Generational Power

Generational Power

How to harness the talents of a multi-generational team in the lab.
By Brian Busenbark

Fostering diversity has increasingly become a foundational principle for many organizations over the past several years. While the driving factors may vary, it’s generally accepted that leveraging the unique thoughts and experiences of a mixture of people with different identities, backgrounds and experiences strengthens a team.

Often lost in that conversation, however, is the importance of age diversity. In fact, a 2015 survey by PwC, an international consulting firm, found that fewer than 10% of organizations include age in their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) strategies. 

While some teams look to embrace DEI with open dialogue around topics once considered taboo in the workplace—including race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and gender identity—age and generational differences largely remain unspoken. Of course, it would be incorrect to assume everyone fits neatly into a broad category and carries the characteristics of a group based solely on their date of birth. Pew Research Center, a leader in generational research for decades, published new guidelines in 2023 outlining how it plans to take increasing care in the studies it puts forth. Among them is a plan to cease “always defaulting to using the standard generational definitions and labels.” 

But we’d be remiss to ignore generational traits entirely. Generations are defined by the events and surroundings that people of a similar age experienced during their formative years (see “5 Generations in the Workplace”). Learning to better understand how these influences shape our co-workers, leaders and team members can help build a stronger, more productive and cohesive team.

Resolve to Understand Differences

As a speaker and bestselling author on generational differences, Ryan Jenkins has spent years advising organizations of all shapes and sizes on how to leverage the strengths of various age cohorts in the workplace. So, it’s a bit ironic that he frames his work with the words of someone born a full century before the first generational label gained traction in the U.S.

“I always like to quote Abraham Lincoln, who once said, ‘I don’t like that man; I must get to know him better,’” Jenkins says. “That’s ultimately why I think the generational conversation is so important—we are different generationally, so that should be our cue to take a step closer to better understand that generation and the context in which that person came of age.”

Understanding the background from which a generation emerged, and its resulting traits and characteristics, is important, but maintaining an open mind is crucial—as generational labels often devolve into negative stereotypes. For example, a common misconception about the younger generations is that they don’t want to work. But working alongside them and understanding their motivation helps illuminate a perceived weakness as a strength. 

“My experience has been that they’re much better at boundary setting,” says Taben Hale, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Basic Medical Sciences at the University of Arizona in Phoenix. “I think that gets misinterpreted as not wanting to work, but that’s not it,” she says. “They do want to work, but they don’t want their work to be their life—and that’s actually healthy and appropriate.”

Therein lies the crux of the chicken-and-egg aspect of the generational conversation. As the world around us constantly evolves, change is inevitable. But when change in the workplace appears to be ushered in by a youth movement, it can cause a rift with the established guard, who may feel they’re being forced to change for the younger generation.

“That’s looking at the conversation all wrong,” Jenkins says. “It shouldn’t be about changing for a generation, but it should be about understanding differences across generations and changing in light of the future of the work.”

Two Types of Intelligence 

Adding complexity to the generational conversation is the biological factor. The strengths and capabilities that everyone brings to the workplace—regardless of their generational background—evolves with age. Jenkins cites the work of Raymond B. Cattell, PhD, a psychologist who developed analytic techniques that allowed for more nuanced empirical measurements of the components of personality and intelligence.

Cattell identified two categories of general intelligence: fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence. While everyone uses both types of intelligence daily, their relationship with our age is important to consider when looking at the relative strengths of different generational groups. 

Fluid intelligence refers to the ability to process new information and solve problems. It’s what helps us work puzzles, recognize patterns and devise strategies to tackle new problems. It’s essentially innate but tends to decline in most people by age 40. On the other hand, crystallized knowledge comes from accumulated experience and typically increases as we age. It represents our ability to work and solve problems by leveraging skills and knowledge we’ve amassed from prior learning.

Fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence work in tandem and are equally important. Jenkins says embracing the biology around when these types of intelligence typically peak is key to harnessing the power of a multi-generational team. “It’s important that we leverage the emerging generations’ fluid intelligence and use them for fresh eyes to explore our blind spots and innovate,” Jenkins says. “But we also need the crystallized intelligence of older generations as guideposts—knowing where we need to focus and in which direction we should go.”

Effective Communication Is Critical

Generational lines are becoming more blurred as the modern workplace evolves and more people take circuitous and non-traditional career paths. This is particularly true in academia, where it’s not uncommon for older workers to choose the lab environment following a career in another industry.

“Science is ageless in a way that I can easily be mentoring a graduate student who is in their 50s,” says Daria Ilatovskaya, PhD, associate professor and director of the graduate program for physiology at Augusta University in Georgia. “Previously, it was more common to have someone older be in charge and the trainees were usually younger, but I think that’s shifting now because more and more people change professions later in life.”

Both Ilatovskaya and Hale manage labs staffed with team members spanning multiple generations. They admit they aren’t sure where many of their workers are grouped from a generational standpoint. “As long as they are engaged, curious, flexible and science is their passion, that’s all that matters,” Ilatovskaya says.

Perhaps most importantly, communication is key to navigating a multi-generational workplace. The research indicates that each age group prefers different methods—baby boomers and Generation Z (perhaps surprisingly) value face-to-face communication, while Generation X and millennials would rather hear from others in an email or text message.

But one point is clear: Solid communication and clarity of direction are a universal language that cuts across generational lines. “When everybody understands the process and how they all fit together, all of that other stuff sort of falls away,” Hale says. “Everyone needs to feel valued and important in their role and understand where they fit into the work.”

Academia is naturally insulated from some of the generational concerns that may plague other industries, according to Hale and Ilatovskaya. They cite the steady influx of young people entering the workforce, as well as the energy all five generations now in the workplace typically bring to their job. Still, challenges will persist. Understanding what innately drives a generational group is an instructive start to handling issues that may arise. But ultimately, it’s often best to emulate Lincoln’s approach. 

“We shouldn’t be dismissive and create blanket statements about any generation, but rather listen to them and learn from them,” Hale says. “In the end, we’re all just people, so we need to learn from each other, find out what is important to them and work with them—as opposed to directing them.” 

This article was originally published in the March 2024 issue of The Physiologist Magazine. Copyright © 2024 by the American Physiological Society. Send questions or comments to tphysmag@physiology.org.