasing globalization of today's business

world means that there is a new source of conflict, namely cross-cultural conflicts.

Oftentimes, employees from different cultures have misunderstandings, incorrect

perceptions, and communication challenges that arise due to their cultural differences.

Understanding workplace conflict can arise from numerous sources and that there

are significant negative effects to workplace conflict is important. The most effective and

efficient way to deal with conflict is to prevent it from happening in the first place.

51
Organizations may employ a number of conflict prevention strategies to stop conflict

before it starts. The first step to any conflict prevention strategy is for management to

understand the seriousness of the problems that can occur due to conflict. Even if the

manager has not encountered any noticeable incidents, workplace conflict exists. This

conflict can escalate, if not resolved, into workplace violence. “One out of four workers

is attacked, threatened or harassed each year. Most harassers are co-workers” (Masters &

Albright, 2001, p. 205).

Paniagua, Bond, and Thompson (2009) used the healthcare industry to discuss the

benefits of a zero tolerance policy for organizations as a means of preventing conflict.

Although the conflict they discussed concerned a patient's aggressive behavior towards a

healthcare provider, this can be applied to certain conflict sources between employees. A

zero tolerance policy against violence and aggressive behavior can help prevent bullying

as a form of conflict in the workplace. If employees know that this type of behavior will

not be tolerated, and their jobs are on the line, this may serve as a significant deterrent,

preventing the behavior from happening in the first place.

To prevent unproductive conflict, employers could help bring issues out in the

open before they escalate into full-blown conflict. Encouraging open communication as

a part of organizational culture is the key to this strategy. This strategy helps if the

employer is aware of conflict triggers within their organization and responds to them

when such triggers are first discovered (Rahim, 2015).

C. James (2010) noted that one way of preventing conflict would be to help

prevent stress among employees. For this reason, James noted that many organizations

have implemented stress management courses and implemented flexible working

52
schedules. Some have even installed a punching bag in a common area, for employees to

alleviate some of the stress they are feeling in a physical way. Other organizations have

set aside a time-out room for employees to have a quiet place to retreat to, to help work

out challenges they may come across (C. James, 2010).

Organizational leaders should develop training programs and prepare employees

to work in team settings as a means of preventing unproductive conflict proactively.

Training should be provided to increase awareness of how conflicts arise and the

different strategies for managing conflict, as a means of maximizing team effectiveness.

This type of training allows employees to develop strategies to address conflict before it

occurs (Sikes et al., 2010). In this way, employees will be well equipped to prevent

workplace conflict, or, at the very least be able to employ conflict resolution strategies

when conflict occurs.

Cloke and Goldsmith (2011) claimed that a majority of organizational conflicts

can be prevented by defusing hostile, manipulative people. Cloke and Goldsmith

continued to note that a great deal of workplace conflict occurs because employees do

and say things that cause conflict. This is typically done unintentionally but occurs

because employees are unaware of their behavior and the way they communicate. For

this reason, an effective conflict prevention strategy centers on educating employees

about not only how their behavior and communication styles can lead to conflict, but also

how to handle these factors when they encounter them from other employees, so as not to

respond in a confrontational manner that spurs conflict.

Choi and Rainey (2014) also found that diversity is important to be managed in

public organizations. Choi and Rainey found that if public organizations’ members

53
perceive that there are high levels of organizational fairness and that diversity is being

managed well, they are more likely to feel motivated and satisfied. According to Selden

and Selden (2001), no matter the field or specialization of the organization, managing

diversity and maintaining diversity can help establish multicultural success. In particular,

in public organizations, diversity can help them serve the public better. If their employees

are diverse, the public organizations can influence active participation and engagement of

individuals from non-dominant ethnic groups (Selden & Selden, 2001)

Early Detection of Workplace Conflict

In the most general of terms, workplace conflict can be a result of “poor

communication, organizational change (and) life changes as individual circumstances

change” (Cooke, 2006, p. 365). These factors often result in stress in the employee,

which can manifest in workplace conflict. Hence, early detection of workplace conflict

often centers on recognizing these factors, especially stress (Cooke, 2006).

Stress is the body’s reaction to the environment or external events. According to

Hussin (2008),

Stress is a state of physiological imbalance in the body, which has unpleasant

emotional and cognitive components. It is the state the body is supposed to be in

when you're faced with a real threat, like the approach of a hungry lion (p. 16).

People's levels of stress differ greatly. A similar event can bring about a different level of

stress for different people. Long-term exposure to stress has not only negative physical

effects but also psychological effects. When an employee is under long-term stress, this

can result in an increased likelihood of workplace conflict (Hussin, 2008).

54
 When an employee is under stress, their brain releases the hormones known as

glucocorticoids, which have several physiological effects (Hussin, 2008). The physical

signs of stress are often a result of the release of adrenaline in the body. These include

the heart beating faster and stronger, as well as increased perspiration.

The psychological consequences of stress may not be as evident as the physical

effects; however, these effects can result in increased incidence of workplace conflict

(Hogh, Hansen, Mikkelsen, & Persson, 2012). Stress can be directly associated with both

behavior problems and emotional difficulties (Hussin, 2008). Anxiety, depression,

phobias, aggression, and insomnia can all make normal workplace challenges more

difficult than they need to be, resulting in increased incidents of conflict when normally

the problem could have been resolved without any confrontation. Training should

include “understanding conflict incubation phases, psychographics, interpersonal

dynamics and workplace constraints” (Hannam & Yordi, 2011, pp. 3-4).

Effective Resolution of Workplace Conflict

Maravelas (2005) stated, “People have strong needs for a sense of belonging.

When workplaces don't provide an opportunity for respect, camaraderie, and attachment,

individuals make their emotional investment in unions, local bars, gangs, recreational

activities, home-based businesses, faith communities, or families” (pp. 152-153). This

sense of belonging cannot be maximized if the employee is embroiled in conflict turmoil.

Conflict can be classified as either functional or dysfunctional. Conflict in and of

itself is not a problem for organizations. Instead, the way in which the conflict is handled

and managed often determines whether it is a problem (Falconer, 2004). Functional

conflict is present when a confrontation between two or more employees enhances and

55
benefits the organization, through enhanced performance, when the conflict is finally

resolved. As long as individuals involved in the conflict are able to derive the most

beneficial decision from the conflict, this is considered functional conflict. Positive

results from functional conflict include search for solutions, awareness of problems,

positive organizational changes, organizational adaptation, and organizational innovation.

Without functional conflict, change within an organization may not occur, resulting in the

organizations becoming stagnant and unproductive (Sikes et al., 2010). Teams can

become stronger and more effective when they have worked through conflict (Miller,

2010).

In contrast, Sikes et al. (2010) noted that dysfunctional conflict occurs when

conflict harms or hinders the goals of the organization. When this happens, the conflict

often leads to a disruption of activities within the organization, and can lead to a

significant dissention among employees. Dysfunctional conflict is damaging to the

morale and goals of the group and to inter-organizational relationships. When

dysfunctional conflict occurs within teams, it impedes the team's ability to maintain its

group cohesiveness. Dysfunctional conflict can damage team communication channels,

decrease innovation and idea creation, result in project cancellation, and ultimately result

in extreme profit loss for the organization. Whether an organization is facing functional

or dysfunctional conflict, handling the situation with effective conflict resolution

strategies is critical to maximizing the benefit from the conflict and minimizing the threat

when the conflict is dysfunctional.

According to Meyer (2004), there are five conflict-handling strategies:

integrating, compromising, obliging, avoiding, and forcing. Sikes et al. (2010) and Jones

56
(2009) classified these as five generic approaches to intergroup conflict and labeled them

dominating, accommodating, problem solving, avoiding, and compromising. The

integrating style (or problem solving approach) of conflict handling involves problem

solving and collaboration, and centers on all parties sharing information and working

towards a satisfactory goal. Sikes et al. (2010) noted that this is often the ideal approach

due to the collaborative aspect and the merging of insights, experience, perspective, and

knowledge.

Various factors affect how people resolve conflict. These factors include status,

organizational culture, gender differences, familial learned behavior, and learned

behavior from role models (Gupta, Boyd, & Kuzmits, 2011; Saundry et al., 2014).

Employees in higher status positions are more likely to confront conflict rather than avoid

or ignore it. Some organizational cultures encourage productive conflict, while others

discourage it (Gupta et al., 2011; Saundry et al., 2014; Singleton, Toombs, Tanjeja,

Larkin, & Pryor, 2011). Males are often encouraged to be more confrontational than

females are. In some families, confrontation and conflict are a style of communication,

while in others conflict is supposed to be hidden and avoided (Zhao, Settles, & Sheng,

2011). Role models can also affect conflict, especially if an employee's boss models

effective conflict resolution skills (Wienclaw, 2015).

Wienclaw (2015) noted several ways to deal with conflict. Research has shown

that the best method of dealing with conflict is to modify a conflict management style to

meet the specific situation. The appropriate conflict management style varies depending

on the degree of party cooperation, or how motivated they are to satisfy the interests of

57
the other(s) involved in the conflict. This style is also dependent on how assertive the

parties are and how motivated they are to satisfy their own interests (Wienclaw, 2015).

Avoidance is opposite collaboration on the conflict resolution spectrum. This

resolution strategy involves low assertiveness and low cooperativeness (Wang, Fink, &

Cai, 2012). This can be an effective strategy for short-term conflict management, as a

means of cooling down the parties involved in the dispute, or when the situation is

minimal. In some situations, avoidance keeps the conflict from escalating, and it helps to

de-escalate the conflict. Davis and Kraus (2009) noted that avoidance may not appear

constructive on the surface; however, postponing a confrontation to allow strong

emotions to subside is constructive.

Competition, according to Wienclaw (2015), can also be an effective means of

resolving workplace conflict. Although this approach involves one party “winning” at

the other’s expense, it can be an effective strategy when one solution is obviously most

appropriate and a quick solution is needed. The underlying assumption is that a limited

number of resources mean a win-win situation is simply not possible.

In contrast to the competitive model of conflict resolution is the accommodation

style of resolution. As with the avoidance strategy, this strategy is low on the

assertiveness scale; however, it is high on cooperativeness. Accommodation involves

one party voluntarily giving into to the other party or acting with little to no self-interest.

This can be a successful conflict management strategy if one party has substantially more

power than the other does, or the issue is not as important to one party as to the other

(Wienclaw, 2015).

58
 Compromise, as a resolution strategy, involves the parties involved striving to

find a middle ground in the conflict. This approach involves moderate levels of

cooperativeness and assertiveness. During the compromise process, the parties involved

traditionally look for solutions where their losses are offset by their gains with the

solution. This is often the best resolution strategy, according to Wienclaw (2015), for

“situations in which there is little possibility of mutual gain through problems solving,

both parties have equal power, and there are time pressures to settle the conflict” (p. 748).

Mediation is often one of the most effective conflict resolution strategies

(Bhattacharya, 2010). The success of mediation can be gauged by not only the

satisfaction with the resolution, but also the parties’ confidence that the resolution will be

successful (Poitras & LeTareau, 2009). In this process, a facilitator is delegated. His or

her role is to assist the employees having the conflict in communicating their thoughts on

the situation. The mediator must be a person that is not directly involved in the conflict.

Managers or human resource personnel are often well positioned to serve as mediators

because they often have knowledge of the situation surrounding the conflict and do not

have a direct stake in the outcome (Krivis, 2006). The facilitator is also charged with

removing doubt from the minds of the participants involved in the conflict, as well as

removing any rumors they may have heard or any preconceived judgments they may

have. The mediator must encourage all parties involved to speak openly and honestly

about the situation, as well as their perceptions, frustrations, and emotions regarding the

conflict (Fae, 2007).

Doherty and Guyler (2008) noted that this mediation strategy is particularly

valuable for several reasons. It can be adopted and suggested early on during a conflict

59
as it includes full participation of the employees involved in the conflict, and this

participation results in accountability for the outcome of the dispute (Doherty & Guyler,

2008). Mediation is also an informal and confidential process that often makes the

parties involved feel more comfortable with the process. It is a cost-effective process

because once a resolution has been established performance can be immediately renewed.

Finally, “mediation offers uniquely the most significant chance of multiple win-win

outcomes for all participants, as well as for their business or organization. Mediation can

be said to give people the opportunity for their 'real' needs to be met” (Doherty & Guyler,

2008, p. 57).

Fae (2007) noted that mediation involves connecting the conflict parties to each

other. The mediator assists the employees with the conflict to recognize the other party's

position regarding the situation (Mahoney & Klaas, 2008). The mediator also asks non-

judgmental questions of the party. However, this strategy does not work well if the

parties involved are resistant to resolution. All employees involved have to be willing

and able to listen to each other's opinions and perceptions. Only in this way will the

parties be able to keep open lines of communication to find a middle ground to which

both parties can agree.

Cross-cultural conflict can often be handled with one of the generic strategies

described above. As a result, a strategy used in situations concerning cross-cultural

conflict must obtain cultural synergy to address the conflict. Organizations should

embrace cultural differences and utilize them to enhance their group performance

(Herring, 2009; Ottaviano, 2006; Palmer & Varner, 2007). “Ethnocentrism should be

discouraged, as it tends to lift up one culture at the expense of another” (Sikes et al.,

60
2010, p. 17). Instead, open communication should be encouraged as a means of resolving

differences in interpretations and perceptions. The commonalities between the

employees involved in the conflict, despite their different cultures, should be emphasized

as part of the resolution strategy and differences minimized (Sikes et al., 2010). However,

there are two important cultural factors to keep in mind when dealing with conflict

arising from cultural differences: internal group culture and individual cultural groups

(Sikes et al., 2010).

The individual team member’s nationalities, religions, and ethnicities often result

in cultural differences. Although the team often develops an inherent culture, external

cultural factors that differ from the norm of the team must be understood, otherwise

conflict may occur. These factors must be taken into consideration when determining

which conflict resolution strategy should be utilized in a given situation (Sikes et al.,

2010).

Sikes et al. (2010) discussed research on conflict resolution provided by

Capozzoli who noted six processes that could be utilized when practicing conflict

resolution. The first process is the exploration of the reasons for the disagreement. If

emotions are still high, this process should be held off until all parties have calmed down,

to ensure that all parties are making decisions rationally and based on logic rather than on

emotions (Capozzoli, 1999; Sikes et al., 2010). It is critical that the perceptions of the

parties involved in the conflict are not criticized during this process (Capozzoli, 1999)

(Sikes et al., 2010).

The second process involves recognizing alternative solutions that are presented

by the different sides of the conflict. However, this should only be done once the

61
disagreement has been identified in full. The third process involves exploring all of the

reasons why each presented solution is appropriate. At this point, negotiations should

begin to determine the most practical of all of the solutions being considered. Once this

solution has been identified, the fourth process ensures that the solution can be

implemented, making certain all of the parties understand the responsibilities in

implementing the solution. The fifth process involves all of the parties involved in the

conflict reviewing the solution and evaluating it. The final step “is to continue practicing

the conflict resolution process. This will enable team members of the organization to be

more equipped when handling future conflicts” (Sikes et al., 2010, p. 18).

Meyer (2004) cited previous research that found the integrating style of conflict

handling to be most effective for conflict resolution. “An integrating style also was

found to correlate with improvements in productivity and customer service. The

researchers reported that poorly handled conflict reduced productivity and increased labor

relations problems” (Meyer, 2004, p. 184). The integrating style of conflict handling

would include collaboration and mediation conflict resolution strategies.

Whichever strategy is employed in conflict resolution, active listening is an

important component for success conflict resolution. Active listening is a valuable skill

that enables parties involved in a conflict to demonstrate that they understand what the

other person is saying and how they are feeling about it. The process is simple, with the

active listener restating, in his or her own words, what the other person has said. Active

listening also confirms that the person's understanding of what has been said is correct,

allowing the other party to make corrections to further communication and resolution

Wienclaw, 2015). In addition, the divergent backgrounds of the people involved in the

62
conflict and the nature of the conflict must be taken into consideration when trying to use

any resolution strategy (Cloke & Goldsmith, 2013).

Literature Summary

The research showed that today’s workplace is marked by the presence of three

full generations (Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials) for the first time in

human history. The research also showed that each of these generations has its own

particular values and goals that affect their behaviors and attitudes in the workplace.

Organizations that recognize these fundamental differences and implement mechanisms

whereby the strengths that each generation possesses are balanced with those of its multi-

generational counterparts can produce a synergistic effect that will improve work

outcomes. Finally, although there was a consistent call for more informed leadership

approaches, a consistent theme that emerged from the research was that everyone,

irrespective of age, wants to be respected and appreciated for his or her work and pay and

benefits represent just part of the success equation.

Numerous researchers discussed intergenerational conflicts among employees

(Graves, 2013; Harris, 2008; Twenge, 2010). Literature has also sought to understand the

roles of management as well as the intergenerational factors that contributed to conflict

within the workplace (Harris, 2008; Twenge, 2010). J. W. Gibson et al. (2009) believed

that when leading and interacting with different generations, managers should consider

generational differences in values, beliefs, and behaviors. Despite all these studies, there

is a lack of studies on the effects of generational differences in public organizations and

how managers manage these generational conflicts. There is no study yet that was

designed to understand the lived experiences of U.S. DoD managers and how they

63
managed workplace conflicts among the Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and

Millennials. The literature on generational differences, generational conflicts, and how

companies should manage these through diversity management can be helpful for

studying U.S. DoD managers’ conflict management practices. The researcher’s goal is to

close this gap by providing a comprehensive understanding of conflicts that occur within

the U.S. federal government workplace among generations. A study investigating both

the attitudes and the behaviors of different generations is pertinent because it provides

strategies for managing different generations and increasing productivity with the

workforce (Roodin & Mendelson, 2013).

64
 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand the lived

experiences of U.S. federal government managers in managing workplace conflicts

among Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials. Qualitative research is a

systematic, naturalistic approach in which the origin and scope of knowledge is human

experience (Van Manen, 2014). Van Manen (2007) stated, “Phenomenology is a project

of sober reflection on the lived experience of human existence– sober, in the sense that

reflecting on experience must be thoughtful, and as much as possible, free from

theoretical, prejudicial and intoxications” (p. 12). This chapter will provide an overview

of the research design, a description of the sampling procedures, participants, setting,

instrumentation, data collection and analysis procedures, and the related procedures for

addressing any issues concerning validity and reliability. The main research question and

the related sub-questions for this study were as follows:

Research Question: What is the experience of U.S. federal government managers

in managing workplace conflicts attributed to generational differences among the Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers, and the Millennials who work together in one agency?

Investigative RQ1: What are the workplace conflicts experienced by U.S. federal

government managers that can contribute to generational differences between Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials?

65
 Investigative RQ2: What are the experiences of U.S. federal government

managers when it comes to managing the effects of workplace generational conflicts on

work performance of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials?

Investigative RQ3: What are the experiences of U.S. federal government

managers in diffusing the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational differences

between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials?

Research Design

Utilizing a qualitative design rather than a quantitative one allowed for an in-

depth exploration of the lived experiences of U.S. federal government managers.

Qualitative researchers explore a phenomenon or problem in the natural setting, include

smaller sample sizes, utilize an inductive approach to collect and analyze data, include

rich descriptions of participants’ experiences, are not generalizable to the larger

population, and provide a means for understanding individuals’ experiences and

perceptions (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2010). The central aim of phenomenology is to

understand the meaning and essence of individuals’ lived experiences (Van Manen,

2014).

Phenomenological Design

Van Manen (1990) described phenomenology as a “systematic attempt to uncover

and describe the structures, the internal meaning of structures of lived experiences” (p.

53). Edmund Husserl, regarded as the founder of the phenomenological approach,

believed that phenomenology captured the essence of an experience in its most

fundamental state, free from interpretation and theoretical assumptions (Van Manen,

66
2014). Phenomenology has two major approaches: transcendental and hermeneutical

(Van Manen, 1990). Van Manen (2014) stated,

A phenomenological question may arise any time we have had a certain

experience that brings us to pause and reflect. Even the most ordinary experience

may bring us to a sense of wonder. Perhaps we suddenly think back to an event

that struck us, or someone made a comment about something that we experienced.

And now we wonder: What is this experience like? How does the meaning of this

experience arise? How do we live through an experience like this? (p. 31)

Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology is a descriptive approach that utilizes human

experience as the foundation for epistemological knowledge and understanding (Bentz &

Rehorick, 2008; Van Manen, 2014). To develop a true understanding of individuals’

experiences, Husserl believed researchers must bracket out their personal biases

concerning the phenomenon under investigation (Van Manen, 1990). Bentz and Rehorick

(2008) concluded that phenomenological researchers must acknowledge and bracket out

presuppositions that inform their perceptions. By bracketing out their personal biases and

experiences, researchers are able to determine true knowledge (McLean, 2014).

While Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology is descriptive, Heidegger’s

hermeneutical phenomenology is interpretive (Van Manen, 1990). Reiners (2012) found

that Heidegger “rejected the theory of knowledge known as epistemology, and adopted

ontology, the science of being. Heidegger developed interpretive phenomenology by

extending hermeneutics, the philosophy of interpretation” (p. 1). The phenomenological

approach is appropriate for this study because the only focus was on the lived and

67
subjective experiences of U.S. government managers as they managed workplace

conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials.

Sample

Participants for this study were managers who worked for three distinct U.S. DoD

agencies. After receiving permission to interview managers, the researcher contacted

each of the agency representatives, requesting a list of managers to participate in this

study. An administrative assistant from one of the agencies provided a list of participants

while representatives from the other two agencies would not. For those two agencies, the

researcher was able to get a list of managers from a supervisor who worked at the first

agency, and a list of managers from a supervisor and a former co-worker who worked at

the second agency. The researcher then emailed 25 managers, providing an overview of

the study and requesting their participation. Managers affirmed their willingness to

participate by responding to the email.

Originally, the researcher anticipated interviewing 15 managers from three

agencies; however, only 12 managers responded to the email. In order to increase the

number of participants to 15, the researcher asked one of the managers if he knew other

managers who would be willing to participate. He was able to refer two DoD managers

who met this study’s inclusion criteria. Another participant was able to recruit another

DoD manager from her agency. This participant brought the DoD manager to her

scheduled interview. The researcher interviewed both at the same time. The three

additional participants were DoD managers within three agencies included in this study.

The 15 managers had varying amounts of managerial experience, ranging from to two

68
years to 20 years. The purposeful sampling combines two types of sampling procedures:

purposeful and random (Gall et al., 2010).

The purposeful sampling procedure involves selecting participants who have

experience with the phenomenon under investigation while the random sampling

procedure provides a larger sample from which to choose and reduces the possibility of

selection bias (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2007; Patton, 2002). Patton (2001) identified one

of the primary characteristics of purposeful sampling, stating that it “involves selecting

cases that meet some predetermined criterion of importance” (p. 238). Patton (2002)

further concluded, "The logic and power of purposeful sampling lie in selecting

information-rich cases for study in depth” (p. 230). In addition to providing a larger

sample and decreasing selection bias, Suri (2011) concluded random sampling increases

the credibility of a study’s results.

The predetermined inclusion criteria for U.S. federal government managers were

as follows:

 Experience managing a workforce comprised of the following

generational cohorts: Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials.

 A minimum of at least one year of managerial experience at one of the

government agencies

 A member of one of the following generational cohorts: Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, or Millennials.

The predetermined exclusion criteria for U.S federal government managers were as

follows:

69
  No experience managing a workforce comprised of all three generational

cohorts.

 A personal relationship with the researcher.

The researcher did not exclude any participant on the basis of ethnicity/race, gender, or

sexual orientation.

Setting

The 15 managers worked for three U.S. DoD agencies located in the southern part

of the United States. The interviews took place in person and on Skype. The original plan

was to interview participants at local libraries; however, this was not possible due to the

participants’ locations (several different states) and scheduling conflicts. As a result, the

in-person interviews occurred in office settings, cafes, the lobby of an office building,

and a food court. Interviews also occurred via Skype. The researcher utilized Skype as a

secondary means for interviewing participants because of the distance between the

researcher’s site location and some of the interviewees’ site locations. In total, there were

10 in-person interviews and five Skype interviews. The researcher and the interviewee

were the only people present during each interview. To ensure an accurate description of

the interview, the researcher audio recorded and later transcribed each in-person

interview and each Skype interview.

All government managers, whether they participated in either the in-person or the

Skype interviews, answered the questions identified in the interview guide. The

researcher anticipated observing all participants in their natural setting; however, this was

not possible due to distance between the site location of the researcher and the site

locations of the interviewees. In total, the researcher observed four participants in their

70
natural setting. Field notes were the data collection method for all participant

observations. Van Manen (2014) recommended the systematic gathering of data by

interviewing and observing participants and describing their experiences in the natural

environment. Prior to interviewing and observing participants, the researcher sent request

letters to agency representatives, requesting permission to recruit, interview, and observe

participants. The interviews commenced within two weeks of receiving IRB approval and

occurred over a four-week period.

Data Collection

The researcher used a triangulated approach to collect data. The three forms of

data were semi-structured interviews, brief observations, and archived data. Triangulation

is the use of multiple forms of data in order to provide a complete understanding of the

phenomenon under investigation and to determine “the consistency of findings generated

by different data collection methods” (Patton, 2002, p. 556). According to Adams and

Van Manen (2008), the purpose of the phenomenological interview is to bring about a

“direct description of a particular situation or event as it is lived through without offering

causal explanations or interpretive generalizations” (p. 618). Allowing participants to

describe their experiences in their own words facilitates a clear explication of the

phenomenon (Gall et al., 2010).

Observation was the second data collection procedure. Observation is a

systematic and indirect way of collecting data (Gall et al., 2010). Moustakas (1994)

stated, “By direct observation the researcher is able to understand the context in which

people live their lives; first-hand experience enables the researcher to be open to discover

and deduce what is significant” (p. 3). Merriam (2009) believed that observation

71
provided information that may be unavailable during an interview. Document review was

the final data collection procedure. Unfortunately, the U.S. federal agencies would not

authorize the researcher to access and review government documents for this study.

Prior to interviewing and briefly observing four participants in their natural

setting, the researcher completed Capella University’s IRB process and sought the

approval of U.S. DoD agency representatives to interview participants. After IRB and

agency representatives gave permission to conduct this study and to interview

participants, the researcher compiled a list of 25 participants. Each of the 25 participants

received an email that provided an overview of the study, explained the time

requirements for participation, and described the consent process. A participant who

agreed to participate replied to the email and provided his or her phone number. Next, the

researcher scheduled one-on-one interviews.

Once the participant arrived, he or she received and signed an informed consent

prior to the interview. After the participant signed the consent to participate form, the

one-on-one interview began. Interviews occurred in office settings, cafes, a food court, a

local library’s conference room, and the lobby of an office building. Because of the

distance between sites, interviews also occurred using Skype and Google Talk. The

researcher and the participant were the only people present at each interview. The

interviews commenced within two weeks after receiving IRB permission. The researcher

interviewed each participant one time. The researcher intended to interview each

participant for 60 minutes; however, most of the interviews were less than 60 minutes

because participants had scheduling conflicts.

72
 In addition to the interviews, the researcher briefly observed four participants

within their natural setting. The observations occurred after interviewing each of the

participants, focusing on their behavior and interactions with employees. The

observations were informal; therefore, the researcher did not need to procure participants’

consent. During the observations, the researcher noted managers’ interactions with

subordinates. The informal observations provided the researcher with a comprehensive

understanding of managers’ interpersonal exchanges. Field notes were the form of data

collection for the observations. Field notes provided a more in-depth understanding of the

culture and social context of the phenomenon under investigation.

Data Analysis

Researchers identified seven steps of the data analysis process when conducting

phenomenological research:

1. setting aside any preconceived notions,

2. becoming immersed in the data,

3. delineating units of meaning,

4. moving from first-order constructs to second-order constructs,

5. clustering the meaning units into themes,

6. synthesizing themes into textual and structural descriptions, and

7. developing a composite description of the essence of the experiences of others

to discover their true meaning (Hycner, 1999; Moustakas, 1994).

Bracketing out perceptions involved reducing preconceptions, theoretical assumptions,

and cultural influences regarding the phenomenon (Bentz & Rehorick, 2008; Dowling,

2007). Dowling (2007) stressed the importance of “the phenomenologist attempting to

73
meet the phenomenon as free and as unprejudiced as possible in order that the

phenomenon present itself as free and as unprejudiced way as possible so that it can be

precisely described and understood” (p. 132). By bracketing out preconceptions,

assumptions, and influences, the researcher differentiated her experiences from those of

the participants thereby facilitating a clear articulation of the essence of the lived

experience (Dowling, 2007; Van Manen, 2014).

For this study, bracketing out perceptions was a multi-step process. First, the

researcher engaged in a process of reflexivity by examining and then blocking out any

knowledge, beliefs, biases, and experiences regarding the phenomenon. Second, the

researcher ensured the scope of the literature reviewed theories that provided an impartial

perspective of the topic; in addition, after reviewing the related literature, the researcher

remained open to the implications of the experience. Third, the researcher obtained data

by conducting semi-structured interviews that included open-ended questions. The

researcher recorded and later transcribed all semi-structured interviews, listening to each

audio recording multiple times to ensure there was an accurate description of

participants’ responses. Finally, to further ensure that the description of managers’

experiences was accurate, the researcher utilized the process of member checking. This

process involved sending interview transcripts to the participants and having them

determine if any data were missing or if the researcher misinterpreted any experiences.

The second step of the data analysis process was immersion. Ajjawi and Higgs

(2007) described immersion as a systematic process that includes the following steps:

“Organizing the data-set into texts; Iterative reading of texts; Preliminary interpretation

of texts to facilitate coding” (p. 621). In regard to this study, the researcher achieved

74
immersion by reading and rereading text of all data, interpreting common meanings, and

conducting a thematic analysis of the interview transcripts, field notes, and records (Van

Manen, 2014).

The third step of data analysis procedures involved delineating meaning from the

data. Nguyen-Dufour (2013) stated, “This rigorous process entails going over every

word, phrase, sentence, paragraph and noted significant non-verbal communication in the

transcript with as much openness as possible” (p. 82). After reviewing and scrutinizing

each transcript, the researcher eliminated repetitive wording throughout the transcripts

and field notes and isolated words or statements that elucidated the phenomenon

(Groenewald, 2004; Moustakas, 1994).

Next, the researcher transitioned from formulating concepts to interpreting the

phenomenon (King, 2014). Ajjawi and Higgs (2007) referred to this transition as moving

from first-to second-order constructs, which was the fourth step of the data analysis

process for this study. They stated, “First order constructs refer to participants’ ideas

expressed in their own words or phrases” (p. 624); conversely, second-order constructs

are the researcher’s interpretations (Edwards & Titchen, 2003). While they interpret

participants’ experiences, researchers must bracket out and not allow any preconceived

ideas to influence their interpretations (Edwards & Titchen, 2003).

In regard to this study, grouping second-order constructs facilitated the process of

clustering the meaning units into themes, which was the fifth stage of the data analysis

procedures. Clustering the meaning allows researchers to identify themes and patterns

(Groenewald, 2004; King, 2014; Lindberg, Persson, Horberg, & Ekebergh, 2013).

Lindberg et al. (2013) stated, “A cluster is a preliminary structure of meanings that is

75
created based on differences and similarities in meanings” (p. 4). With respect to this

study, clustering the data involved identifying themes and patterns regarding the lived

experiences of U.S. federal government managers in managing workplace conflicts

attributed to generational differences among the Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and the

Millennials.

After clustering the meaning, the researcher synthesized identified themes and

patterns and created a textural description of the lived experiences of U.S. government

managers (Groenewald, 2004; Lindberg et al., 2013). Creating a textural description of

participants’ lived experiences based on identified themes and patterns involves

describing “the constituents that comprise the experience in consciousness, from the

vantage point of an open self” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 34). The final step involved the

researcher creating a composite description of the essence of federal government

managers’ experiences regarding the conflicts that were attributable to generational

differences among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials.

Validity and Reliability

Validity is the extent to which the findings provide an accurate representation of

participants’ lived experiences while reliability is the degree to which findings are

replicable in other studies (Erlingsson & Brysiewicz, 2012; Oluwatayo, 2012). To

establish reliability and validity in phenomenological studies, researchers should conduct

field tests, utilize triangulation, engage in constant self-reflection, and conduct member

checks throughout the data collection and analysis process (Merriam, 2009). Conducting

field tests illuminate any limitations regarding the interview instrument with respect to

wording and the appropriateness of questions (Oluwatayo, 2012). Triangulation involves

76
the inclusion of multiple forms of data and aims to identify common themes in the data

(Erlingsson & Brysiewicz, 2012; Merriam, 2009). These multiple forms of data include

any combination of interviews, documents, and observations (Horner-Smith, 2014;

Oluwatayo, 2012). Self-reflection is important because the researcher must be able to

provide an open and unbiased description of the participants’ experiences (Merriam,

2009; Moustakas, 1994). Member checks allow participants to check the accuracy of the

interview transcripts and corroborate the researcher’s interpretation of the interview and

observation.

To test the reliability and validity of the 14-question interview instrument, the

researcher conducted a field test with five individuals who had experience conducting

face-to-face interviews. The five individuals did not work at any of the target sites nor did

the researcher include them in this study. The first participant was the researcher’s chair

at Capella University while the second and third participants were professors at private

universities. The fourth participant served as the lead attorney for a southern state, and

the fifth participant was a veteran manager for a U.S. federal government agency. The

participants who had no affiliation with Capella University provided written feedback

regarding the open-ended interview questions while the chair provided oral feedback

concerning the interview questions and the pacing of the interview during two practice

interview sessions.

After reviewing the written feedback and conducting two practice interview

sessions, the researcher deleted four interview questions and then reworded nine

interview questions, resulting in a 10-question interview instrument. The field test

ensured that the open-ended interview questions would not cause participants undue

77
stress, were clear with respect to wording and appropriate for the target population,

aligned with this study’s research questions, and facilitated participants’ ability to

describe their experiences. Constant self-reflection was the third step for establishing

validity and reliability.

Ethical Considerations

In accordance with federal guidelines, the researcher submitted a research plan, an

informed consent form, and other related documentation to Capella University’s

institutional review board (IRB). After Capella University approved the study, the

researcher sent an email to each agency’s administrative assistant to the directorate,

requesting permission to conduct this study and to contact and interview participants.

Next, the researcher sent participants an email requesting their participation in this study

and their personal contact information. In the email, the researcher provided an overview

of the study, the requisite time commitment for participating in this study, and the related

procedures for ensuring participant confidentiality. Participants who agreed to participate

replied to the email and provided their personal email addresses. Participants whom the

researcher selected received a follow-up email that included an attached copy of an

informed consent form and a possible interview time and location.

Prior to the semi-structured interview, each participant reviewed and signed an

informed consent document. Participants were able to withdraw from the study at any

point without penalty. The researcher maintained participant confidentiality by deleting

any identifying information and assigning a pseudonym to each participant’s interview

transcripts and within the researcher’s field notes. The researcher’s assistants agreed to

protect the confidentiality of participants and to not disclose their identity by signing a

78
confidentiality agreement. At the conclusion of each interview, the researcher asked the

interviewee if he or she had questions or if he or she would like to share any additional

information. Next, the researcher compared interview transcripts and audio recordings.

The researcher then sent each participant his or her transcript(s) and requested that he or

she confirm the findings. The researcher kept all data pertaining to this study in a

password protected computer and locked file cabinet in the researcher’s home residence.

In accordance with Capella’s guidelines for keeping data, the researcher will keep all data

from this study for seven years.

79
 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

Introduction

The results of this chapter present the study's finding pertaining to the data

analysis based on the data gathered from the interviews with 15 U.S. Department of

Defense (DoD) managers. The purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study

was to explore the lived experiences of U.S. federal government managers and how they

managed workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials.

The aims of this study were to elucidate the differences that existed among these

generations, to develop a clearer understanding of how these differences contributed to

conflict within the workplace, and to identify strategies that minimized conflict within the

workplace. The researcher interviewed 15 U.S. DoD managers regarding their

perceptions and experiences of generational differences in their workplace and

organizations. To protect participants’ privacy, the researcher used identifiers __ 001

through ___015 for the DoD managers and used codes for direct quotes. The roman

numerals (I-III) identify the location of the participants. The researcher also referred to

them as participants throughout this chapter. The researcher used a thematic analysis to

determine the major and minor themes that addressed the main research question and the

three investigative research questions. The researcher utilized NVivo10 to determine the

major and minor themes and to establish further the validity and the reliability of the

80
results. Chapter 4 also includes a description of the sample, the research methodology for

the study, the data and results, and the summary of the findings.

Research Question: What is the experience of U.S. federal government

managers in managing workplace conflicts attributed to generational differences among

the Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and the Millennials who work together in one

agency?

Investigative Research Question # 1: What are the workplace conflicts

experienced by U.S. federal government managers that can contribute to generational

differences between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Investigative Research Question # 2: What are the experiences of U.S. federal

government managers when it comes to managing the effects of workplace generational

conflicts on work performance of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Investigative Research Question # 3: What are the experiences U.S. federal

government managers in diffusing the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational

differences between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials?

Description of the Sample

Participants of the study were 15 U.S. federal government managers (10 males

and five females) who had experience leading and managing the three generations in their

workplace. The researcher selected these participants because they had enough firsthand

experiences to respond to the investigative queries. Among the 15 participants, four were

from the Baby Boomers generation, nine were from the Generation Xers, and two were

Millennials. Table 1 contains the basic demographics of the sample.

Table 1

81
Basic demographics of the sample

Gender Generation

Participant 01I Male Baby Boomer

Participant 02I Female Baby Boomer

Participant 03I Male Generation X

Participant 04I Male Generation X

Participant 05I Male Baby Boomer

Participant 05I Male Baby Boomer

Participant 06II Male Millennial

Participant 07II Male Generation X

Participant 08II Male Millennial

Participant 09II Male Generation X

Participant 010II Female Generation X

Participant 11III Female Baby Boomer

Participant 12III Female Generation X

Participant 13III Male Generation X

Participant 14III Female Generation X

Participant 15III Male Generation X

Research Methodology

A transcendental phenomenological design was employed to examine and explore

the lived experiences shared by the participants during the interviews. The seven steps

discussed by Hycner (1999) and Moustakas (1994) were used for the analysis of the data

gathered. The seven steps were as follows:

1. Researcher set aside any preconceived notions,

82
 2. Researcher immersed self in the data,

3. Researcher delineated the units of meaning,

4. Researcher moved from first-order constructs to second-order constructs,

5. Researcher clustered the meaning units into themes,

6. Researcher synthesized themes into textual and structural descriptions, and

(1) Researcher developed a composite description of the essence of the experiences

of others to discover their true meaning.

The NVivo was only used to store and secure the date collected and not for the

analysis and results of the study. The data analysis’ major and minor themes were

established by analyzing the interviews according to the guide above and inputting them

in Microsoft Excel to determine the occurrences of every response or clustered theme

previously formed. The results were then tabulated and reviewed for the presentation of

analysis.

Data Analysis

The researcher discovered major and minor themes that all addressed this study’s

main research question and investigative questions. The researcher used a thematic

analysis on the data collected from the interviews. The major themes were the ones that

received the highest number of occurrences while the other important experiences were

the ones that received relatively fewer occurrences. The data results were presented based

on the following clustered themes:

Major Theme 1. Difference in work goals, ethics, and attitudes between the three

generations

83
 The first major theme of the study was based on the first investigative research

question of what are the workplace conflicts experienced by U.S. federal government

managers because of generational differences between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers,

and Millennials. The difference in work goals, ethics, and attitudes between the three

generations was the chief conflict observed and experienced by the managers. This major

theme received 12 occurrences out of the 15 responses of the participants (Table 2). The

first key experience pertains to the conflict of having to deal with the difference in

professional goals and attitudes between the three generations.

Table 2

The workplace conflicts experienced by U.S. federal government managers that can

contribute to generational differences between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and

Millennials

Thematic Label 1 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Difference in work goals, ethics, and attitudes

12 80%
between the three generations

Lack of willingness to adapt to changes for the

4 27%
older generation

Conflict of the traditional and modern

3 20%
methods within the organization

Generations are threatened by the presence of

2 13%
one another

Social interaction issues between the majority 1 7%

84
and minority of the groups

Lack of command for the Millennials 1 7%

Overall, the first major theme, which was the difference in work goals, ethics, and

attitudes between the three generations, was one of the three most crucial findings of the

study. P02I stated the conflict that she observed was the difference in work goals and

attitude between the older generation or the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers versus

the Millennials:

I observed, with my generation and I think the X generation, to some degree

is…we all feel that we need to kind of, work to… husband and wife work, and

this generation, they kind of… if they want to take off… to stay home or to go to

another job back home, they just do that.

Meanwhile, P012I shared another observation about Generation Y, with them

being young and having different priorities:

I think the Generation Y has been probably my most challenging, and the reason,

not that I’ve had really good employees, but I guess they are young and they come

out with, it seems like a…not really stability, like when they want to quickly get

those promotions, and they’ll go wherever they need to go to get them.

P03I added how the older generations have more value for their jobs while the

Millennials, as they are still very young, are more carefree and relaxed:

I do believe that some of the older generations, our generations- the Xers and the

Baby Boomers often times look for that security in a job. [Interviewee 1 agrees] I

don’t know if it’s fear of trepidation, but often times just changing jobs is not

85
 something you’re going to do, especially when you have mouths to feed and so

forth and so on.

P03I noticed how the younger generation is more focused on promotion alone, which

Sometimes entailed negative results or outcomes:

Maybe promotions or how can I matriculate through the system, so to speak

without that impact to who it impacts, so it’s more focused on self than others. It

sounds negative, but it gives that appearance, so many times.

P04I then observed that when compared to the younger generation, the Boomers

are more stable in their position and the Millennials being young are more competitive in

proving for promotions:

I guess you can say as far as behavior, compared to the younger generation, the

Boomers are more stable. There’s no need for them to try to get their promotion.

They’re good with what they’re doing. They’re good with where they’re at, so

they’re just on a steady course. You know where as my younger generation, the

ones that are really trying to get to that part.

P07II explained the main differences between the desires of the three generations

in terms of their career paths; in addition, their goals also depend on their skill sets, which

greatly vary according to the generation they belong to. For the Baby Boomers, their

aspirations were more targeted on stability:

Baby Boomers, their desires seem to be more directed towards stability, their

impact to the command…they’re older, so they seem to be more impactful when

it comes to their role in the organization.

86
Concurrently, for the Generation Xers, they are more focused on being recognized and

growing into the organization as well:

The Generation Xers, which I’m a member of, tend to be a little closer, more

closely in line with the Baby Boomers in terms of how they impact the

organization, their desires for one being recognized. You see a little bit more of

it, to be recognized, and the ability to kind of grow as they’re moving up in the

organization.

P07II then pointed out how the three generations are completely dissimilar with the

younger ones being more confident and sure of the skills and abilities that they can offer:

The Millennials/Generation Y’s, they’re completely different in terms of their

desires because they come in knowing they have a skill set. They know that they

have a very marketable skill set; they know that they’re highly sought after. All

they want is to make sure that they have an influence over the organization that

their voices are heard within the organization and things of that nature, and that

drives their behavior.

P12II added that there is a knowledge gap between the generations, the

differences in their attitudes and work ethics are considered as the main conflicts:

The younger generation is trying to make their footprint, where they’re trying to

come in and steam roll a little bit. Trying to go above and beyond, and which is

great, but at the same time, they’re chasing the dollar, so they’re not really getting

their experience. They’re learning what they need to know and then they’re

moving. So, they got the knowledge, but they don’t have the experience to work

the knowledge.

87
P12II furthered the differences in priority and concerns between the Baby Boomers and

the younger generation [Millennials]:

Really goes back to there’s such a knowledge gap between our Baby Boomers

and our new people coming in. And the middle people, they’re just satisfied they

got a job. You don’t get a lot of motivation with the middle group. A lot of them

have families, so to them, the quality of life, they wanna be able to get off from

work and watch their kid play soccer, or whatever their activity is. Where the

Baby Boomers, they’re not ready for retirement; you know they don’t wanna go

anywhere, and the younger ones, they’re just chasing the Dollar.

P13III shared the main differences in values between the three generations,

wherein as compared to the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers, Generation Ys are only

focused on the present and the upcoming promotions and gratifications that they can

receive:

…for the younger generation [Millennials], it’s instant gratification, promotions

now… Everything now, now, now…microwave type generation. There’s no I’m

gonna put in the work to get there; I’m gonna make a long-term plan. It’s not

gonna be ok with them to wait 10 yrs for a position, 20 yrs for a position.

P13III made the comparison with the Baby Boomers.

On the other end of the spectrum is the Baby Boomers, who actually believed in

working their way up the chain… it takes them a long time to become skilled and

do that hands on.

88
 P01I carefully explained the differences in values and philosophy between the

three generations, which have caused conflicts within the organization as well. P01I

shared how Baby Boomers are more traditional:

Baby Boomers have the philosophy of the “American Dream.” Their belief is that

they should have loyalty to a company, work for them for 30 years, get a pension

and live the “American Dream.” That’s a philosophy they got from their parents

and taken it into the workplace. They’re very inflexible to change because they

try to stay within that model they’ve learned, and that’s what I expect from the

Baby Boomers.

Meanwhile, Generation X was deemed to have a more negative view and unanswered

promises and plans in terms of their careers:

Generation X, somewhat have that but have been disillusioned because they’ve

seen that the promises of working for someone else for 30yrs doesn’t work out. I

think this started with the Enron Case, whereas people work their whole life then

get ready to retire and don’t have anything. I think this caught this generation off-

guard; promises aren’t always kept so they’ve taken a different approach in how

they do their work-life balance.

Finally, the Millennials showed a strong set of skills thus making them more confident

and eager than the other generations:

The Millennials are the complete opposite of Baby Boomers; they don’t feel they

need to show that 30yrs loyalty. They’re more flexible in terms of being able to

move around and get many experiences, not giving their whole life to one

89
 company but get the diversity of experience available and quite mobile... They

don’t want to be saddled with the things we consider the “American Dream.”

Minor Theme 1. Lack of willingness to adapt to changes for the older

generation. The first minor theme that followed was the lack of willingness of the baby

boomers to adapt to changes. This theme received four occurrences from the responses

of the 15 participants. P11III admitted that as a Baby Boomer, it is difficult for her to

accept and adapt to the changes happening within the organization:

Yes, we got a couple of them that we do it this way; we’ve always done it, and

don’t want any change...And those are the ones that really don’t wanna be

involved with different activities; they just wanna come in, do the work and go

home… more so than the younger ones.

The participant also shared that baby boomers are traditional and conventional with the

ways they have established through the years:

The younger ones, really when we spearhead a function, they come…they are

willing and ready because they wanna move to the top, so they’re “Johnny on the

spot” yea, let’s do it, and they have some good ideas; they offer some good ideas.

P10II added how the constant change becomes a difficulty for the Baby Boomers, thus

also transforms into conflict in the long run:

I think it’s a bigger distraction on the constant change for the older generation. I

think the biggest thing I’ve experienced is change, where the Baby Boomers

[slowly] they have a way of doing things and they’re kinda set in their ways. So

yea, with the Baby Boomers, with the change and not being as open to it, it’s just

a lot of convincing. She also expressed how there is not much difference between

90
 the Baby Boomers and Millennials: Whereas with like the Millennials, it’s just

kind of a [Baby Boomers] need for them [Millennials] to slow down just a little…

a little more patience. I mean it’s good that they’re trying to enhance the way we

do things, so that’s definitely a good idea. If just executed well, it would be better.

P12II also added that it is indeed a conflict for the older generation to adapt with

the constant development of technology: “I think it’s a bigger distraction on the constant

change for the older generation.”

Minor Theme 2. Conflict of the traditional and modern methods within the

organization. The second minor theme that followed was the conflict of the traditional

and modern methods within the organization. There were three occurrences from the

responses of the 15 participants. P12II explained how she feels that there is a conflict

with regard to the traditional and modern methods of the three generations:

… I feel like we have an old mind frame of micro managing a little bit more

than… employees because it’s the old way of doing things vs. using the systems,

using like the timesheets… It’s just the old way of doing things.

P01I explained how there is a difference in interaction as well, as the Baby

Boomers and Generation Xers are geared towards the personal communication while the

Millennials mostly communicate through the various technological networks available:

In the workplace, personal interaction is a challenge because Baby Boomers want

to have lots of meetings and be face-to-face, but the younger generations don’t

want to do that. They’re like send me a text; tell me what you need and I’ll get it

for you. I don’t want a long meeting and don’t want to talk on the phone all day.

I don’t need to meet you face-to-face to get the job done, so there’s this conflict.

91
Another point that validates the previous point is that:

When I put groups together which include the Baby Boomers, Generation Xers,

and Millennials together, the personal interaction they have is a challenge. As a

manager, I have to look for ways to find that middle ground where the Baby

Boomers don’t feel their life is being turned upside down and Millennials don’t

feel I’m burdening them with all things they don’t need.

Minor Theme 3. Generations are threatened by the presence of one another.

The third minor theme that followed was that the generations are threatened by the

presence of one another. This minor theme received two occurrences from the responses

of the 15 participants. P04I shared a different experience in her department wherein the

three generations are intimidated by the strengths and skills that each group brings to the

organization:

I think the detraction is the older, the Baby Boomers see the Generation Y(the

younger folks) as a threat, coming in, because, I think because they get the

technology aspect of it, and I think they’re threatened a little bit because they can

really roll with the system. You tell them what buttons to push, what fields to

enter, and it clicks with them. Where with the Baby Boomers, it doesn’t click so

fast.

This intimidation pertains to the experience of the Baby Boomers against the new and

more developed skill sets of the Generation Xers and more so the Generation Y or the

Millennials:

92
 So, I think there’s a little intimidation there with the Baby Boomers to the

younger folks, but at the same time, I think the younger folks are also intimidated

by the Baby Boomers because of the experience level that they have.

Minor Theme 4. Social interaction issues between the majority and minority

of the groups. The fourth minor theme that followed was that the social interaction

issues between the majority and minority of the groups. One occurrence was presented

for this theme from the responses of the 15 participants. P09II shared an experience

when one current employee is a minority or from a different generation, this employee

somehow refuses to interact with the officers from another generation:

As far as generationally, I only have one current employee that’s from kind of a

different generation. They don’t interact as well with the rest of the team. The

rest of the team seems to bond a lot more freely so that’s …it could be that she’s

not around as often; she does telework quite a bit but when she is in the office

she’s more focused on, let me just get what I need to get done and then I need to

leave.

Minor Theme 5. Lack of command for the Millennials. The fifth and final

minor theme that followed was the lack of command for the Millennials when interacting

with the older generations. The minor theme received one occurrence from the responses

of the 15 participants. P05I stated that as a young manager, he constantly experienced

the lack of command from the older generations:

...when I was coming up as a younger Supervisor, I think I had to earn respect a

little bit more. I seem to have a lot more impact on phone interviews or phone

conversations with meeting with customers than I would when I went in person. You

93
know the initial reaction that, they may look at me and they’re like he doesn’t know what

he’s talking about…The first major theme showed that generational conflicts exist in the

federal government agencies, largely because of the differences in the work values and

beliefs of the different generations. Five minor themes of unwillingness to adapt,

differences in methods, feelings of being threatened, social interaction issues, and lack of

command of one generation over another generation aggravated the conflicts.

Major Theme 2. Conflicts in work performances are acceptable as long as leaders

know how to manage effectively

The second major theme of the study was based on the second investigative

research question of what are the experiences of U.S. federal government managers when

it comes to managing the effects of workplace generational conflicts on work

performance of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials. It was discovered that

the conflicts from the experience of the leaders that conflicts are still relatively

manageable, which means they are acceptable as long as leaders know how to manage

effectively. This major theme received 10 occurrences out of the 15 responses of the

participants (Table 3). The second key experience discovered pertains to the participants’

belief that the workplace conflicts are normal given the generational differences; in

addition, the work performances are not affected as long as managers know how to

handle the issues.

Table 3

The experiences of U.S. federal government managers when it comes to managing the

effects of workplace generational conflicts on work performance of Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, and Millennials

94
 Thematic Label 2 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Conflicts in work performances are

acceptable as long as leaders know 10 67%

how to manage effectively

Negative effect due to the lack of

3 20%
willingness to communicate properly

Negative effect due to the technology

3 20%
issues with the first two generations

Knowing how to manage changes in

2 13%
the organization

Overall negative effect due to the

1 7%
generational conflicts present

Overall, the second major theme of the study was that the conflicts in work

performances are relatively manageable. Leaders can manage them even though they can

be challenging. This was considered to be one of the three most significant findings of

the study. P02I admitted that it is indeed challenging to manage the different generations

when they are mixed together; but the leader can still manage the issues.

…having the older and younger generation kinda mix together, I think it helps

each other. Sometimes it’s kinda challenging to supervise

(laughs)…communication issues I suppose is where kinda go to really work with

each of them to some degree… but yea, and you’re right; they do challenge the

95
 envelope And in productive ways, as well as sometimes in non-productive ways

as long as you can manage.

P11III shared an experience where as a Baby Boomer, she had to adjust to the

attitude of her younger employees, but at the same time taught them the lesson on

performing in a professional environment:

I know some of the younger ones, the writing skills because of texting, they don’t

do complete sentences, so I talk to them as far as managing them; I have to

remember they are younger. I don’t want to hurt their feelings, but I’m to the

point that you don’t write like this. This is a professional environment, so I don’t

wanna inhibit them, but yet I wanna be…I am direct, to the point and let’s get it

done, but there’s a right way to do it and a wrong way.

P10II shared that there is no effect on the work performance as long as the leaders

know how to manage and approach the issues with their employees from different

generations:

It’s how I approach; I’ll have my team activities and that’s to kind of make the

most cohesive teams, so when I’m working as a Contracting Officer with

individuals, I try to figure out what’s the best way to approach them. If I’m

working with a Millennial, I’m not gonna have like 50 meetings with them, I’m

gonna kind of have one meeting to kinda get it going and then maybe do a lot

more emails, just because if they’re more productive after I’ve given them good

direction and I send them off, I just want them to be productive. I don’t want

them to Feel like I’m just hovering over them.

96
P10II again shared another leadership style that she practices, this time with Generation

X:

Generation X, which is my generation, I’ve got to find the middle ground how

many meetings or whatever. Now if it’s a Baby Boomer, then we have to have a

lot more meetings just to make sure that we’re (capturing everything and we’re all

on the same page and just giving that good feel feeling, and then everybody can

go back. The Baby Boomer can go back and continue their work…I find that it’s

helpful if we regroup more often.

P07II shared how she uses her strength and skills to manage the conflicts

effectively, in order for the issues to not affect the work performance of the people:

My strength is obviously with my people, so when I start thinking…Ok, I have

the Millennials doing this particular project, or I have a Baby Boomer doing this

particular project; I have to be sensitive to their goals, desires, and things of that

nature in order to get the good work out of them… I have to manage differently

because I know I’m dealing with different people.

P05I had a positive experience and only had limited conflicts in his department.

Thus, no negative effects on work performance were mentioned:

We have a great time; I work on a great team, and there are definitely different

generations. I don’t feel like I have to approach anybody differently based on it,

and we are very supportive of the telework program. Across my workforce

everybody participates; who wouldn’t like to participate if they’re eligible in that

and it really haven’t had anything to do with generation.

97
 P12II also emphasized that conflicts are always present especially with the

generational differences but she has not experienced any major ones in terms of the work

performance as proper management is utilized:

I don’t see that it changed it… any differently than a normal situation would’ve

changed the production. In my situation and the comments that I see, it had

nothing to do with necessary productivity or had to do with the Generation X or

the Baby Boomers, I don’t think I’ve had that experience, so I really haven’t

noticed a difference.

Minor Theme 1. Negative effect due to the lack of willingness to

communicate properly. The first minor theme that followed was the negative effect [on

the work performance] due to the lack of willingness to communicate properly. This

significant experience received three occurrences of the 15 responses of the participants

or 20% of the total sample population. P09II simply shared that work performance is

affected once there is a lack of willingness to accept orders to the older generations,

assigned by the younger generation:

A lack of willingness to accept that the instruction being provided is informed and

accurate and correct because the person delivering the message or giving the

instruction maybe younger and perceived as less authoritative or less informed or

less of an expert in some way or regard.

P13III added that as long as groups and issues are present, there would always be

negative results given the communication issues: “So whenever you have those clicks

from generation to generation you have communication problems, so if you have

communication problems, it’s gonna be some lag in the mission and performances.”

98
 Minor Theme 2. Negative effect due to the technology issues with the first

two generations. The second minor theme that followed was the negative effect on the

work performance due to the technology issues with the first two generations. This

significant experience received three occurrences of the 15 responses of the participants

or 20% of the total sample population. P09II shared another experience wherein the

older generations are hindered by the constant development of technology as compared to

the younger generation/s:

The non-Gen X, Gen Y/Millennials, always seem to have computer issues and

always seem to have something to prevent the work from getting done. And

sometimes it’s just as simple as the docking station wasn’t plugged into the wall,

so the battery died or the monitor was turned off. No, you don’t need a new

computer; you just need to turn your monitor on.

P11II again admitted that the technology issues of the older generation hinder the overall

work performance and environment:

I think the younger, with the computers, the knowledge that these young people

have is just unbelievable, and they’re not afraid of the computers. I think the older

generation, like me, when a conflict comes up, when something happens, I just

give up and call one of the younger ones to come over and help me, so I just give

up and say (you know) I don’t know what’s going on; help me. They normally

can come in and resolve the problem. I mean they’re just “Johnny on the spot”

there with technology, the younger generation.

Minor Theme 3. Knowing how to manage changes in the organization. The

third minor theme that followed was knowing how to manage changes in the

99
organization. This significant experience received just two occurrences of the 15

responses of the participants or 13% of the total sample population. P03I shared that as

long as leaders can recognize and manage the changes then the generational conflicts can

still be solved:

…oftentimes the older generations struggle with change... another spreadsheet,

another reporting tool, how is this gonna go; I really don’t like it because of a lot

of reasons. Why some of the other-older generations struggle in that area and

some of the Gen Y for instance and even Gen X, depending on what end of the

spectrum you’re on, they’re like ok, we recognize change, whether it’s technology

driven or whether it is... are you saying I can challenge the boundaries; sounds

good to me.

P05I added how managers should learn how to relate to the different generations

especially when change is constant:

Well, you just have to relate to them, especially when you’re talking to change,

it’s like we just have to accept it and have to relay it to them…I may not agree

with this; I may not like this style or what’s coming up with this new computer

system we have to use, but that’s part of it; that’s something that’s online. We

don’t have a choice; we have to adapt to it and move on.

P05I then suggested a usual practice that he employs when change cannot be avoided:

So it’s almost like sometimes you have to coach the older ones a little more than

the younger ones; they’ll grab it and go. Sometimes if you get the right one; it

depends on how they interact with the team. Sometimes you can get them into it

100
 and they can show how user friendly and easier to use, and they can sell it on the

others also.

Minor Theme 4. Overall negative effect due to the generational conflicts

present. Lastly, the fourth minor theme that followed was the overall negative effect due

to the generational conflicts present. This important experience received just one

occurrence of the 15 responses of the participants. P01I simply expressed that he has

experienced negative outcomes on the work performances of the officers given that

conflicts need to be addressed, which takes the time and effort instead of fulfilling work

for the organization:

Because of the conflicts that arise between the different generations, there really is a

burden on productivity because there are issues whereas nothing will get done until those

issues are resolved. I spend a lot of time, though called the contracts director is really a

personnel director because 95% of the day is personnel issues where as 5% is contracting

issues because of these conflicts and disagreements and all the things that happen during

the day…It’s time consuming. The second theme showed that conflicts can still be

managed by leaders who are effective. The minor themes showed that conflicts were

largely because of the differences in communication methods and technological skills and

knowledge. However, the minor themes also established that it is still possible for leaders

to manage these issues as long as they recognize these differences. However, the

managers still find conflicts cumbersome and negative.

Major Theme 3. Employment of proper communication

The third major theme of the study was based on the third and last investigative

research question of what are the experiences U.S. federal government managers in

101
diffusing the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational differences between Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials. It was discovered that the employment of

proper communication was the main method of the managers in solving the generational

differences and issues. This major theme received eight occurrences out of the 15

responses of the participants (Table 4). The third key experience established pertains to

the practice of having a proper and clear communication with the officers from the three

groups of generation to solve the current issues faced and potential problems that may

arise as well.

Table 4

The experiences of U.S. federal government managers in diffusing the challenges and

conflicts attributed to generational differences between Baby Boomers, Generation Xers

and Millennials

Thematic Label 3 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Employment of proper communication 8 53%

Participation in different leadership

5 33%
trainings

Individual management of conflicts and

5 33%
issues

Open-mindedness for changes and new

3 20%
ideas

Treat each generational group fairly and

2 13%
equally

102
Resolve conflicts as quickly as possible 1 7%

Overall, the third major theme was the employment of proper communication to

aid in resolving the generational differences and conflicts mentioned in the first two

investigative questions. The last major theme was also one of the most crucial findings

of the study. P02I stated how proper communication is a big factor in diffusing the

existing conflicts between the three generations; she also shared an example:

I’ve always had an open door, always communicating. I mean whether

professionally, personally, whatever we talk about, I try to treat all of them fairly,

the same, all the employees, and I think they just pretty much just come in the

door to see me, to talk about things… any rumors or if they get upset about their

teammate, or someone across on another team or something. You know we come

in, and they tell me; we’ll talk about it.

P09II shared that he took a course that helped them in communicating and

preparing for the generational differences present in the workplace:

Yea when I was first assigned, selected as a Supervisor, there’s a course that we

all took and two of them really. One is a lead course, and that…I think there’s a

handout that they even provided there that has kind of a list of perceived values of

the folks of each generation. And they made an effort to kind of communicate.

P09II again shared another experience where he learned the difference in communicating

between the older and younger generations:

Ok, so as far as managing conflict with folks that are within kind of the same, Gen

Y/Millennial type area, it’s a lot easier because I can be a little less formal with

103
 them and still get the point across…we have this rule and this rule is this and this

is why it’s there. I can just say, hey, you’re kinda backsliding a little on this, or

hey you’re doing a really good job; I appreciate it. And they tend to be much

more responsive to that less formal feedback, and I don’t see a lot of repetitive

issues pop up.

P04I shared that he used coaching and mentoring as another method to

communicate effectively with the employees from different generations:

I told you I do a lot of coaching/mentoring, to my team and not just my team, but

others in the building. I’ve been fortunate enough that while I was in uniform

prior to my last tour. When I came back as a civilian, I still knew a lot of people

in the building, old and new familiar face, and a lot of people still come to me

with their familiarity, friendliness, etc. When it comes to conflict, actually a lot of

them come to me for, like a sounding board or come to me for possible advice

because for some reason they think or they feel… they’re comfortable discussing

it with me.

P04I then addresses the issues and problems tapped to him by using his experiences and

sharing them with the younger ones:

And usually what I do is, I give them examples, so this is where I do take

advantage of the generation gap, where using either my own examples, and

especially for the, for the younger generation that they’re still lacking that

experience.

104
 P07II shared how he employs the proper communication of hearing the opinions

and perceptions of the employees from different generations; and then try to facilitate

accordingly to solve the generational differences:

(So) when you have a conflict, especially between the different age groups, the

best strategy that I’ve found is… again, everybody wants to be heard. I try to

bring both sides of the argument to the table, and then try to facilitate an

environment to where they’re understanding what the other person is saying and

vice versa, the other person is understanding their perspectives. Usually you can

get a compromise from that; then I always start conversations where conflict is at

the core of it, is to understand that the only time you can grow and evolve

mentally, is to incorporate a compromise and different perspectives.

P06II added that he has learned how to differentiate the communication methods

between the three groups; to listen and heed for their perceptions in order to solve the

conflicts as quickly as possible:

There’s been a few little things between a couple of the younger people and one

older person in particular, and it is related to kind of how they communicate with

each other, mainly just a breakdown in that, it’s one person taking something one

way that maybe it wasn’t intended that way. What I’ve tried to do, however, is

just look for some sort of mutual understanding, mutual ground where you can, as

far as listening to the sides of what’s going on, getting to the bottom of what’s at

fault for the conflict, and if you can find some sort of common ground and appeal

to that in both then develop a way that they can go forward and communicating in

a different way.

105
 Minor Theme 1. Participation in different leadership trainings. The first

minor theme that followed was the method of participating in different leadership

trainings. It was assumed that leadership training for managers where the goal was to

help manage the officers under them included taking into account generational

differences was part of the trainings received. The minor theme received five

occurrences of the 15 total sample population or 33%. P02I shared that they had a

leadership training to help in managing the conflicts: “We have the leadership training.”

P03I again explained how their training helped in the resolution of their conflicts: “In

cohort training you learn about leadership style and different things; we’ve talked about

conflict management and stuff like that.” P13III also emphasized that attending different

leadership courses can help in proper management of people especially given the

presence of conflicts between the generations:

Going through many leadership courses, personnel management type courses, but

I think the best part is learning. You learn more, you can take from one manager

what to do and what not to do, so that’s the magic of it.

Minor Theme 2. Individual management of conflicts and issues. The second

minor theme that followed was the method of individual management of conflicts and

issues. The minor theme received five occurrences of the 15 total sample population or

33%. P03I stated that another method of conflict diffusion would be to manage them in a

situational manner where the leader seeks to solve the issues according to the needs and

situations the other employees are in:

I didn’t seek any methods of conflict resolution. Part of that is you never know

until there is a conflict, so you just kind of manage it situationally. It’s called

106
 situational management to resolve conflict because to me every situation is

different, even when they’re the same because of the variables associated with

different people; one is the personalities and so forth and so on.

P11III described how she manages the conflicts within the organization, mainly

by assessing the employees individually and how to treat them properly:

Well, I just wanna treat people how I want to be treated, so I normally handle

conflict individually. I don’t like to start shooting bullets out to the entire

branch/section. I like to go pull the person aside and talk to that person

individually, and try to dissolve the issue one on one.

P14III stated how conflict management and methods depend on the officers being

managed and the conflict situation they are in:

I would say it depends on the person. Some people you can be a little more direct

with and tell them exactly how it is, and exactly how you know…the conflict is

not productive. And sometimes the conflict is good. You do have your good

conflict; it helps spring along different ideas that can help the workforce.

However, I could change the way I deal with conflict based on the person I’m

dealing with, so I could have some people you kinda have to baby them through.

Minor Theme 3. Open-mindedness for changes and new ideas. The third

minor theme that followed was the practice of open-mindedness for changes and new

ideas. This minor theme received three occurrences of the 15 total sample population or

20%. P05I explained how being available to the employees especially when there are

challenges and conflicts with an open mind allow better supervision of generational

differences:

107
 I would say just trying to be available. Try to be open to change and agree to

doing things that sometimes that may not necessarily be something that I would

do. Say for an example, if you give one of the Baby Boomers, if you want them

to handle something and then they come off with one of these young crazy ideas

that you’re like “Whoa, Whoa, Whoa”… sometimes if it’s not too bad you have to

go ahead and let it go anyway.

P11III highlighted how he has developed open-mindedness upon transitioning in

the position; this was the result of having faced enough conflicts and learning from them:

If a certain task isn’t done, or up to quality, you have to talk and discuss it. One of

the approaches to handling conflict is always try to be open; I have an open door

policy. I also like to give the reasons behind what I’m requesting, before just

deciding a task. I’ll detail the impact to our branch and the organization, why I’m

assigning it to them the way I’m building them up for future growth, so we don’t

have a lot of conflict.

Minor Theme 4. Treat each generational group fairly and equally. The fourth

minor theme that followed was the practice of treating each generational group fairly and

equally. The minor theme received two occurrences of the 15 total sample population or

13%. P06II described how he has learned to treat each generational group fairly and

equally:

I try to pick up the slack as much as I can myself, but not always possible, but yea

gotta always be mindful of if someone else is taking on more, they’re gonna be

looking around and saying well this person hasn’t been tasked with that sort of

108
 thing…so it’s always that fairness, that equitability...are you treating people fairly

but not necessarily the same.

P13III added how fair treatment along with respect can help in addressing the

generational issues present in their organization:

I set myself in an organization, every organization, I always come in, that I

manage is, I don’t need you to get along; I just need you to respect one another.

So, they don’t really have to like each other. Liking each other is a plus, but you

gotta respect each other and gotta realize the mission is bigger than us, so we got

a job to get done, so that’s how I approach things.

Minor Theme 5. Resolve conflicts as quickly as possible. The fifth and last

minor theme that followed was the practice of resolving conflicts as quickly as possible.

This minor theme received just one occurrence of the 15 total sample population or 7%.

P15III shared how he resolved the conflicts within the organization as quickly and

strategically as possible, to avoid them from getting worse:

I think my approach would be to deal with it direct and very quick. My approach

is to identify the cause, address, no problem gets better with time it has to be

resolved, and so I think my goal in my workplace, in my office is to resolve the

issue, address identify, address it and resolve it.

The third theme showed that leaders who manage these generational conflicts in the

federal government agencies improve their communication methods to do so. Minor

themes showed that participating in leadership training sessions to resolve conflicts,

treating conflicts individually and situationally, openly, fairly, and quickly is ideal.

109
 Researcher (Participant) Observations

Participant 01I

P01I was professional with a cool demeanor. He often leaned back and was

positioned in a relaxed manner. He was confident in his answers, but also seemed a bit

exaggerated. At times throughout, although there was insight obtained, he seemed to

have been self-promoting rather than just sharing experiences and observations. As far as

involvement/interactions with some team members in the “natural setting,” the actions

seemed a bit inconsistent with some of the claims. It did not seem that there was an

embracing of many of the employees, particularly the younger ones (Millennials).

Participant 02I & Participant 03I

This was a dual interview with two leaders. Although not anticipated, the

researcher had asked for assistance in recruiting others, so P02I had invited P03I to the

interview. Because of time constraints and the need for participants, the researcher

agreed to have the latter participant to join. Each gave separate answers for each

questions and some answers were different or from a different perspective.

P02I was very calm and collected. Only once or twice was she aggressive with

her answers, even when P03I interrupted (a few times). Often times P02I agreed with

P03I. Although she always had an answer and provided insight, it seemed that the

questions asked (or this opportunity) stimulated her experience and insight, meaning she

seemed to have noticed actions and interactions but did not seem to have thought much

about it, or articulated it. P02I was courteous although somewhat disconnected, but the

brief interaction the researcher witnessed was consistent with her comments.

110
 P03I was often aggressive in his responses, not destructively by any means but

very much constructive. He seemed very comfortable to be there, to answer/respond and

with his answers. He did interrupt P02I a few times, but it did not dampen the interview

or havoc the experience. It seemed that the interview stimulated some ideas, thoughts and

experiences, but it also appeared that he has had thoughts about this topic. Based on

observations, he acts accordingly as he expressed during the interview. He relates to his

team; he is open, courteous, and flexible.

Participant 04I

P04I was eager to share his experience and experiences throughout many years

(during his military and civilian experiences). He seemed a bit unsure at times and used

“umm/ahh/you know” excessively. P04I seemed to be honest and talked a lot even

though he veered from the exact question often. After he started to speak, he seemed

confident but often before commencing to answer did not seem very confident, which

appeared to be with the actual question being asked. Often the researcher had to ask

follow-up questions. His responses prompted responses. P04I seemed genuine, and it felt

that he was often “venting.” This interview was the longest, at 53 minutes. Even though

the researcher did not have the opportunity to observe him on the job (or natural setting),

comments made about him (from co-workers/subordinates) have been identical to his

claimed approach and interactions.

Participant 05I

P05I was relaxed and was sure to attempt to understand the content of the study

and the questions asked. He did not seem to have thought about this topic much, but he

did provide some insight. Often the researcher had to ask a follow-up question. He

111
seemed comfortable with the interview but a bit uncertain. His answers were vague and

often overlapped.

Participant 06II

P06II was calm, cool, and collected. He seemed comfortable but was certain to

ensure that he was responding as the researcher anticipated and became more relaxed

over the course of the interview. He often paused indicating his thoughtfulness and desire

to express accuracy. He seemed genuine and precise. He did not ramble. He clearly

articulated his experience and only elaborated where or when it was necessary.

Participant 07II

P07II is a military officer. He had nervous energy, but he seemed comfortable to

participate. His seated position did not change much throughout the interview. His

posture was consistent with his responses, direct and consistent. He did not have any

problems answering any of the questions, thought them through and seemed eager to to

respond.

Participant 08II

P08II seemed a bit nervous although it could have been his frustration with the

generalization (as he called it) of the generations and consequences thereof. He seemed

comfortable sharing and had no problem answering all the questions asked. Question #5

was inadvertently skipped. Therefore, the researcher requested P08II response via email.

He was a bit aggravated with the generalization of generations and how one generation is

perceived (particularly the Millennials). He even gave the idea that there should be

research or a study regarding discrimination against the younger generation(s). He was

adamant about this topic.

112
Participant 09II

P09II was calm and collected. He gave precise answers but involved answers. He

was sure to understand the questions. He gave examples, even personal examples

regarding generational differences and conflict, providing a vivid view of his

experiences. He did not express preconceived ideas just what he experienced. He was

eager to participate.

Participant 10II

P10II seemed to have observed much regarding generational differences and

conflict and thought about this topic in detail. She was very comfortable and collected,

eager to give her responses and gave precise careful responses. P10II listened to the

questions and answered them. She actually mentioned thoughts she has had about this

topic and had interesting questions for the researcher.

Participant 11III

During the interviews, there were technical difficulties, and P11II had already had

a long day, yet she was eager and willing to participate. She gave some insight, but it

was clear she has not had much thought about the differences or even much of the

conflict. She prided in enjoying working with the younger generation. She seemed

calmed but also a bit unsure often. The researcher had to reiterate the question or ask

follow-up questions often.

113
Participant 12III:

P12III was eager to answer the questions precisely and seemed quite comfortable.

She seemed to have been aware of her daily observations and was able to express them

and her experiences. Upon briefly observing P12III in her “natural setting,” she does

appear to connect with her team and was not reluctant to speak what she feels. Her

claims (in her responses) are believable.

Participant 13III

P13III is a military officer. He seemed comfortable and was eager to participate.

He seemed to have thought about generational differences and conflict management at

least briefly. Most of his answers were precise. A few times the researcher did have to

repeat the questions or ask a follow-up question.

Participant 14III

Initially P14III seemed a bit uncomfortable and/or hesitant, which could have

been due to the spontaneous request for her participation. She gave precise answers and

seemed comfortable with them. Most were not very long or involved. Some answers,

however, were not clear. The researcher asked her to speak into the microphone, as this

was a Skype interview. She did but often it was difficult to understand her responses on

the recording. This was the shortest interview at 13 minutes. She seemed more relaxed

and comfortable midway the interview.

Participant 15III

P15III seemed interested in the topic and very interested in participating. Before

the interview there were some delays, but the interview was conducted very comfortably.

He provided some involved answers, some not so involved. He is former military. The

114
researcher had to repeat or ask a follow-up question a few times, but he seemed confident

in his responses, shared experiences and observation, and provided some insight.

Limitations of data collection. The researcher intended to collect multiple forms

of data at the three different sites. Each site was a distinct U.S. federal agency. Prior to

collecting data, a letter was submitted to each distinct U.S. federal agency requesting

permission to interview participants, to observe participants, and to collect archival data.

The first federal agency gave permission to interview participants and placed the

following limitations concerning the interviews: (a) the researcher could not act in either

a personal capacity or as a U.S. government employee during this study, (b) solicitation

and participation of U.S. federal agency employees were to occur on their personal time,

(c) no activities pertaining to this study were to occur in the work place, and (d) any

activities pertaining to this study were not to imply that the U.S. federal agency endorsed

the study. The second federal agency did not have an agreement with the human

protection office; therefore, it had to adhere to the first limitations provided by the first

federal agency. The third federal agency gave permission to interview and observe

participants and to collect archival data; however, observing participants and collecting

archival data were not feasible because the agency was located in another part of the

United States. With this in mind, participants from the third federal agency were

interviewed via Skype. Based on the above-stated procedural and geographic limitations,

archival data could not be collected and observations did not occur.

Summary

Chapter 4 provided the overall analysis and results of the transcendental

phenomenological study of the interviews with the 15 U.S. government federal managers.

115
The researcher then used participants’ responses to generate and establish the major and

minor themes for the thematic analysis, using NVivo10 when necessary. The researcher

discovered three major themes in addressing the main investigative research question of:

What is the experience of U.S. federal government managers in managing workplace

conflicts attributed to generational differences among the Baby Boomers, Generation

Xers, and the Millennials who work together in one agency? Based on the thematic

analysis, the main conflict discovered and experienced was the (a) difference in work

goals, ethics, and attitudes between the three generations. The second experience in

managing the effects of workplace generational conflicts on work performance was that

there were no (b) conflicts in work performances are acceptable as long as leaders know

how to manage effectively. Finally, the experiences U.S. federal government managers

in diffusing the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational differences between

Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials were the (c) employment of proper

communication. In Chapter 5, the researcher will discuss the results of the study and

provide interpretations, implications, conclusions, and recommendations for future

research.

116
 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

Chapter 5 provides a summary of the results, a discussion of the results, a

discussion of the conclusions, the limitations of this study, recommendations for further

study, and final conclusions. Within the summary of the results section, the researcher

restates the research problem, discusses the significance of this study in regard to the

phenomenon under investigation, identifies recent literature concerning the topic,

describes the methodology of this study, and provides a thorough summary of the

findings. For the discussion of the results section, the researcher interprets the results of

this study in relation to the research questions, discusses the theoretical implications of

the results, and briefly identifies the limitations of this study.

Within the discussion of the conclusions section, the researcher compares and

contrasts the results of this study with those of other researchers, determines if the results

of this study support, confirm, or refute those of other researchers, discusses the

implications of the conclusions in the target setting, and provides a scholarly rationale for

the conclusions. In the limitations section, the researcher provides thorough descriptions

of this study’s limitations and identifies ways in which future research can facilitate a

comprehensive understanding of the topic. For the recommendations for further study

section, the researcher discusses how future research can address limitations and

117
delimitations. In the conclusion section, the researcher reflects on what she learned

concerning intergenerational conflict within one branch of the federal government.

Summary of the Results

The Research Problem

As stated in Chapter 1, the distinct values, desires, preferences, beliefs, and

behaviors of individuals who represented different generational cohorts—Baby Boomers,

Generation Xers, and Millennials—created conflict in the workforce and challenged

managers' leadership styles in one branch of the federal government. Although

researchers investigated intergenerational conflict and strategies that effectively managed

conflict across various industries (Hammill, 2005; Hannam & Yordi, 2011; Hui-Chun &

Miller, 2005), they had not investigated the same phenomena within three agencies of the

DoD. By focusing on the lived experiences of 15 managers within three DoD agencies,

the researcher was able to gain an in-depth understanding of intergenerational conflict

and strategies for managing conflict within the target setting and contribute to the overall

body of knowledge concerning the topic.

Significance of the Study

Because organizations are transitioning from a hierarchical power structure to a

flat power structure (Graves, 2013; Harber, 2011), individuals who represent three

distinct generational cohorts are working together, resulting in a multigenerational

workforce (DelCampo et al., 2012; K. A. Williams, 2011). The differing values, goals,

beliefs, preferences, and experiences of the generational cohorts and the need for

collaboration to occur among them have led to intergenerational conflict within

organizations (Bowes, 2012; Graves, 2013).

118
Literature

Distinct political, social, and economical events inform the beliefs, values, and

goals of each generational cohort (Bransford, 2011; Hui-Chun & Miller, 2005; Luby,

2012). The beliefs, values, and goals of each generational cohort impact its attitude

regarding work-related issues and performance. A review of the related literature

revealed differences in beliefs, values, and goals among a multigenerational workforce

that includes Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials (Bransford, 2011; Gursoy

et al., 2008; Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010). Within the current workforce, these differences

negatively affect interpersonal interactions and the overall work environment, resulting in

conflict among generations (Gargoline, 2012; Graves, 2013).

Because intergenerational conflict is inevitable within a multigenerational cohort,

organizations have focused on implementing strategies for effectively managing

intergenerational differences (Gargoline, 2012; Graves, 2013). These strategies include

addressing conflict before it occurs, developing an understanding of the perspective of

each person or group, and respecting the values and belief of each generational cohort

(Bowes, 2012; Sikes et al., 2010; Wienclaw, 2015). Researchers who investigated the

phenomenon of intergenerational conflict in the workforce during the data collection

phase of this study supported the appropriateness of these strategies (Choi & Rainey,

2014).

Methodology

To increase the scope of knowledge regarding intergenerational conflict within

three agencies of the U.S. DoD and to answer this study’s main research question and its

related investigative questions, the researcher explored the lived experiences of 15 DoD

119
managers who had experience leading and managing Baby Boomers, Generation Xers,

and Millennials. After considering the study’s main research question, its overall purpose,

and the gap in the literature, the researcher believed that a phenomenological design

would allow participants to provide an in-depth descriptions of their experiences. A

phenomenological design is appropriate when researchers seek to describe the essence of

the phenomenon under investigation from the perspectives of individuals who have

firsthand knowledge and experience concerning the phenomenon (Heidegger, 1972;

Moustakas, 1994).

Within the discipline of phenomenology, there are two distinct approaches:

transcendental and hermeneutical (Van Manen, 1990; Van Manen, 2007). While

researchers who incorporate the transcendental approach describe the essence of

individuals’ experiences, those who utilize a hermeneutical interpret the essence of

individuals’ experiences (Bentz & Rehorick, 2008; Van Manen, 1990). For this

phenomenological study, the researcher utilized a transcendental approach. To facilitate

the selection of participants who had experience managing a multigenerational cohort, the

researcher utilized random purposeful sampling procedures.

Summary of the Findings

The researcher investigated the phenomenon of intergenerational conflict within

one branch of the federal government based on the perspectives of 15 U.S. government

managers. The U.S. government managers had varying amounts of managerial

experience, ranging from to two years to 20 years. By including managers who worked

for three different agencies and had varying amounts of experience, the researcher was

able to provide a comprehensive perspective of the phenomenon. The researcher used a

120
thematic analysis to determine the major themes and their related minor themes that

addressed the main research question and the three investigative research questions.

The first major theme was the difference in work goals, ethics, and attitudes

between the three generations. The related minor themes were as follows: (a) lack of

willingness to adapt to changes for the older generation, (b) conflict of the traditional and

modern methods within the organization, (c) generations are threatened by the presence

of one another, (d) social interaction issues between the majority and minority of the

groups, and (e) lack of command for the Millennials.

The second major theme was conflicts in work performances were acceptable as

long as leaders knew how to manage effectively. The related minor themes were as

follows: (a) negative effect due to the lack of willingness to communicate properly, (b)

negative effect due to the technology issues with the first two generations, (c) knowing

how to manage changes in the organization, and (d) overall negative effect due to the

generational conflicts present. The third major theme was the employment of proper

communication. The related minor themes were as follows: (a) participation in different

leadership trainings, (b) individual management of conflicts and issues, (c) open-

mindedness for changes and new ideas, (d) treat each generational group fairly and

equally, and (e) resolve conflicts as quickly as possible.

121
 Discussion of the Results

The results of this study are significant in answering the research question and

three investigative questions. Throughout this section, the researcher discusses the three

major themes identified through data analysis. These themes provide insight to the lived

experiences of the managers. Using each of the three major themes, as well as its related

minor themes, the researcher answers the following research question: “What is the

experience of US Federal Government Managers in managing workplace conflicts

attributed to generational differences among the Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and

Millennials who work together in an Agency?” At the conclusion of the discussion of the

results, the researcher will identify the limitations of this study.

Difference in Work Goals, Ethics, and Attitudes Between the Three Generations.

Each of the managers described their experiences and observations by contrasting

the different generations and sharing their challenges, experiences, and observations. The

differing goals, ethics, and attitudes were prevalent as 12 out the 15 participants had

significant contributions. This was impactful because at the beginning of the semi-

structured interviews, the researcher perceived that many of the managers had not

considered the difference between the three generations nor had they considered the

potential for conflict within the workforce. However, by experiencing the differences,

managers realized they needed to modify their leadership styles and to adapt their

techniques. They also believed that modifying leadership styles and adapting techniques

would be an ongoing process, but doing these things would enable them to manage the

older generation’s lack of willingness to adapt to changes and the conflicts of traditional

and modern methods within the organization.

122
Conflicts in Work Performances Are Acceptable as Long as Leaders Know How to

Manage Effectively.

Despite their best efforts to accept and appreciate differences among the

generations and to create an environment in which various generational cohorts felt

appreciated and accepted, 10 of the 15 managers believed conflict in the workforce was

inevitable due to an unwillingness to communicate properly and technological issues with

the two older generational cohorts. This realization prompted the participants to stress the

importance of acknowledging rather than ignoring conflict and making all generational

cohorts feel accepted and appreciated.

Employment of Proper Communication.

More than half of the participants believed that the employment of proper

communication reduced the prevalence of negativity towards generational differences.

Participants provided unique perspectives of strategies that diffused the challenges and

conflicts associated with generational differences in the workforce. These strategies

included providing a means for members of each generation to express themselves,

conveying a willingness to be open-minded to change, acknowledging that generational

differences exist and impact the workforce, communicating more efficiently and

effectively, and making the necessary sacrifices to become an effective manager.

Summary of Results in Relation to Research Question

The researcher found that managers experienced differences in work goals, ethics,

and attitudes between the three generations and these differences would inevitably lead to

conflict; however, there was no impact on work performance when managers modified

leadership styles, adapted techniques, addressed conflict immediately, cultivated a respect

123
for generational differences, and encouraged open dialogue between managers and

members of the various generational cohorts. Based on the differences experienced by the

managers, the researcher believed that Baby Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials

displayed the characteristics of both individualism and collectivism. Managers who

sought opportunities to improve leadership skills increased their capabilities to manage

intergenerational conflict. Noteworthy was the importance that DoD managers placed on

communication as one of the characteristics associated with being able to manage

effectively and as the primary way in which to reduce the prevalence of negativity

towards generational differences.

Limitations of the Study

The limitations of the current study were as follows: (a) accuracy and credibility

of results, (b) the generalizability of findings, (c) a limited sample size, (d) the use of

purposeful random sampling procedures, and (e) the subjectivity of interpreting

participants’ experiences. Of these five limitations, the researcher concluded that

insufficient data influenced the overall accuracy and credibility of results. As stated in

Chapter 3, the researcher intended to utilize a triangulated approach to collect data that

included semi-structured interviews, brief observations, and archived data; however, the

researcher was unable to observe participants in their natural setting and to collect

archival data because of either geographical constraints or procedural restrictions

imposed by two of the federal agencies. The ability to observe participants in their natural

setting and to review archival data would have provided a more comprehensive

understanding of intergenerational conflict and strategies for managing workplace

conflicts and differences among a multigenerational workforce who work for three

124
different agencies of one department of the federal government. The researcher provides

a more thorough discussion of the above-stated limitations towards the end of this

chapter.

Implication of the Study Results

The researcher concluded that managers from three distinct U.S. DoD agencies

must have a comprehensive skill set to manage a multigenerational workforce effectively.

First, they must have an acute understanding of the distinct work goals, ethics, and

attitudes of each generational cohort. By understanding the goals, ethics, and attitudes of

each generational cohort, managers can utilize appropriate motivational strategies,

provide appropriate levels of support to employees who are struggling to adapt to

changes within the organization, and facilitate effective interpersonal communication

among members of a multigenerational workforce.

Second, U.S. federal managers must possess the ability to manage conflict

effectively. They manage conflict effectively by recognizing that workplace conflicts are

inevitable due to generational differences. They also ensure that conflict does not impact

individual and organizational performance by placing an emphasis on solving the

problem rather than fixing the individual, utilizing proper management techniques,

participating in regular conflict resolution training, and incorporating motivation

strategies aimed at improving both individual and organizational outcomes. Prior

research suggested that these leadership characteristics aligned with the transformational

leadership style (Bass, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 2004).

Third, managers must utilize effective communication strategies when diffusing

the challenges and conflicts attributed to generational differences between Baby

125
Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials. These communication strategies include

promoting open and respectful dialogue among members of the various generational

cohorts, actively listening to others, acknowledging others’ perspectives, and modeling

appropriate interpersonal behaviors. For current and aspiring managers, the federal

government should provide leadership training that focuses on developing the requisite

skills to manage intergenerational conflict effectively within its workforce.

Difference in Work Goals, Ethics, and Attitudes

The first major theme experienced by managers was the difference in work goals,

ethics, and attitudes between the three generations. Specifically, P01I stated the conflict

was the difference in work goals and attitudes between the older generations: Baby

Boomers and Generation Xers versus the Millennials. This finding is similar to that of R.

J. Schultz and Schwepker (2012) and Hannam and Yordi (2011) who found a difference

in the work goals, ethics, and attitudes of each generational cohort across various

industries. Within the sales industry, R. J. Schultz and Schwepker (2012) found

Millennials, the youngest generation, desired a balance between their work and personal

life whereas Baby Boomers, the oldest generation, sought rapid advancement and were

work-centric. The researcher also identified five minor themes within this first major

theme.

Lack of willingness to adapt to changes. The first minor theme identified was

the conflict experience of the lack of willingness to adapt to changes for the older

generation. This finding supports previous research that found Baby Boomers, regarded

as the oldest generation within the workforce, were resistant to change (Eisner, 2005). In

regard to Generation Xers, Gursoy et al. (2008) stated, “They are set in their ways. They

126
do not like change” (p. 454). P10II concluded that Baby Boomers and Millennials had

contrasting perspectives regarding change in the workplace. While Baby Boomers

staunchly opposed change, Millennials readily endorsed and embraced change.

Conflict of the traditional and modern methods. The second minor theme was

conflict of the traditional and modern methods within the organization. As P12II

suggested, there was a challenge when transitioning from a hierarchical management

system to a flat one. Baby Boomers had become accustomed to a hierarchical power

structure whereas Baby Boomers were acclimated to the flat power structure (Brooks,

2010; Langdon, 2012; Mclean, 2014; R. W. Schultz, 2010). The characteristics of the

hierarchical power structure align with the transactional leadership style; in contrast, the

characteristics of the flat power structure conform to the transformational leadership style

(Bass, 1999; Burns, 1978; Twenge, 2010). The distinct values, goals, beliefs, behaviors,

communication styles, preferences, and these distinct generational cohorts and the need

for unilateral collaboration within organizations increase the likelihood of conflicts

within an organization (Allah, 2011; Harber, 2011; Cannon & Broach, 2011). With

respect to the target settings, conflicts between the traditional and modern methods were

present.

Generations threatened by the presence of one another. The third minor theme

was that generations felt threatened by the presence of one another. The findings of

Kersten (2002) provide insight into why each generation perceived the other as a threat.

She asserted that the extent of generational differences have increased in the last half

century with respect to interpersonal communication and prompted a closer examination

of the perceived gender gap. Kersten reasoned that developing an acute awareness of

127
each generation’s preferences allows individuals to view others “on a less personal level”

(para. 24).

The generations felt threatened by one another in a distinct manner as each

generation possessed unique skills, strengths, and experiences. The Baby Boomers felt

threatened by the technological expertise and the adaptability of the Millennials and to a

lesser extent those same skills in Generations Xers. Conversely, the Generation Xers and

Millennials felt threatened by the level of experience of Baby Boomers, with Millennials

feeling a greater threat than the Generation Xers. Hence, the youngest generation

(Millenials) and the oldest generation (Baby Boomers) felt the strongest threats between

one another.

Social interaction issues. The fourth minor theme was social interaction issues

found between the majority and minority of the groups. Comperatore and Nerone (2011)

attributed the interpersonal issues within the workforce to the distinct perspective that

each generational cohort has regarding its job responsibilities. They believed that creating

a work environment that encourages and cultivates honest dialogue among generational

cohorts mitigates the possibility of interpersonal conflicts. Comperatore and Nerone

concluded that individuals, irrespective of their age, have a desire to be successful and to

advance in their organizations. Effective leaders recognize individuals’ desire to succeed

and to advance and create an environment that facilitates individual and organizational

growth (Bass, 1999).

Lack of command for the Millennials. The final minor theme was a lack of

command for the Millennials. This finding is consistent with that of Gursoy et al. (2008)

and Luby (2012). Gursoy et al. (2008) found that Baby Boomers believed they should

128
have autonomy within the workplace because of their dedication to the organization and

the long hours they worked while Generation Xers believed that effective performance

should lead to job promotions. In regard to members of the youngest generational cohort,

Baby Boomers believed that Millennials needed to “pay their dues” (Luby, 2012, p. 35).

Within the target setting, the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers displayed a lack of

command towards Millennials who served as leaders within the organization. This lack of

command was particularly evident during face-to-face interactions as Baby Boomers and

Generation Xers perceived that the age of the Millennials precluded them from serving as

managers.

Conflicts in Work Performances

The second major theme identified was conflicts in work performances were

acceptable as long as leaders knew how to manage effectively. This finding is consistent

with that of Sikes et al. (2010), Wienclaw (2015), and Meyer (2004). By utilizing

effective conflict resolution strategies and approaches, leaders improve individual and

group performance (Sikes et al., 2010). Wienclaw (2015) concluded, “The lack of

necessary skills for diplomatic communication can escalate a conflict situation and result

in less motivation for effective communication in the future” (p. 745). P01I perceived

that managing a multigenerational workforce is challenging, but if the leader manages the

issues, everything will turn out well. P07II shared that there was no effect on the work

performance as long as the leaders knew how to manage and approach the issues with

their officers from different generations. P08II believed that understanding individuals’

goals and desires enhanced a leader’s ability to manage conflict effectively and to

129
improve their overall performance. The researcher also found four minor themes within

this second major theme.

Negative effect due to the lack of willingness to communicate properly. The

first minor theme identified was the negative effect on work performance due to the

unwillingness of the older generation to accept orders from the younger generation. P09II

perceived that the older generation was unwilling to accept directives from the younger

generation. P09II attributed the older generation’s lack of willingness to accept orders to

its belief that the younger generation had less experience and a lower level of expertise.

This finding is consistent with that of Gursoy et al. (2008), who concluded that Baby

Boomers, the oldest generation in the workforce, perceived that Generation X managers,

the second oldest generation, lacked both the experience and expertise to manage.

Negative effect due to the technology issues with the first two generations.

The second minor theme identified was the negative effect due to the technology issues

with the Baby Boomers and Generation Xers. P09II perceived that the evolution of

technology hindered productivity of both Baby Boomer and Generation Xers. This

finding supports previous research that found Baby Boomers and Generation Xers did not

have the same level of technological proficiency as Millennials (Eisner, 2005; Hannam &

Yordi, 2011; Wesner & Miller, 2008). Eisner (2005) asserted that the older generations

disliked change and technology transformed the workplace. With respect to the target

setting, Millennials had no issues adapting to rapid technological change and the

increasing prevalence of technology; in contrast, Baby Boomers and Generation Xers

were inflexible to technological innovation and resistant to the ubiquity of technology.

130
Consequently, Baby Boomers and Generation Xers impeded organizational performance

and negatively impacted the overall work environment.

Knowing how to manage changes in the organization. The third minor theme

was knowing how to manage changes in the organization. Previous research found

profound changes and challenges within in the workplace (Hannam & Yordi, 2011).

These changes and challenges include rapid technological advancements, an aging

workforce, and a transition from a hierarchical power structure to a flat one (DelCampo

et al., 2012; Graves, 2013; Hannam, & Yordi, 2011; K. A. Williams, 2011). The ability to

manage these changes and challenges mitigates the potential for intergenerational conflict

within the workplace and improves organizational outcomes (Bass, 1999; Bowes, 2012;

Hillman, 2013). Bass (1999) concluded imaginative, empathetic, and adaptive leadership

guided positive change and lessened the anxiety associated with change in the workplace.

P03I perceived that managers could resolve generational conflicts. P05I believed the

manager’s interpersonal methods influenced the willingness of a multigenerational

workforce to accept change. With this in mind, knowing how to manage changes within

three distinct federal agencies requires managers to articulate clearly the need for changes

and the outcomes associated with these changes. This strategy is especially important

when managers interact with members of the older generations, which includes Baby

Boomers and Generation Xers.

Overall negative effect due to the generational conflicts present. The overall

negative effect due to the presence of generational conflicts found in this study aligns

with the findings of Hillman (2013) and Myers and Sadaghiani (2010). Hillman found

that intergenerational conflict negatively impacted productivity. The negative effect of

131
generational conflict has a profound effect on Millennials’ productivity and “their ability

to develop effective organizational relationships” (Myers & Sadaghiani, 2010, p. 226).

P01I cited the negative impact that unresolved issues had on organizational productivity.

To mitigate the overall negative effect due to generational conflicts, managers should

recognize and address intergenerational conflicts immediately as doing so would increase

the performance of the three target agencies and the Millennials.

Employment of Proper Communication

The third major theme was the employment of proper communication. This was

the main method that managers utilized to resolve generational differences and issues.

This finding is in agreement with that of Bowes (2012) and Hillman (2013) who

concluded that open and appropriate communication mitigates the potential for

generational conflict within the work setting. P08II found that cultivating an environment

in which individuals not only listen but also understand each other’s perspectives

provides the foundation for compromise and for personal and professional growth. Other

strategies for solving issues pertaining to generational differences included the following:

“A generationally based education/training intervention, as directed by the leader, is a

major factor in reducing generational conflict and leads to a more productive work

environment” (p. 112). The response of P04I supported the utilization of training in

preparing for the generational differences in the workplace. Prior to assuming a

supervisor position within the organization, P041 perceived a mandatory course provided

a clear understanding of the perceived values of each generation. One of the primary

themes of the course was the presence of three distinct generations working together for

the first time. The researcher also found five minor themes within this third major theme.

132
 Participation in different leadership trainings. The belief that participation in

different leadership trainings helped managers manage conflicts between the generations

corroborates the findings of Behfar et al. (2008) and Nelson and Quick (2011), who

found training that increased leaders’ awareness of generational differences, improved

interpersonal communication between generational cohorts, and cultivated a respect for

others’ beliefs, attitudes, and preferences. Improved interpersonal communication and the

development of mutual respect between generations increase job satisfaction and

employee performance (Nelson & Quick, 2011; Von Bonsdorff, 2011). P13III believed

that participating in leadership trainings provided an opportunity to learn from other

managers. With this in mind, providing leadership training helps managers from three

distinct federal agencies resolve intergenerational conflicts. In addition to helping resolve

intergenerational conflicts, the leadership training provides an opportunity for managers

to interact and to gain insight into how other managers resolve conflict within their

agencies.

Individual management of conflicts and issues. The method of individual

management of conflicts and issues was the second minor theme. P03I and P11III would

manage conflicts situationally and individually. Similarly, Wienclaw (2015)

recommended that leaders adopt a situational conflict management style. The author

supported this assertion by stating the level of cooperation and motivation determines the

conflict management style. In contrast, prior research supported a collaborative conflict

management style when resolving issues in the workplace (Miller, 2010; Sikes et al.,

2010). Within three distinct federal agencies, the management of conflict and issues

between generations requires managers to incorporate situational and individual

133
approaches; in addition, they need to have a keen understanding of how individuals’

communication preferences influence the type of conflict resolution approach managers

utilize.

Open-mindedness for changes and new ideas. The third minor theme was open-

mindedness for changes and new ideas. P05I and P11III believed that open-mindedness,

which included trying something new or listening to a new idea, cultivated growth and

minimized conflict. Active listening is a critical component in creating a workplace

environment that fosters individual and organizational growth and that resolves conflict

(Cloke & Goldsmith, 2013). Therefore, managers promote open-mindedness for change

and new ideas by being available to employees and encouraging employees to share

ideas. The managers’ open-mindedness for change and new ideas also mitigates the

potential for conflict and issues between generations.

Treat each generational group fairly and equally. The finding that each

generational group desired fair and equal treatment aligns with Bernstein et al. (2008),

who found “everyone wants to be treated with fairness and respect and have a sense that

they are making a contribution” (p. 18). Bernstein et al. further concluded that members

of each generational cohort wanted not only monetary incentives and fringe benefits but

also fair and respectful treatment and the knowledge that they contributed to the overall

success of the organization. P13III perceived that a willingness to treat others with

respect could help address generational differences in the workplace. This finding

suggests that U.S. DoD managers’ ability to treat each generational group fairly and

equally enables them to address generational issues effectively; in addition, adopting the

134
perspective that organizational goals take precedence over personal goals and treating

others with respect reduce intergenerational conflict within three U.S. DoD agencies.

Resolve conflicts as quickly as possible. The final minor theme was resolve

conflicts as quickly as possible. Previous research found that implementing a conflict

resolution process, providing a forum for employees to discuss potential work-related

issues, and teaching different conflict resolution strategies maximizes team effectiveness

(Perkins, 2010). Masters and Albright (2001) found that unresolved conflict could lead

to workplace violence. P15III stressed the importance of resolving conflicts in an

expedient and precise manner. In regard to the target settings, resolving conflicts as

quickly as possible minimizes generational conflicts and discord within the target

settings.

Limitations

The researcher identified five limitations. As noted earlier in this chapter, the

researcher was unable to observe participants in their natural setting and to collect

archival data from the three DoD agencies. The inability to deeply observe U.S. DoD

managers and to collect archival data from the three U.S. agencies impacted the accuracy

and credibility of findings. By including multiple forms of data, the researcher would

have provided a more thorough understanding of the lived experiences of U.S. DoD

managers and how they managed workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generation

Xers, and Millennials. Another limitation was the generalizability of this study’s findings.

By focusing only on the experiences of managers from three agencies within the DoD,

the researcher limited the ability to generalize the findings of this study to other settings

and populations.

135
 The next two limitations were this study’s limited sample size and the use of

purposeful random sampling procedures. In order to provide an in-depth description of

managers’ experiences, the researcher limited the scope of this study to 15 participants

and included only participants who experienced the phenomenon in the natural setting.

Limiting the scope of this study and including only participants who had firsthand

experience and knowledge of the phenomenon limited the ability to generalize findings to

other settings and populations. The final limitation was the subjectivity of interpreting

participants’ experiences thereby making it difficult to establish credibility and

verification. To address this limitation, the researcher developed a valid and reliable 14-

question interview instrument and then conducted field-testing with five individuals who

had experience conducting face-to-face interviews. These five individuals were not

participants in this study, and they did not work for any of the three DoD agencies.

Delimitations

To provide a comprehensive understanding of intergenerational conflict within

three agencies of the DoD, the researcher limited the scope of this study in the following

two areas: participants and setting. To participate in this study, participants had to have

experience managing a multigenerational cohort comprised of Baby Boomers,

Generations Xers, and Millennials. In addition to having experience managing a

multigenerational cohort, participants had to have at least one year of managerial

experience at one of the three DoD agencies. The researcher excluded participants who

had either no experience managing a cohort that included all three generational cohorts or

a personal relationship with the researcher. With respect to the setting of this study, the

researcher only included managers from three agencies within the DoD.

136
 Recommendations for Further Research

Although this phenomenological study contributed to the overall body of

knowledge regarding the differences in work goals, ethics, and attitudes between the

three generations and possible strategies for addressing intergenerational conflict within

three agencies of the DoD, the inability to observe participants in their natural setting and

to collect archival data influenced the credibility of findings. To provide a more

comprehensive understanding of the lived experiences of U.S. DoD managers, future

research should incorporate additional data collection methods, including observations of

participants in their natural settings and multiple semi-structured interviews with

participants.

Although the DoD managers perceived there were differences in work goals,

ethics, and values among generational cohorts, they did not elucidate the distinct goals,

ethical values, and attitudes of each generational cohort. Therefore, one recommendation

would be to conduct a similar study that promotes a more concise understanding of each

generational cohort’s goals, values, and attitudes and expand the study using quantitative

methods to compliment/validate the findings.

As noted in the delimitations section of this document, the researcher limited the

scope of this study to managers who had at least one year of experience managing a

multigenerational cohort at one of the three DoD agencies. With this in mind, another

recommendation is for further research to investigate intergenerational conflict from the

perspectives of both managers and employees who work for other DoD agencies, other

government agencies, and other companies within the private sector. The final

recommendation for further research is to identify and explicate the interpersonal and

137
intrapersonal communication strategies U.S. DoD managers employ to solve the issues

caused by generational differences.

Conclusions

The purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study was to understand the

lived experiences of 15 U.S. DoD government managers and how they managed

workplace conflicts among Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and Millennials. By

understanding how generational differences contributed to conflict within the DoD and

by identifying strategies that U.S DoD managers utilized to minimize conflict, the

researcher was able to answer the following research question: “What is the experience of

U.S. federal government managers in managing workplace conflicts attributed to

generational differences among the Baby Boomers, Generations Xers, and the Millennials

who work together in one agency?”

Using a seven-step data analysis process, the researcher identified three major

themes and 14 minor themes from the in-depth interviews with 15 U.S. DoD managers.

None of the identified themes conflicted with any of the themes identified in the

literature. The researcher was able to expand the knowledge of how generational

differences contributed to conflict and what strategies minimized conflict within three

DoD agencies. Each manager clearly expressed their experience in managing workplace

conflicts due to generational differences, although some managers had not analyzed the

origin of the conflicts. The lack of training was a major consensus among the different

generations of managers.

By understanding that generational differences contributed to workplace conflicts,

managers were able to identify strategies that managed the effects of conflict on work

138
performance and diffused the challenges and conflicts among the cohorts (Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers, and Millennials). These strategies included utilizing proper

communication, conveying a willingness to be open-minded, acknowledging rather than

ignoring conflict, and channeling discord into productive results. In addition, the

researcher, as well as the managers, reached the conclusion that a more transformational

style of leadership is more inclusive and collaborative, and therefore, more effective

within three agencies of the Department of Defense.

139
 REFERENCES

Adams, C., & Van Manen, M. (2008). Phenomenology. In L.M. Given (Ed.), The Sage

Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods (pp.615-620). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Ajjawi, R., & Higgs, J. (2007). Using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate how

experienced practitioners learn to communicate clinical reasoning. The

Qualitative Report, 12, 612-638.

Allah, H. B. (2011). The influence of multigenerational cohorts on organizational

leadership: A phenomenological study (Doctoral dissertation). Available from

ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3462490)

American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). (n.d). Leading a multigenerational

workforce. Retrieved from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org/cs/misc/leading a

multigenerational workforce.pdf

Angeline, T. (2011). Managing generational diversity at the workplace: Expectations and

perceptions of different generations of employees. African Journal of Business

Management, 5, 249-255. doi:10.5897/AJBM10.335

Armstrong, N. B. (2010). Team member perspectives on individualism-collectivism:

Generational differences and their perceived impact on teams (Doctoral

dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI

No. 3427231)

140
Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational

leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9-

32. doi:10.1080/135943299398410

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Manual and

sampler set (3rd ed.). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.

Behfar, K., Peterson, R., Mannix, E., & Trochim, W. (2008). The critical role of conflict

resolution in teams: A close look at the links between conflict type, conflict

management strategies, and team outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93,

170-188. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.170

Bennett, J., Pitt, M., & Price, S. (2012). Understanding the impact of generational issues

in the workplace. Facilities, 30(7/8), 278-288.

Bentz, V. M., & Rehorick, D. A. (2008). Transformative phenomenology a scholarly

scaffold for practitioners. In D. A. Rehorick & V. M. Bentz (Eds.),

Transformative phenomenology (pp. 3–31). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Bernstein, L., Alexander, D., & Alexander, B. (2008). Generations: Harnessing the

potential of the multigenerational workforce. The Catalyst, 37(3), 17-18.

Bhattacharya, S. (2010). Resolving conflict at work. Business Today, 19(9), 127-129.

Borges, N., Manuel, S., Elam, C., & Jones, B. (2010). Differences in motives between

Millennial and Generation X medical students. Medical Education, 44(6), 570–

576.

Bowes, L. M. (2012). Multi-generational differences: Bridging the gap (Master’s thesis).

Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 1551875)

141
Bransford, A. A. (2011). Generations: The dividing line between preferences for

leadership styles (master’s thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and

Theses database. (UMI No. 1493630)

Braungart, R. G., & Braungart, M. M. (1986). Life-course and generational politics.

Annual Review of Sociology, 12, 205-231.

Brooks, C. E. (2010). Action research: Interventions for helping leaders use groups to

affect conflict between workforce generations (Doctoral dissertation). Available

from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3407429)

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Cannon, M. M., & Broach, D. (2011). Studies of next generation air traffic control

specialists: Why be an air traffic controller? (No. DOT/FAA/AM-11/12).

Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Aerospace

Medicine.

Capozzoli, T. K. (1999). Conflict resolution-a key ingredient in successful

teams. Supervision, 60, 14-16.

Chen, P.., & Choi, Y. (2008). Generational differences in work values: A study of

hospitality management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality

Management, 20(6), 595-615.

Choi, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2014). Organizational fairness and diversity management in

public organizations does fairness matter in managing diversity? Review of Public

Personnel Administration, 34(4), 307-331.

142
Chou, S. Y. (2012). Millennials in the workplace: A conceptual analysis of millennials’

leadership and followership styles. International Journal of Human Resource

Studies, 2(2), 72-83. doi:10.5296/ijhrs.v2i2.1568.

Christensen, T. M., & Brumfield, K. A. (2010). Phenomenological designs: The

philosophy of phenomenological research. In C. J. Sheperis, J. S. Young, & M. H.

Daniels (Eds.), Counseling research: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed

methods (pp. 135-150). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Chrobot-Mason, D., & Aramovich, N. P. (2013). The psychological benefits of creating

an affirming climate for workplace diversity. Group & Organization

Management, 38(6), 659-689.

Cloke, K., & Goldsmith, J. (2011). Resolving conflicts at work: Ten strategies for

everyone on the job. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Cogin, J. (2012). Are generational differences in work values fact or fiction? Multi-

country evidence and implications. The International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 23(11), 2268-2294.

Collins, C. J., Hanges, P. J., & Locke, E. A. (2004). The relationship of achievement

motivation to entrepreneurial behaviour: A meta-analysis. Human Performance,

27(1), 95-117.

Collins, S. D., & O’Rourke, J. S. (2005). Managing conflict and workplace relationships.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Comperatore, E., & Nerone, F. (2011). Coping with different generations in the

workplace. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 6(6), 15-29.

143
Conklin, T. A. (2007). Method or madness phenomenology as knowledge creator.

Journal of Management Inquiry, 16, 275-287. doi: 10.1177/1056492607306023

Cooke, L. (2006). In their opinion: Conflict and challenging behaviour in the workplace.

Journal of Perioperative Practice, 16(8), 365-366.

Davis, M., & Kraus, L. (2009). Age differences in responses to conflict in the workplace.

International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 68, 339-355.

Deal, J. J., Altman, D. G., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2010). Millennials at work: What we

know and what we need to do (if anything). Journal of Business and Psychology,

25(2), 191-199. doi:10.1007/s10869-010-9177-2

Debevec, K., Schewe, C. D., Madden, T. J., & Diamond, W. D. (2013). Are today's

Millennials splintering into a new generational cohort? Maybe!. Journal of

Consumer Behaviour, 12(1), 20-31.

DelCampo, M. R. G., Haney, M. J., Haggerty, L. A., & Knippel, L. A. (2012). Managing

the multi-generational workforce: From the GI generation to the millennials.

Burlington, VT: Gower Publishing.

Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., Skorinko, J., & Tullis, T. (2011). Online viewing and aesthetic

preferences of generation y and the baby boom generation: Testing user web site

experience through eye tracking. International Journal of Electronic Commerce,

15(4), 121-158.

Doherty, N., & Guyler, M. (2008). The essential guide to workplace mediation & conflict

resolution rebuilding working relationships. London, United Kingdom: Kogan

Page.

144
Dowd-Higgins, C. (2013, April 1). How to play together in the multigenerational sandbox

at work. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/caroline-

dowdhiggins/how-to-play- together-in-t_b_2989568.html

Dowling, M. (2007). From Husserl to Van Manen. A review of different

phenomenological approaches. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44, 131-

142. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2005.11.026

Earley, C. P., & Gibson, C. B. (1998). Taking stock in our progress on individualism-

collectivism: 100 years of solidarity and community. Journal of Management, 24,

265-304.

Edwards, C., & Titchen, A. (2003). Research into patients’ perspectives: Relevance and

usefulness of phenomenological sociology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44,

450-460.

Eisner, S. (2005). Managing Generation Y. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 70(4),

4.

Employment of Veterans in the Federal Executive Branch. (2010). Employee services

agency and Veterans’ support. Washington DC: Office of Personnel Management

(OPM).

Erlingsson, C., & Brysiewicz, P. (2012). Orientation among multiple truths: An

introduction to qualitative research. American Journal of Emergency Medicine,

3(2), 92-99. doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2012.04.005

Fabre, J. (2005). Smart nursing: How to create a positive work environment that

empowers and retains nurses. New York, NY: Springer.

145
Facts and statistics about the baby boomer generation. (2011, September 19). Retrieved

from http://www.babyboomer-magazine.com/news/165/ARTICLE/1437/2010-04-

04.html.

Fae, R. (2007). Workplace conflict resolution. Retrieved from

http://www.lifescript.com/Life/Money/Work/Workplace_Conflict_Resolution.asp

Falconer, H. (2004). IRS managing conflict in the workplace. Surrey, United Kingdom:

LexisNexis UK.

Fullerton, A. S., & Dixon, J. C. (2010). Generational conflict or methodological artifact?

Reconsidering the relationship between age and policy attitudes in the US, 1984–

2008. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(4), 643-673.

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2010). Applying educational research: How to

read, do, and use research to solve problems of practice (6th ed.). New York:

Allyn & Bacon.

Gargoline, C. B. (2012). A phenomenological study of leading a multigenerational

workforce. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and

Theses database. (UMI No. 3498589)

Ghosh, R., & Chaudhuri, S. (2009). Intergenerational differences in

individualism/collectivism orientations: Implications for outlook towards

HRD/HRM practices in India and the United States. New Horizons in Adult

Education and Human Resource Development, 23(4), 5-21.

146
Gibson, L. A. (2012). An experimental investigation of collaboration and apprising on

target commitment in upward influence attempts (Doctoral dissertation).

Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3537765)

Gibson, J. W., Greenwood, R. A., & Murphy, E. F., Jr. (2009). Generational differences

in the workplace: Personal values, behaviors and popular beliefs. Journal of

Diversity Management, 4(3), 1-8.

Graves, F. (2013). The pedagogy of organizational leaders: Identifying generational

differences and how those difference s may cause workplace conflict (Doctoral

dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI

No. 3566385)

Gravett, L., & Throckmorton, R. (2007). Bridging the generation gap: How to get radio

babies, boomers, Gen Xers, and Gen Yers to work together and achieve more.

Pompton Plains, NJ: Career Press.

Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated (Article 4).

International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1).. Retrieved from

http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1/pdf/groenewald.pdf

Guillaume, Y. R., Dawson, J. F., Woods, S. A., Sacramento, C. A., & West, M. A.

(2013). Getting diversity at work to work: What we know and what we still don't

know. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(2), 123-141.

Gupta, M., Boyd, L., & Kuzmits, F. (2011). The evaporating cloud: a tool for resolving

workplace conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 22(4), 394-

412.

147
Gursoy, D., Maier, T. A., & Chi, C. G. (2008). Generational differences: An examination

of work values and generational gaps in the hospitality workforce. International

Journal of Hospitality Management, 27(3), 448-458.

Hammill, G. (2005). Mixing and managing four generations of employees. Retrieved

from http://www.fdu.edu/newspubs/magazine/05ws/generations.htm

Hannam, S. E., & Yordi, B. (2011). Engaging a multi-generational workforce: Practical

advice for government managers. Washington, DC: IBM Center for the Business

of Government.

Harber, J. G. (2011). Generations in the workplace: Similarities and differences

(Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses

database. (UMI No. 3462046)

Harris, K. (2008). Book review: Millennial makeover: Myspace, YouTube, and the future

of American politics. Transcultural Futurist Magazine, 7(2), 1-3.

Hatchmann, F. (2008). Generation X revisited: An exploratory cross-cultural case study.

Proceedings of the 2008 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising.

Heidegger, M. (1972). On time and being (J. Stambaugh, Trans.). New York, NY: Harper

& Row.

Herring, C. (2009). Does diversity pay? Race, gender, and the business case for diversity.

American Sociological Review, 74(2), 208-224.

Hertel, G., Thielgen, M., Rauschenbach, C., Grube, A., Stamov-Roßnagel, C., & Krumm,

S. (2013). Age differences in motivation and stress at work. In C. Schlick, E.

Frieling, & J. Wegge (Eds.), Age-differentiated work systems (pp. 119-147).

Heidelberg: Springer.

148
Hill, K. S. (2004). Defy the decades with multigenerational teams. Nursing Management,

35(1), 32-35.

Hillman, D. R. (2013). Understanding generational differences in the U.S. workplace:

Implications for managing generationally-diverse employees (Doctoral

dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI

No. 3602436)

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related

values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online

Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 1-26. doi:10.9707/2307-0919.1014

Hogh, A., Hansen, Å. M., Mikkelsen, E. G., & Persson, R. (2012). Exposure to negative

acts at work, psychological stress reactions and physiological stress

response. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 73(1), 47-52.

Horner-Smith, M. J. (2014). Human resource executives' perceptions of talent

management and the influence of transformational leadership style on their

perceptions of hiring practices (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3613861)

Houlihan, A. (2011). The new melting pot: How to effectively lead different generations

in the workplace. Retrieved from

http://www.elevatedleadership.com/Articles/the_new_melting_pot.htm

Hui-Chun, Y., & Miller, P. (2005). Leadership style: The X generation and Baby

Boomers compared in different cultural contexts. Leadership & Organizational

Developmental Journal, 26(1), 35-50. doi:10.1108/01437730510575570.

149
Hussin, W. (2008). Managing stress at the workplace: The application of Wan Hussin 3-

dimensional stress management model. The Journal of Management Awareness,

11(2), 16-26.

Hycner, R. H. (1999). Some guidelines for the phenomenological analysis of interview

data. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Qualitative research (pp. 143-164).

London: Sage.

ICF International. (2013). Demographics 2013: Profile of the military community.

Retrieved from http://www.icfi.com/workforce.

Jakubek, M. A. (2013). Generational differences within a corporate workplace (master’s

thesis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No.

1551928)

James, C. (2010). React quickly to signs of stress. Human Resources, 2010, 16.

James, J. B., Swanberg, J. E., & McKechnie, S. P. (2007). Generational differences in

perceptions of older workers' capabilities. Center on Aging & Work/Workplace

Flexibility at Boston College: Chestnut Hill, MA.

Jones, C. (2009). Sort it out! Nursery World, 109(4200), 24-25.

Kafle, N. P. (2011). Hermeneutic phenomenological research method simplified. An

Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 181-200. doi:10.3126/bodhi.v5i1.8053

Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K. K. (2006). Conflict and performance in global

virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 237-274.

Kapoor, C., & Solomon, N. (2011). Understanding and managing generational

differences in the workplace. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 3(4),

308-318.

150
Kersten, D. (2002). Today’s generations face new communication gaps. Retrieved from

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/jobcenter/workplace/communication/2002

-11-15-communication-gap_x.htm

King, D. (2014). Deep swimming and murky waters: Phenomenological interviewing -

reflections from the field. Education Journal, 3(3), 170-178. doi:

10.11648/j.edu.20140303.18

Krivis, J. (2006). Can we call a truce? Ten tips for negotiating workplace conflicts.

Employment Relations Today, 33(3), 31-35.

Kunze, F., Boehm, S., & Bruch, H. (2013). Organizational performance consequences of

age diversity: Inspecting the role of diversity-friendly HR policies and top

managers’ negative age stereotypes. Journal of Management Studies, 50(3), 413-

442.

Langdon, T. L. (2012). Workforce understanding: Multigenerational workforce influence

on organizational leadership (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3506700)

LeFebvre, R., & Franke, V. (2013). Culture matters: Individualism vs. collectivism in

conflict decision-making. Societies, 3, 128–146. doi:10.3390/soc3010128

Leiter, M. (2009). Contrasting burnout, turnover intention, control, value congruence and

knowledge sharing between Baby Boomers and Generation X. Journal of Nursing

Management, 17(1), 100–109.

Leschinsky, R. M., & Michael, J. H. (2004). Motivators and desired company values of

wood products industry employees: Investigating generational differences. Forest

Products Journal, 54(1), 34-39.

151
Lester, S. W., Standifer, R. L., Schultz, N. J., & Windsor, J. M. (2012). Actual versus

perceived generational differences at work: An empirical examination. Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(3), 341-354.

doi:10.1177/1548051812442747

Lindberg, E., Persson, E., Horberg, U., & Ekebergh, M. (2013). Older patients’

participation in team meetings—a phenomenological study from the nurses’

perspective. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-

being, 8, 1-10. doi:10.3402/qhw.v8i0.21908

Luby, J. S. (2012). Learning for tomorrow’s leaders: A study of management education

and practice for millennials (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3542628)

Mahoney, D., & Klaas, B. (2008). Comparative dispute resolution in the workplace.

Journal of Labor Research, 29(3), 251-271.

Maravelas, A. (2005). How to reduce workplace conflict and stress: How leaders and

their employees can protect their sanity and productivity from tension and turf

wars. Franklin Lakes, NJ: Career Press.

Masters, M., & Albright, R. (2001). Complete guide to conflict resolution in the

workplace. New York, NY: AMACOM.

McLean, K. N. (2014). Virtual team structure: A phenomenological study of perspectives

from the nonprofit industry (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3613818)

McQuerrey, L. (2013). Advantages of diverse ages in the workplace. Retrieved from

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/advantages-diverse-ages-workplace-17928.html

152
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.

Messmer, M. (2001). Motivating employees for dummies. New York, NY: Hungry

Minds.

MetLife Mature Market Institute. (2010). Demographic profile America’s gen x.

Retrieved from

http://www.metlife.com/assets/cao/mmi/publications/Profiles/mmi-gen-x-

demographic-profile.pdf

Meyer, S. (2004). Organizational response to conflict: Future conflict and work

outcomes. Social Work Research, 28(3), 183-190.

Miller, B. (2010). Nice teams finish last. New York, NY: AMACOM

Mills, J., & Clark, M. S. (1982). Communal and exchange relationships. In L. Wheeler

(Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (pp. 121–144). Beverly Hills,

CA: Sage.

Montgomery, K. C. (2000). Children's media culture in the new millennium: Mapping the

digital landscape. The Future of Children, 10(2), 145.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Murphy, S. (2007). Leading a multigenerational workforce. AARP, Clare Raines

Associates.

Myers, K. K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the workplace: A communication

perspective on millennials’ organizational relationships and performance. Journal

of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 225-238. doi:10.1007s10869-010-9172-7.

153
Nazari, K., & Emami, M. (2012). Leadership a critical review of the concept.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(9), 545-553.

Nelson, D. L., & Quick, J. C. (2011). Organizational behavior: Science, the real world,

and you. Mason, OH, USA: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Nguyen-Dufour, K. K. (2013). An examination of the perceptions of educational leaders

on the ensuring literacy for all initiative’s impact on student reading achievement

in Louisiana (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of New Orleans,

New Orleans, LA.

Niemczyk, M., & Ulrich, J. (2009). Workplace preferences of millennials in the aviation

industry. International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies, 9(2), 207-219.

Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Njoroge, N., & Yazdanifard, R. (2014). The impact of social and emotional intelligence

on employee motivation in a multigenerational workplace. Global Journal of

Management And Business Research, 14(3), 30-36.

Oluwatayo, J. A. (2012) Validity and reliability issues in educational research. Journal of

Educational and Social Research, 2(2), 391-400. doi:10.5901/jesr.2012.v2n2.391

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses.

Quality & Quantity, 41, 105–121. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-1098-1

Osborne, D. R. (2011). In search of a universal transformational leadership development

training program for diverse leaders: The efficacy of the Dale Carnegie course

(RTM) (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and Theses

database. (UMI No. 3482458)

154
Ottaviano, G. (2006). The economic value of cultural diversity: Evidence from US cities.

Journal of Economic Geography, 6(1), 9-44.

Palmer. T., & Varner, I. (2007). A comparison of the international diversity on top

management teams of multinational firms based in the United States, Europe, and

Asia: Status and implications. Singapore Management Review, 29(1), 1-30.

Paniagua, H., Bond, P., & Thompson, A. (2009). Providing an alternative to zero

tolerance policies. British Journal of Nursing, 18(10), 619-623.

Pardue, K. T., & Morgan, P. (2008). Millennials considered: A new generation, new

approaches, and implications for nursing education. Nursing Education

Perspectives, 29(2), 74-75.

Parry, E., & Tyson, S. (2010). Managing an age diverse workforce. Basingstoke, United

Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.

Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Perkins, K. (2010). Resolving workplace conflict: 8 simple, smart strategies. HR

Specialist, 8(7), 7.

Perry, E. L., & Hanvongse, A., & Casoinic, D. (2013). Making a case for the existence of

generational stereotypes: A literature review and exploratory study. In J. Field, R.

J. Burke, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of aging, work and society

(pp. 416-437). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

155
Piktialis, D. (2007). Adaptations to an aging workforce: Innovative responses by the

corporate sector. Generations, 31(1), 76-77.

Pitt-Catsouphes, M. (2007). Between a twentieth- and a twenty-first-century workforce:

Employers at the tipping point. Generations, 31(1), 50-52.

Poitras, J., & LeTareau, A. (2009). Quantifying the quality of mediation agreements.

Negotiation & Conflict Management Research, 2(4), 363-380.

Posthuma, R. A., Wagstaff, M. F., & Campion, M. A. (2012). Age stereotypes and

workplace age discrimination: A framework for future research. In J. W. Hedge,

W. C. Borman (Eds.). The Oxford handbook on work and aging (pp. 313-340).

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rahim, M. A. (2015). Managing conflict in organizations. New Brunswick, NJ:

Transaction Publishers.

Reiners, G. M. (2012). Understanding the differences between Husserl’s (descriptive) and

Heidegger’s (Interpretive) phenomenological research. Journal of Nursing &

Care, 1(5), 1-3. doi:10.4172/2167-1168.1000119

Reiss, A. E. (2012). Generational differences in evaluation and expression of leadership

style (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Wayne State University, Detroit, MI.

Riaz, M. K., Zulkifal, Z., & Jamal, W. (2012). Conceptualizing the relationship between

individualism-collectivism and conflict management styles at the individual level.

Research Journal of Economics, Business and ICT, 5, 34-38. doi:

10.2139/ssrn.1983846

Robbins, S. P. (2009). Organisational behavior: Global and Southern African

perspectives. Cape Town, South Africa: Pearson Education South Africa.

156
Rodriguez, R. O., Green, M. T., & Ree, M. J. (2003). Leading Generation X: Do the old

rules apply? The Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(4), 67-75.

Roodin, P., & Mendelson, M. (2013). Multiple generations at work: Current and future

trends. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 11(3), 213-222. doi:

10.1080/15350770.2013.810496.

Salahuddin, M. M. (2011). Generational differences impact on leadership style and

organizational success. Journal of Diversity Management (JDM), 5(2), 1-6.

Saundry, R. A., Latreille, P., Dickens, L., Irvine, C., Teague, P., Urwin, P., & Wibberley,

G. (2014). Reframing resolution-managing conflict and resolving individual

employment disputes in the contemporary workplace. ACAS Policy Discussion

Papers, 1-21.

Schullery, N. M. (2013). Workplace engagement and generational differences in

values. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 252-265.

Schultz, R. W. (2010). Exploring leadership within the modern organization:

Understanding the dynamics of effective leadership of a virtual, multigenerational

workforce (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertation and

Theses database. (UMI No. 3427741)

Schultz, R. J., & Schwepker, K. H. (2012). Boomers vs. Millennials: Critical conflict

regarding sales culture, salesforce recognition, and supervisor expectation.

International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 2(1), 32-41.

Seabrooke, L. (2011). Everyday politics and generational conflicts in the world

economy. International Political Sociology, 5(4), 456-459.

157
Seagriff, B. (2010). Keep your lunch money: Alleviating workplace bullying with

mediation. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 25(2), 575-602.

Seamon, D. (2000). A way of seeing people and place: Phenomenology in environment-

behavior research. In S. Wapner, J. Demick, T. Yamamoto, & H Minami (Eds.),

Theoretical perspectives in environment-behavior research (pp. 157-78). New

York, NY: Plenum.

Selden, C. S., & Selden, F. (2001). Rethinking diversity in public organizations for the

21st century: Moving toward a multicultural model. Administration & Society,

33(3), 303-329. doi: 10.1177/00953990122019785

Sikes, B., Gulbro, R., & Shonesy, L. (2010). Conflict in work teams: Problems and

solutions. Allied Academies International Conference: Proceedings of the

Academy of Organizational Culture, Communications & Conflict, 15(1), 15-19.

Singleton, R., Toombs, L. A., Taneja, S., Larkin, C., & Pryor, M. G. (2011). Workplace

conflict: a strategic leadership imperative. International Journal of Business &

Public Administration, 8(1), 149-163.

Slaikeu, K. A., & Hasson, R. H. (1998). Controlling the costs of conflict: How to design a

system for your organization. New Jersey: Jossey-Bass..

Smola, K., & Sutton, C. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational work

values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363-382.

Somech, A., Desivilya, H., & Lidogoster, H. (2009). Team conflict management and

team effectiveness: The effects of task interdependence and team identification.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(3), 359-378.

158
Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis. Qualitative

Research Journal, 11(2), 63-75. doi:10.3316/QRJ1102063

Szamosi, L. T. (2006). Just what are tomorrow's SME employees looking for? Education

& Training, 48(8/9), 654-665.

Tang, T. L. P., Cunningham, P. H., Frauman, E., Ivy, M. I., & Perry, T. L. (2012).

Attitudes and occupational commitment among public personnel: Differences

between baby boomers and Gen-Xers. Public Personnel Management, 41(2), 327-

360.

Tolbize, A. (2008). Generational differences in the workplace. Research and Training

Center on Community Living, University of Minnesota. Retrieved from

http://rtc.umn.edu/docs/2_18_Gen_diff_workplace.pdf

Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Triandis, H. C., & Gelfand, M. (2012). A theory of individualism and collectivism. In P.

Van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social

psychology (pp. 498-521). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi:

10.4135/9781446249222.n51

Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in

work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 201-210.

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action

sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: State University of New York.

Van Manen, M. (2007). Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice, 1(1),

11-30.

159
Van Manen, M. (2014). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in

phenomenological research and writing. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press,

Inc.

Von Bonsdorff, M. E. (2011). Age-related differences in reward preferences.

International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(6), 1262-1276. doi:

10.1080/09585192.2011.559098.

Wang, Q., Fink, E. L., & Cai, D. A. (2012). The effect of conflict goals on avoidance

strategies: What does not communicating communicate? Human Communication

Research, 38(2), 222-252.

Wesner, M. S., & Miller, T. (2008). Boomers and Millennials have much in common.

Organization Development Journal, 26(3), 89-90.

Wienclaw, R. A. (2015). Teams & team building. Teams & team building -Research

starters business. Retrieved

from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/54856308/teams-team-building

Williams, K. A. (2011). Work value preferences of generational and gender diversity: An

exploration among accountants (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest

Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3466430)

Williams, K. L. (2014). Cyber security governance- a view of selected organizations

within the U.S. Department of Defense (Doctoral dissertation). Available from

ProQuest Dissertation and Theses database. (UMI No. 3634751).

Williams, J. L., Collingridge, D. S., & Williams, M. S. (2011). Primary care physicians'

experience with family history: An exploratory qualitative study. Genetics in

Medicine, 13, 21–25. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181f928fc

160
Winograd, M., & Hais, M. D. (2008). Millennial makeover: MySpace, YouTube, and the

future of American politics. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Zemke, R., Raines, C., & Filipczak, B. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the clash

of veterans, boomers, xers, and nexters in your workplace. New York: Amacom.

Zhao, J., Settles, B. H., & Sheng, X. (2011). Family-to-work conflict: Gender, equity and

workplace policies. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 42(5), 723-738.

161
 APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for
the integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion
postings, assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.
Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy,
definition of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary
consequences of academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that
learners will follow APA rules for citing another person’s ideas or works.
The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in
the Policy:
Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the
authorship of others’ work through proper citation and reference. Use of another
person’s ideas, including another learner’s, without proper reference or citation
constitutes plagiarism and academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)
Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting
someone else’s ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying
verbatim or rephrasing ideas without properly acknowledging the source by author,
date, and publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella University’s Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for
research integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:
Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication,
plagiarism, misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those
that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing,
conducting, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not
limited to dismissal or revocation of the degree.

162
 Statement of Original Work and Signature

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy
(3.01.01) and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including the Policy Statements,
Rationale, and Definitions.
I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the
ideas or words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following
the guidelines set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name
and date Miriam C. Harris 06/16/2015

Mentor name Dr. Steven Jeddeloh, Capella University School of Business and
and school Technology

163
 APPENDIX B. DATA ANALYSIS TABLE

Thematic Label 1 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Difference in work goals, ethics, and attitudes
12 80%
between the three generations
Lack of willingness to adapt to changes for the
4 27%
older generation
Conflict of the traditional and modern methods
3 20%
within the organization
Generations are threatened by the presence of
2 13%
one another
Social interaction issues between the majority and
1 7%
minority of the groups
Lack of command for the Millennials 1 7%

Thematic Label 2 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Conflicts in work performances are acceptable as
10 67%
long as leaders know how to manage effectively
Negative effect due to the lack of willingness to
3 20%
communicate properly
Negative effect due to the technology issues with
3 20%
the first two generations
Knowing how to manage changes in the
2 13%
organization
Overall negative effect due to the generational
1 7%
conflicts present

Thematic Label 3 # of Occurrences % of Occurrences

Employment of proper communication 8 53%
Participation in different leadership trainings 5 33%
Individual management of conflicts and issues 5 33%
Open-mindedness for changes and new ideas 3 20%
2 13%
Treat each generational group fairly and equally
Resolve conflicts as quickly as possible 1 7%

164
 APPENDIX C. INTERVIEW GUIDE

Introduction

Hi, I am Miriam Harris. I am a Doctoral student at Capella University, and I am

conducting a study on generational differences in the workforce and conflict

management. Therefore, I am here to gain insight regarding your experience with Baby

Boomers, Generation Xers and Millennials/Generation Y in the workplace. The Baby

Boomers are those between the age of 53-70, the Generation Xers between the ages of

32-52, and the Millennials/Generation Y between the ages of 22-31.

Questions

1. What have you observed as the distinct differences of values, desires, and behaviors

among the different generations?

2. How do the differences enhance or detract in your agency?

3. How do the differences impact your management role?

4. How would you describe your approach to managing conflict, and how did you derive

this method?

5. Based on your experience, what workplace conflicts attributable to generational

differences have you witnessed?

6. How have workplace conflicts, attributed to generational differences, affected work

performance of Baby Boomers, Generation Xers and the Millennials?

7. What ways have you managed workplace conflict?

8. How does your agency practice generational conflict management?

9. How do you think generational conflict and your management style or practice(s)

have affected the growth of your career in management?

165
10. Is there anything that I have not asked that you would like to share regarding this

topic?

Thank you for participating in this research.

166