Making the Case for ‘Subjective Age’ in the Multigenerational Workforce

In today’s business world, for the first time ever, up to five generations find themselves working side by side in an increasingly volatile, fast-paced, and uncertain economy. Challenges in the workplace are bound to arise, including those related to cultural gaps. But generational differences are nothing new; Aristotle complained about younger generations in his writings way back in the fourth century B.C. Such criticism also manifests in modern ways, such as the derisive phrase “OK, boomer.” So how can companies overcome these complicated issues to help all employees thrive in the modern workplace?

The most significant problem with age-based generalizations is that they oversimplify and inaccurately reflect the current unprecedented age diversity of the workforce. In addition, these stereotypes assume that chronological age is more reliable than it is. But while chronological age is useful to track childhood development, it grows appreciably less predictive of personality or behavior the older we get. In other words, there are larger differences within age groups than between age groups, and this discrepancy grows as we age. Sociologists call this concept aged heterogeneity.

In the context of work, aged heterogeneity implies that companies and policy makers should not consider all older workers as equivalent — and yet that is exactly what they have tended to do, including in the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Surprisingly, scholarly research in this area also tends to view all older workers through the same lens. Research is sparse in this critically important area, despite the fact that older workers are the fastest-growing segment of the workforce, and a projected 13 million people age 65 and above are expected to be employed in the U.S. by 2024, compared with 8.9 million in 2016.

Our recent research focuses on this overlooked heterogeneity. From it, we were able to create a typology of late-career employees, categorizing workers age 50 and above as Youthfuls, Matures, or Veterans, based on their behavior and performance rather than their chronological age. While members of the three groups were the same age numerically (on average, 55 years old), they scored very differently in all of the other areas we investigated, such as health, work ability, and work performance. These differences could only be explained by participants’ subjective ages — not their numeric ages. In other words, how old one feels appears to be more important than how old one is numerically for various life outcomes, including those in the workplace. This phenomenon, called subjective aging, has been used in aging research to explain differences in survival rates after surgeries and has also been shown to be related to brain aging.

Youthfuls, Matures, and Veterans

These three types of older workers exhibit vast performance differences. For example, subjectively younger participants — those categorized as Youthfuls due to the fact that they feel more than a decade younger than their chronological age — also scored significantly higher on work engagement, productivity, and organizational citizenship behavior such as altruism or generally taking charge at work. This suggests that Youthfuls might be particularly fit for leadership positions and activities that entail motivating colleagues, such as mentoring or teaching.

Veterans, in contrast, reported the lowest levels of work motivation and engagement and the highest need for support and intervention. Thus, it is important that management and HR identify the Veterans on their teams, reexamine their work design and workloads, and provide access to occupational health programs. Organizations may be able to adjust job demands and resources to support Veterans’ work abilities, such as reducing time pressures or providing greater autonomy. Veterans could thrive under flexible work scheduling or a bridge employment opportunity — a flexible postretirement job held before exiting the labor force completely.

Matures are the proverbial middle child: They are doing well and are motivated but are less engaged than Youthfuls. Representing 40% of the population of older workers, Matures have dormant potential that might be better utilized by organizations that, for instance, broaden the reward system to be in line with the changing needs of workers, create a more stimulating work environment, and foster employees’ feeling of appreciation and recognition.

Recommendations for Leaders

Our findings offer key takeaways for organizational leadership. Although diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts related to chronological age are gaining momentum, there is still untapped value in ascertaining subjective age diversity. Our research suggests that acknowledging subjective age differences — and how these differences shape work motivations — could help HR departments better support the aging workforce and provide better-targeted assistance for individual late-career employees.

Subjective age can be an indicator of successful aging and above-average coping skills. Highly engaged employees such as Youthfuls, for example, typically show higher levels of effective leadership behaviors, such as transformational leadership and leader-member exchange. Also, in regard to teamwork, which benefits from high levels of organizational citizenship behaviors, Youthfuls could help to increase team performance by supporting the productivity of their coworkers.

Although organizations must not discriminate on the basis of either subjective or chronological age, managers might consider the role that occupational health programs can play in cultivating a productive and happy multigenerational workforce. Subjective age provides a novel avenue to think about successful aging and late-career interventions, a subject of new research efforts. Understanding differing levels of health or accident risks among workers of any age is worthwhile for organizations looking to maximize productivity. Subjective age differences represent another important factor for employers to be aware of given that some older workers might need extra support, whereas others will get along just fine without it or would even profit from job enrichment or enlargement.

At a macro level, the promotion of successful aging is fast becoming a public health priority. Our work suggests that it should be a management issue as well. Businesses can help not only by understanding that the labor force is rapidly aging, but also by recognizing that chronological age alone is an imprecise indicator of work motivation and performance. Organizations that recognize — and harness — the heterogeneity of the aging workforce stand to benefit the most.