Generation Y, Call Centres, Engament and Motivation

The findings of a relatively recent survey carried out by Sodexo Motivation Solutions revealed that more than half of Generation Y workers are making plans to leave their current employer within a year. Whether this will really happen in practice taking heed of the current labour market state of play, which is not really offering plenty of opportunities, is difficult to predict. Nonetheless, the survey, aiming at investigating Generation Y views on a number of work-related subjects, showed that Yers have an utterly negative perception of working at call centres, insofar as just a measly 5 percent of respondents deemed working in a call centre exciting, whereas a considerable 55 percent expressed an utterly negative opinion about the industry at large. One third of respondents even reported preferring claiming unemployment benefits to working at a call centre. Notwithstanding, 25 percent of the panellists said that they would consider a career in call centres for the flexible benefits these offer, whilst 43 percent specifically referred to flexible working as the sole valuable benefit offered by the employers of this industry to their staff. The findings of the survey also revealed that the current employer of 46 percent of the panellists is not offering any benefit, aside from salary, to their employees.

 

 

It clearly emerges from the study that individuals attach a significant importance and value to flexible benefits; it is hence regrettable that many organizations still do not offer these. Yet, flexible benefits could prove to be advantageous for organizations, too in that tax-efficient and enabling employers to provide their staff personalised awards. The creation of a new human capital proposition, which includes amongst the available options employee benefits, might indeed potentially contribute to reduce employee turnover rates and help employers to motivate staff.

 

 

 

All in all, it can be contended that the survey ultimately showed that there is still a lot to do to engage Gen Y people. The efforts, nonetheless, would be sorely justified; despite these individuals have different priorities from those of older generations and can be regarded to some degree as a new huge challenge to employers, their contribution is and remains of paramount importance for the call centre industry. Yers are able to quickly adapt to change, are willing to work hard, are creative and incline to take up new challenges. Notwithstanding, in order for employers to motivate and retain Generation Y people these must learn to manage and motivate them. First and foremost, call centres managers should get the message across that the call centre industry actually offers career prospects and is capable and willing to meet the expectations of individuals aiming at taking further responsibilities. Yet, to motivate and retain these individuals corporate culture should definitely foster and clearly convey the message that hard work is both acknowledged and rewarded, hopefully in a way that meets the specific needs and expectations of these individuals.

 

 

 

Call centres environments, nonetheless, also have positive features. According to a specific poll conducted by Lloyd’s pharmacy, call-centres employees are the most likely to have a relationship with a colleague: nearly 33 percent of call centres staff have a romantic liaison with someone they work with, followed by the finance (28 percent) and HR (26.5 percent) functions employees. Notwithstanding, as revealed by the CIPD Absence Management Survey (CIPD, 2009), call centre, with an average absence level of 12.4 days per employee per year, is the industry with the highest absence rate, with stress being openly acknowledged as one of the main causes for that.

 

This is indeed an issue call centres employers are usually used to cope with. At British Gas’ Cardiff call centre, for instance, sickness absence was representing a serious problem in 2008. Despite the staff short-term sickness absence rate was essentially in line with the national average ratio, the long-term sickness percentage, with 30 employees on long-term sickness leave each week, had indeed reached an alarming value.

 

 

 

The management realized that it was definitely time to take action and inspired by the five drivers of wellbeing recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), that is to say psychological, physical, financial, social and environmental states, developed a programme aiming at fostering different initiatives for each of the relevant five pillars, underpinned by the awareness that individuals are different one another. Practical examples of these initiatives were free health checks and fruits, and discounted gym membership for the “physical” pillar; emotional resilience seminars and chill-out rooms with TVs and Nintendo Wiis for the “psychological” state and concierge services for the “social” state.

 

 

 

The results obtained thanks to the introduction of the programme were impressive: the number of people in long-term sickness absence each week dropped from 30 to 9, the Net Promoter Score (NPS) reached the considerable value of +35, which is 25 points above the average utilities score and, most importantly, employee engagement increased of 7 percentage points. So remarkable were the results attained by the programme – called SMILE – as to this being integrated into the British Gas Group programmes.

 

 

 

A similar success was also obtained by the Lewisham Borough Council, which in 2009 was experiencing an undesirable remarkable increase in sick-related absence rates. Also in this case the launch of initiatives such as walk-to-work challenges, health awareness days, wellbeing-at-work fairs and smoking cessation support as well as the offering of on-site relaxation therapies and the set-up of some leisure facilities within the organization’s premises enabled the employer to drastically reduce the absence rates, save hundreds of thousands of pounds and increase of 6 points the workforce satisfaction index on work-life-balance-related issues.

 

 

 

Remarkable positive results were also attained by the contact centre of the Co-operative Financial Services (CFS) when the organization decided to improve its customer service level. In this instance, the employer desired individuals to concentrate more on the “how” rather than focusing on the “what” side when building relationships; these techniques needed to be based on a more positive mindset and culture. With the help of a learning solutions provider the employer offered a programme, called Positive Programme, composed of three different modules: Talking Positive, Selling Positive and Keeping Positive. During the Talking Positive module the Contact Centre Agents (CCAs) learned how to: “guide” a call, listen, ask questions, acknowledge, respond and upsell as well as how to handle conflicts. Team and customer service managers also attended a leadership skills workshop. Selling positive was mainly directed at the sales teams, whereas Keeping Positive was a programme more specifically concerned with customer retention. All of these programmes were supported by role-plays, discussions and coaching.

 

 

 

The programme produced indeed outstanding results and measurable performance improvements. A research conducted by an independent consumer intelligence agency in fact showed that CFS had obtained the highest level of improvement in sales techniques amongst its major competitors of the general insurance sectors. Yet, the new retention teams enabled the organization to save more than £1.8 million. One of the biggest evidences of the programme success was that other businesses within the group considered offering it.

 

 

 

Call centres are unquestionably particularly difficult to manage; moreover, enhancing CCAs’ morale, engagement and productivity is everything but an easy feat to perform. Nonetheless, it cannot be clearly overlooked that call centres, allowing organizations to stay open for business around the clock, are nowadays part of the strategy pursued by a constantly growing number of organizations. The services provided by these platforms, in many cases, can also enable organizations to gain competitive edge. Despite the workplace is at times particularly stressing and the job repetitive, call centres are destined to represent a vital part and a differentiating feature of many businesses hereinafter.

 

 

 

The job repetitiveness and the stress usually caused by call centre environments, possibly influenced by the individual awareness that their career prospects, if any, are limited have a negative impact on staff morale and productivity and, as data show, absence rates are usually also considerably high. Particular care should be thus constantly taken to effectually manage these businesses. Despite call centres might be deserted by Yers, who are more likely to seek for more rewarding and promising careers, call centres definitely have something positive to offer. Their atmosphere is usually very friendly, the environment rather informal and, most importantly, workplaces are technologically sophisticated, which should actually account for making these places particularly attractive to Gen Y people.

 

 

 

Call centres can be indeed transformed in places individuals may love to work at, but this is not an easy feat to perform in practice and in order to be successful employers definitely need to involve the whole organization management, with line managers playing the most crucial role. Group activities and teamwork can definitely help, but as showed by the CFS case, also health and wellbeing initiatives as well as training activities should have a remarkable positive impact and effectually help employers to improve engagement and reduce absenteeism. In general, group and out of work activities such as volunteering and Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives might prove to be genuinely beneficial to create a good working atmosphere and improve motivation.

 

 

It is very unlikely that isolated, occasional measures could effectually enable an employer to attain long-term benefits so that the bundle approach, by reason of its multiplicative effect, is strongly recommended and very likely to yield effective, positive results.

 

 

 

Particular attention needs to be given to reward; once again a 360-degree approach would prove to be particularly beneficial so that the adoption of the total reward approach, taking heed of intrinsic as well as extrinsic, and direct in addition to indirect rewards should be considered somewhat of mandatory. Employers should develop bespoke reward systems, which as suggested by Armstrong (2007), should be based on a holistic approach combining transactional (concerned with benefits and pay) and relational rewards (concerned with L&D and the work experience). As aptly summarised by O’Neal (1998), total reward should consider and embrace everything employees feel and perceive as valuable in the employment relationship.

 

 

 

The establishment of an open two-way communication process represents as per usual a fundamental prerequisite to pinpoint which types of reward are perceived as valuable by employees and these are hence expected to receive.

 

 

Longo, R., (2010), Generation Y, Call Centres, Engagement and Motivation; HR Professionals, [online].

Related articles:

Motivation - The present and future challenge of call centres

RECESSION GIVES BIRTH TO A NEW GENERATION

Not defined by an age range, but by their survival ability - Welcome Gen “R”

The good news is that the worst of the recession in many countries is over; organisations which have resisted to its effects are now relaunching their activities and preparing to get the most out of the envisaged and wished upturn.

The financial crunch has definitely been particularly hard for people who have lost their jobs but, although in a pretty different way, it has not been completely smooth sailing for those who have held their jobs either.

The pressure caused by having seen colleagues made redundant and leave their organisations, has clearly left its mark and had a negative impact on “survivors” too. Employees who have been lucky enough to keep their jobs have, nonetheless, also experienced a quite particular grim “climate” and mood within their organisations.

With business obliged to tight their belts and downsize, the remaining staff have been required to: carry out an increasing number of duties and activities, take more responsibilities, work harder and in leaner and more flexible teams.

In such situations staff has then acquired and developed new skills, widened their competencies and build an optimistic feeling up.

More specifically, according to the findings of a study recently carried out by the Recruiter Randstad, “World of Work”, private sector staff who have emerged from the downturn are more confident about their future and perspectives. To the extent, that a substantial majority of them consider themselves being ready for leaving their current job, if any good opportunities should come along.

Even though the international recession has, by and large, made employees rather prudent and wary about considering changing their job, Gen R employees consider themselves emerging more motivated from the crisis. They also feel being more skilled and with the ability to perform work in different, harder situations, and able to adapt to changes.

Thanks to these features Gen R people represent an opportunity for employers but, at the same time, they could represent a potential problem as well if employers should not capitalise on their abilities.

To some extent Generation R people, who are, then, not defined by age but by attitude, are very similar to Gen Y in that it would not really be enough a mere salary increase to persuade them to shift workplace, they are, in fact, mainly interested in a proper career path, good training opportunities and professional development. This could arguably be related to the circumstance that during the last 18 months these employees have had little or no support at all and have realised the pivotal importance of having the opportunity to gain access to these benefits.

The research also showed that, basically, these people have experienced new ways of working and do not want risk going back to the previous working methods. They have acquired so many skills that it is expected that the competition to hire them will intensify in the incoming future; are, then, we going to assist, in the course of the next months to a “war for Gen R” rather than to a “war for talent”? This is anybody’s guess; nonetheless, “war” or not, it is very likely that organisations will try to lure these “upskilled” staff in the near future.

The investigation also revealed that, although during the last 18 months 23% of respondents had to cover additional responsibilities, because of businesses recruitment freeze, acquiring new skills and abilities, on the other hand of it, nearly 50% of surveyed employees claimed that they have been under-utilised, whilst 10% even said that, because of recession, they had to cover positions which did not completely utilise their skills.

Generation R optimism notwithstanding, employees fears for redundancy is not completely over. According to the findings of the “Protection Gap Survey”, commissioned by Abbey Legal Protection, in fact, 26% of senior managers and 42% of Executives, without management responsibility, still consider redundancy as the source of main concern in the working place.

Clearly, despite the more positive appearance of the economic environment, job insecurity is still rife amongst staff.

Much more confident seem to be CEOs, who currently consider the risk of making staff redundant quite far from reality. Just 5% of them, in fact, mentioned redundancy as a likely risk they will have to cope with in the incoming future, showing much more concern for tax investigation by HMRC (12%) and for the impact of bad health on workforce stress (11%).

Internet at work, how to manage the “issue”?

Social networks, online shopping, personal emails, online media, chat rooms, instant messenger systems and much, much more; employees spend nowadays a long period of time on the internet at work for personal-related reasons. A study carried out by Olféo in 2009 showed that French employees spend an average of 66 minutes a day surfing the internet during the business working hours. The findings of the investigation also revealed that employees’ favourite activities are: check their personal email box, use social networks, read online news and shop online.

 

 

 

According to a similar investigation carried out in the UK by MyJobGroup, the time spent online by British employees, very similar in length to that spent by French workers, accounted in 2009 for an estimated loss of a staggering 17 billion Euros.

 

 

 

In order to avert the phenomenon to completely spin out of control, on account of the distraction and loss of concentration it causes, some organizations have totally banned or sensibly limited the private use of the internet to their employees during the working hours. The BNP management, for instance, decided to prevent employees accessing some websites – such as Facebook or Gmail –, whereas giving access to others – such as news and public transport websites. When an employee tries to access one of the websites banned by the company Internet policy, the screen shows a warning message recalling the employee that s/he should have not made the attempt to access that page.

Some organizations block or limit employee access to the internet to prevent their IT system from being exposed to viruses. In some countries, employee internet usage does not enjoy the same legal protection offered, for instance, to personal data so that employers can track the websites visited by their employees and deny access to undesirable sites accordingly. In some instances, employers have the obligation to deny their employees access to the Internet when this may be considered a danger for their infrastructure network and thus for the public.

 

 

 

The vast majority of French organizations, notwithstanding, have opted to avoid completely blocking the internet access to their employees. In contrast, many employers have decided to expand the number of accessible websites, considering that it is not preventing their employees accessing the internet which will enable them to reach higher levels of efficiency and productivity. Employees have indeed many other options to waste time, whether they want to.

 

 

 

Surfing the internet in the workplace is perceived by employers as a complete waste of time, time which individuals essentially deduct from that which these should devote to perform their working activities. For many individuals, especially for Generation Y people, nonetheless, browsing the internet rather represents the way these naturally approach their work. Younger generations consider the internet as a working tool exactly like the telephone. Limiting or banning the use of social network, in particular to young generations, would negatively impact their job; for these individuals, social networks are also a common place where share and hopefully find solutions to specific work-related problems. Young people do not hence use social network just for personal reasons. In some organizations, namely those where the internet is part of their core business, like Google and Cisco, employees are even encouraged to surf the Net, which employers also see as a more effective way to communicate around their brand.

The best approach employers can adopt is possibly neither giving employees a completely free of control access to the internet nor totally banning it. The one size hardly fits all, it is thus also unlikely that the problem might be effectually tackled adopting a best practice approach, that is, an approach which has proved to be effective in some other organizations. Every employer has different needs and should hence differently approach the issue, invariably taking heed of the IT Director advice.

 

 

 

Organizations should regulate the use of the Internet by developing and introducing a specific policy aiming at clearly defining what the employer means by, for instance, “appropriate” and “reasonable” when referring to the personal use of the Internet in the workplace. Policies may, for instance:

- State the maximum length of time individuals can surf the Internet on any single day;

- Provide for the suitable period of the day when employees can freely surf the net (during breaks, for instance);

- Limit and list the number of authorized websites.

 

 

 

Employers might alternatively prefer to arrange and provide employees dedicated “surfing spaces” within the organization where staff can freely surf the net before or after their regular working hours. These spaces might indeed also be used by employees to socialize with their colleagues.

 

In a bid to deter employees from surfing the internet for long periods of time, some organizations have decided to adopt open-plan office layouts. This approach appears to be sorely questionable in that such a decision should be indeed made on the basis of much more relevant and significant considerations.

 

 

 

A French employee confessed to a social media to spending at least one hour a day surfing the internet at work; he added that doing that allows him to address most of his daily issues: banking, administration, shopping, etc. This also enables him to spend more valuable time at work, but whether his employer should ban the use of the internet, he would have no option than to leave the office earlier in order to care about his personal commitments. Thinking about and planning for his personal duties during the day would clearly make him less efficient and less productive at work. According to this employee, the Internet is a very useful and powerful tool, which enables employers to save a lot of money and gain new expertise.

 

 

 

Internet is seen by employers as the employee distraction of the present times. The current debate about the Internet has essentially replaced the debate engaging employers in the distant past about the use of the telephone at work. Nonetheless, a number of options are certainly available in order for employers to effectively and properly manage the “issue.” Every organization just needs to identify its “best fit” solution, but totally banning the use of the Internet definitely represents the least convenient approach to adopt, younger generations could not indeed survive the measure.

 

 

Longo, R., (2010), Internet at work, how to manage the “issue”?; HR Professionals, [online].

How to attract and retain Generation Y and change HRM practices accordingly

Considering that all the members of a group have the same characteristics and features would definitely represent a blunder, remarkable differences can be in fact identified between the different generations. According to Sparrow and Cooper (2003) is reasonable thinking that the workforce of the future will have different “work values” compared to the current one.

Yers

“Generation Y” people or “Nexters”, as they are also known, are supposed to perform better whether they can be part of, and work in, a team (Penna and CIPD, 2008). Moreover, they are very interested in social network, preferably online but also offline. They want to have fun and make new friends. What motivate them the most is being offered opportunities for personal and professional growth and expanding their technical skills.

Yers are willing to work hard, prefer performing challenging tasks but want to enjoy the advantages provided by an appropriate work-life balance. An additional distinctive characteristic of these individuals is that they do not to excel in terms of loyalty to their employer. Yet, they aim at receiving benefits genuinely meeting their wants (Penna and CIPD, 2008).

 

Being absolutely confident in the use of technological devises and applications, these people are sorely engaged and interested in technology and hence in savvy working environments (Torrington et al, 2008).

 

Gen X

Generation X individuals actually share many features with Yers: enjoy to be challenged, aim at an appropriate working-life balance (Torrington et al., 2008), perform better working in a team, enjoy socialising in the workplace and seek personal growth and challenging job opportunities (Penna and CIPD, 2009).

They also aim at receiving a considerable degree of latitude and care more about outcomes than processes (Penna and CIPD, 2009).

Baby boomers

Baby boomers, as Yers and Xers, are more engaged when performing challenging works and are offered opportunities for personal development. Yet, people belonging to this generation want to enjoy the benefits offered by work-life balance practices. As Xers, they long for autonomy when making decisions and want to be personally valued by the people surrounding them.

Although this is the most loyal generation, they do not suggest their organisation to others as a good place to work at and are the less incline to go the extra mile.

In contrast to Yers and Xers, baby boomers are less interested in teamwork, but are those who value the most the social commitment of their employer (Penna and CIPD, 2008).

 

Veterans

Similarly to Yers, Xers and baby boomers, veterans are attracted by jobs giving them the authority to make decisions. These individuals also definitely prefer that roles, responsibilities and hierarchies are clearly defined. As baby boomers and Xers, they want to be valued by the people they work with.

Veterans give a crucial importance to the psychological contract and are expected their loyalty to be reciprocated. Traditionalists, as veterans are also called, are expected that their ideas and suggestions are valued by their employer and are more passionate than any other generation about their job. Their loyalty is not influenced by their role and they would consider working beyond retirement whether possible (Penna and CIPD, 2009).

 

************

Albeit it is not completely clear whether differences amongst generations are based on age or life stage rather than on generational related characteristics, there is a wide agreement on the “self-evident differences” between generations (Parry and Urwin, 2009).

 

What characterise Yers the most compared to the other generations is their marked interest in cash, work-life balance, learning and development (Berry, 2008), their “can-do attitude when it comes to technology” and the need for constant feedback (Peacock, 2008).

 

Recruiting and retaining Yers

Enabling organizations to reach the individuals having the skills and capabilities they require, recruitment clearly has a paramount importance for every organisation (Parry and Urwin, 2009).

When recruitment activities are carried out, there are two aspects which in particular need to be carefully considered: the recruitment channels, in terms of identifying and having recourse to the means which are likely to most successfully enable a business to reach its target; and the creation of the employer branding based on the offer of a value proposition meeting the expectations of the pre-identified target. These factors are crucially important insofar as, whether properly managed, habitually enabling organisations to recruit and retain the right individuals (Parry and Urwin, 2009).

Nexters are attracted by technology and enjoy using electronic media (Matthews 2008) so that web 2.0 technology should definitely reveal to be useful to attract them (Birkinshaw, 2008). These people are familiar with video company information, online application forms, tests and brochures; social networks, online adverts and forums, and Second life hence definitely represent the most suitable channels to reach them (Birkinshaw, 2008). Second Life has in particular revealed to be very effective both for the recruitment of new staff and for offering career advancement to the existing employees. Individuals move within this virtual world acquiring knowledge of roles, of the related required competencies and of the new opportunities eventually arose within the organisation. By means of this application employees also have the possibility to talk to the organisation’s “ambassadors” who are able to provide them useful information.

The most effective offline channel to reach Yers has instead proved to be the word of mouth; they are very likely to recommend their employer to others, so that the employer branding image would reveal to be extremely beneficial to reach and attract them.

Generation Y people are much more willing to participate to assessment centres, not appreciated by baby boomers, and are sometimes over-cosseted by their parents so that employers should be ready to deal with the “helicopter effect”, that is, the constant presence of their parents calling them relatively often and even attending career fairs on their kids behalf (Matthews, 2008). Some organisations have even adapted their recruitment process accordingly inviting at recruitment fairs an additional member of the candidate’s family and including, in the information package sent to the appointed people, a letter specifically addressed to their parents (Matthews, 2008b).

In order to attract and retain Nexters a techno-savvy working environment, the access to online social networks, intranet applications and the like are hence necessary. To attain these objectives, organisations should also offer flexible working opportunities; these individuals in fact like to work anytime, anywhere and do prefer works based on tasks rather than on time constraints.

Specialist skills and personal development opportunities are also very attractive to them. Nexters are interested in career, coaching and training opportunities; they don’t live to work, but work to live so that work-life balance is definitely and firmly at the top of their priorities and interests.
 

The findings of some investigations have revealed that they are sensitive to CSR activities and that they are, consequently, more incline to work for an organisation implementing CSR initiatives. According to other studies, Yers interest for CSR is rather linked to their age and it actually increases with it, feature this much more typical of baby boomers.

Since many Nexters have experienced hardships during their studies and to indeed finance these, they are very sensitive to the financial component of their reward package (Asthana, 2008). They are essentially willing to work longer hours, but just to receive in exchange the appropriate  compensation, be it in money or time off.

A total reward approach is thus necessary to retain them and since individuals are different one another, a “cafeteria style” benefit programme would be the most appropriate to ensure that each of them will have the opportunity to choose the reward s/he values the most.

 

Can Nexters contribute to their organisation achievement of completive advantage?

Generation Y, as the other generations, enabling the employer to count on a diverse workforce can actually contribute to the workplace fresh thinking and new perspectives. Businesses achieving a good level of harmonisation between generations can benefit of high performance, creativity, innovation and, thus, competitive edge (Ozbilgin et al., 2008).

As pointed out by Ulrich and Smallwood (2002), what can really contribute competitive advantage to organisations is their human capital or “intangible assets.” Nexters with their distinctive ability and confidence in the use of new technologies, coupled with their interest in training and in personal and professional growth, can effectively contribute to their organisation achievement of competitive edge.

“Plorking” is an example of their new way to approach the work, that is, spending hours during the day on the computer working and playing as well; indeed this is not the way they avoid working, but just the way they approach working (Redmond, 2009).

On the other hand, the fact that these individuals are particularly demanding in term of reward and compensation and that they are willing to go the extra mile only in exchange for a money supplement can be negatively perceived by employers.

Figures provided by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and a Work Audit carried out by CIPD (2009), revealed that the recession has had a bigger impact on employment for the under 25s (CIPD, 2010). Findings of an additional research (CIPD, 2010) gave evidence that work satisfaction, at its all-time low, recorded the most dramatic levels amongst Nexters, who expressed a far higher level of work dissatisfaction than the other generations.

 

How to adapt HRM practices

Organisations wanting to recruit and retain Yers clearly need to adapt their policies and practices to the wants of these demanding and techno-savvy individuals.

Training, for instance, need to be carried out using cutting edge technologies and considering that Yers need to receive constant feedback (Parry, E. and Urwin, P., 2009). A massive use of technology is also required in communications: blog, webcasts, podcasts, SharePoint and live forums will all fit and meet their preferences.

Line managers will be of paramount importance to the implementation of new strategies: they should strive for redesigning their day-to-day job in order this to provide to these individuals a stronger sense of purpose and fulfilment and greater accountability.
 

To meet Yers expectations retention and engagement strategies will need to balance the business needs with their increasing demand for work-life balance, flexibility and freedom. Effectually managing the emerged blurred line between socialising and work for the younger generations will also be a key driver of engagement.

Create reward policies meeting the older generations’ view of reward, considered as linked to the length of service, and the Yers aggressive attitude to performance- and merit-related pay will be particular challenging, but this definitely represents an important feet to achieve for employers.

To accommodate Yers needs, the most appropriate HRM strategy approach to pursue is the resource-based. This approach assumes that competitive edge can only be achieved by means of an inimitable bundle of “distinctive resources” (Barney, 1991) and establishing a link between “internal resources, strategy and firm performance” (Boxal, 1996). These resources must be:

·         Valuable, that is, have the required competencies;

·         Rare, in terms of flexibility and adaptability;

·         Inimitable, in order to avert competitors to understand the reasons for success;

·         Non-substitutable, that is, transferable to different organizational functions in the long-run (Wright et al., 1994).

The People and Performance Model developed by the Bath University can be deemed as the most suitable model enabling employers to redress organisations’ strategies in order to meet Yers needs and expectations and retain this generation’s employees. This model is in fact based on the most appropriate bundle and supported by the AMO (abilities, motivation and opportunity) approach (Torrington et al., 2008). This HRM model also properly emphasizes the importance of line mangers during the implementation phase of new strategies.

 

Longo, R., (2010), How to attract and retain Gen Y and change HRM policies accordingly, HR Professionals, Milan [online].

The end of Generation Y as we know it (?)

Veterans
• Aged 60+
• Called traditionalists in the US
• Joined the workforce when the labour market was flourishing
• 50% of them have spent at least 10 years with their current employer and 33% have even spent more than 20.

Baby boomers
• Aged between 46 and 61
• Joined the workforce in a period of harsh competition for work and their career have been, by and large, linked to long working hours
• 50% have spent the last 10 years with their current employer.

Generation X
• Aged between 31 and 45
• Most of them graduated into the worst condition of job market since the Depression and are used to uncertainty
• 50% have spent at least five years with their current employer

Generation Y
• Aged between 19 and 30
• Grew up in a time of relative peace and prosperity, but for the impact of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and 7/7
• Joined the workforce in a economic boom
• 50% spent less than three years with their current employer.

The findings of a survey carried out last year by Penna, CIPD and PeopleMetrics, showed that beyond any expectations, Generation Y is not aiming to change job every year and, on the contrary, 50% of them said they planned to work with their current employer for at least five years. Nonetheless, as we have already seen, 50% of them had spent less than three years with their employer at the time of the survey.
Generation Y workers are by and large considered focused in flexibility, professional freedom, higher rewards, better work-life balance and present new challenges.
As one US HR Director explained: “They have seen their parents work all their lives for the same company and then get fired. They are not interested in killing themselves for work”.
Clearly the content of the psychological contract, the unwritten contract stating the mutual obligation between employee and employer, seem requiring to be revisited. That’s why nowadays we usually speak about a “new” psychological contract, opposed to the “old” one.
Definitely tricky workers to cope with, notwithstanding, they too need to be motivated, pushing organisation to improve their retention policies.
What is the impact, if any, of the current recession? Changing job today is as easy as it could be simply 1/2 years ago?

What is your experience with Generation Y?
Which is the behaviour of “Generation Y” in your firm? Are they used to stay for long periods or for short ones?
Is that true that they are not looking for a “job for life” and that they are not interested in “killing themselves for work”?
Have you seen any change since the recession outbreak?