For offering foundational base of study, this chapter consists of importance of Generation Y, learning intention, career adaptability and employee retention.
Generation Y Definition
Generality pertains to the definition of Gen Y roughly considered as whom born between 1970-2000, and the range of born year is the most common way to define Gen Y, see Table 2.1. However, their definition has been debated in the literature for decades, the birth years defining the Millennial generation are not precise because that are correspond roughly born year that between late 1970 to 2000s rather than universally accepted definition of Gen Y (Levenson, 2010).
Table 2.1.
The Differences Definition of Gen Y
Definition Year Author
Generation Y born between approximately
1978 and 1995 2002 Smola & Sutton
Generation Y born between 1978 and 1988 2005 Martin Generation Y generally defined as people born
between 1980 and the mid to late 1990s. 2010 Levenson Generation Y born between the years from
1980 to 2000. 2012 Cekada
Defines Gen Y as those individuals born
between 1977 and 1994. 2013 Luscombe et al.
Generation Y called as millennial, who are
born in 1980s-1990s. 2014 Kilber et al.
This study defined Gen Y as those individuals born between 1980 and 1993. Reasoning in accordance with the Taiwanese career path and education system. Approaches 80 percent of fresh graduate are complete their bachelor degree at 22 years old.
Gen Y named variety but revealed their generation feature observably. Some researcher called them as Millennials, Gen Y, Echo Boomers (Smith, 2010) which is related to their born years’ feature; some are called them as Nexters, Generation www, the Digital Generation, Echo Boomers, N-Gens (Berkup, 2014; Martin, 2005) which is related to the advanced technology in their childhood. Others are called them as Non-Nuclear Family Generation, the Nothing-Is-Sacred Generation, the Feel-Good Generation, CyberKids, the Do-or-Die Generation, and the Searching-for-an-Identity Generation, Entitled Generation (Barford &
Hester, 2011; Martin, 2005) and Generation Me, based on the observation of Gen Y characteristics.
Characteristics of Gen Y
Mannheim (1970) asserted that cohort effect makes generations differentiate from another, because of specific social event (i.e., social movement, economic dynamic changing, or a breakthrough improvement of technology) during a their childhood and teenage period.
Recent year, several studies stated that cohort effect leave deep impression on core value, belief, work ethic, and life style of an age group (Krahn & Galambos, 2014).
Nowadays, the technology-centered world that has strongly influenced to the way of people communicated, absorbed knowledge, working approach, attitude, and expectation about their future. Besides, educational background, economic environment, social network, and perceptive of working are much more complex than previous generations (Thompson &
Gregory, 2012).
The characteristics of Gen Y have been discussed and described in plenty of research worldwide. Several characteristics are related to Gen Y beliefs and attitudes. For example, Gen Y individuals value their personal life much more than their work life; they prefer the concept “work to live” rather than live to work, they also do not believe in work-life balance or integration. They are willing to work and solve problem in teams, value working flexibility, willing to embrace diversity and change, have comprehensive knowledge of technology and feel comfortable with technology (Bannon, Ford, & Meltzer, 2011; Cekada, 2012; Gavatorta, 2012; Kilber et al., 2014; Luscombe et al., 2013; Stanimir, 2015).
Since Gen Y enter the workplace, the issues of management challenge, working attitude are in a spotlight, such as disloyalty, perceived neediness, overall casualness, short-term sight and sense of entitlement, most of all, the gap between employee and employer for long-term commitment cause management challenge in workplace. (Martin, 2005; Thompson &
Gregory, 2012).
In spite of previous studies stated criticism about Gen Y working attitude, several researches advocate Gen Y positive side and recognized their contribution (Fallon, 2009;
Kilber et al., 2014; Martin, 2005; Tapscott, 2010). They believed that all the criticism about Gen Y is a stereotype, and not every single person alike the overall negative perspective.
Besides, they indicated that Gen Y were proactive, independent and can thrive on rapid working advancement. They were well educated and grow up in the extremely competitive external environment, they have been cultivated to be autonomous, innovative, and were expected to make some change to the environment.
To sum up, organizations should emphases on the reasons of management challenge among their young people in workplace and need to use the appropriate managerial style and
motivate better performance in organizations (Tapscott, 2010).
Learning Intention Derivation of Learning Intention
The theory of planed behavior interpreted the way of people forming an intention, which will lead to an actual behavior. Ajzen (1991) indicated attitude toward behavior, subject norm and perceived behavior control as the main character to perform a behavior, the pattern gained a lot of recognition in worldwide in decades.
An attitude means person’s opinion about whether a behavior is positive or negative. A subjective norm describes the social pressure an individual feels of arising from one’s perception to perform or not perform the behavior at hand. Perceived behavior control was widely used in physiological field, for example, the theory of self-efficacy. Perceived behavior control is refers to people’s perception of the ease or difficulty of performing the behavior of interest, in other word, people take their self-control ability as a motivator of performing a behavior.
As the Figure 2.1. showed below, perceived behavioral control is both direct influence behavior and indirect influence behavior by behavioral intention. The direct path from perceived behavioral control to behavior is assumed to reflect the actual control an individual has over performing the behavior. The indirect path happened if their intentions of performing the behaviors are low, (even if they have delightful attitudes and/or positive subjective norms concerning the performance of the behavior) which is result in people believe they have little control over performing the behavior because of a lack of requisite resource.
Figure 2.1. Framework of the theory of planned behavior. Adapted from “The theory of planned behavior” by Ajzen, I. 1991, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), p.182. Copyright 2016 by Elsevier B. V.
In 1991, Ajzen found that expectancy of success is similar to the concept of perceived behavior control. Expectancy of success was defined as “perceived probability of succeeding at a given task.” It’s similar to perceived behavior control because it refers to a specific behavior context and generalized tendency.
In addition, self-efficacy theory is one of the most known for conduct perceived behavior control, the mainly idea is self-efficacy can influence choice of activities, preparation for an activity, effort expended during performance, as well as thought patterns and emotional reactions (Bandura, 1986, 1991). Furthermore, Zimmerman (2000) stated that the one who have higher self-efficacy beliefs support themself a system of self-regulatory to motivate through learning process. The system of self-regulatory including goal setting,
self-monitoring, self-evaluation and strategy use. In other words, the theory of planned behavior generated a more mineral framework of the relations among beliefs, attitude, intentions, and behavior by placing the construct of self-efficacy belief or perceived behavior control.
Learning Intention Context
Based on the context of intention, this attention of learning intention is specific given to learning in workplace and applies the concept of the theory of planned behavior to denote learning intention. Learning intention conceptually defined as a wiliness of participating in learning activities, because the intention of engaging to particular learning activities can be considered as a strong indicator for actual behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Learning intention is an inner drive of employee to participate a learning activity provided by employer and was considered a proximal determinant of participation in education and training.
Furthermore, Maurer, Weiss, and Barbeite (2003) indicated specifically that the intention to participate in learning activities was a robust predictor of actual participation in those learning activities. Kyndt et al. (2011b) defined learning intention as a readiness or willingness to undertake a concrete action in order to reach a desired situation by means of training and education program. Based on previous research, learning intention is clearly indicated to participate learning activities physically, rather than on-line learning or self-learning.
Baert et al. (2006) also put forward a rational decision-making process that is consider attitudes toward learning and subjective social norms of employees. The development of a learning intention centralizes the decision-making process of the individual, which is considered to be an increasing articulation of an educational need. As the Figure 2.2. showed,
the decision-making process is initialed at a need, then the need produce educational need, learning intention, educational demand, afterward, educational participation. Thus, a learning intention is realized on educational participation.
Learning Intention of Gen Y
Regarding learning intention of Gen Y, the youngest group in organization. Since they are going to represent an organization’s future in next decades, the intention of learning is important to concern. The learning style has changed since Yers are natural on advanced technology and the abundant resources of learning is convenience to reach as long as they initiative to approach it. Gen Y used to explore the Internet to learn new things, pay a lot of attention to reach what they are interesting. Thus, attend the structured training course physically is not the interest to Gen Y if they didn’t realized how important to their individual career development. A training make them spend additional time to dealing with work responsibility, most of people therefore rather to take online activities than take part of a training course.
However, for long-term consideration, learning intention is an essential factor for Gen Y’s career development, because the purpose of training courses is to help organization become more profitable by eliminating the gap between desired status and current status, then
Figure 2.2. Decision-making process of the potential learner. Adapted from “Towards the conceptualization of learning climate”by H. Baert et al., 2006. In R. Vieira de Castro, A. V. Sancho, & P. Guimaraes (Eds.) Adult Education: New Routes in a New Landscape, p.95. Copyright 2006 by University of Minho.
meet the development goal. Thus learning intention can be considered as the foster of organization development.
Regarding Socio-demographic characteristics, the attention is given to gender differences toward learning intention of Gen Y, according to Sanders et al. (2011) finding, female had higher learning intentions than male. Elman and O’Rand (2002) further investigate the willingness to retrain in order to increase job insecurity. They found that female have more willingness to retrain because they are the group that have more risky of losing its job. On the contrary, Greenhalgh and Mavrotas (1994) and Zoogah (2010) did not find gender differences on learning intention. Therefore, it is lack of literature evidence of the gender discrepancy of learning intention of Gen Y.
Speak of educational level difference on learning intention, it is found that an employees without college degree are less likely to engage in future activities, on the other hand, the employee who obtained degree-level qualifications showed a higher learning intention.
Greenhalgh and Mavrotas (1994) found that employees who obtained degree-level qualifications demonstrate a higher learning intention. Elman and O’Rand (2002) showed that employees without a college degree are less likely to engage in future learning activities.
Kyndt et al. (2011b), whose study focused on low-educated employees, that is, those without a starter’s qualification for higher education, found that those employees without any form of educational degree had the lowest learning intentions
Based on the previous research, the connection between learning intention and gender difference of Gen Y is remain unclear, the current research will test the differences and present in chapter IV.
To conclude, an effective learning is like a coin of two sides; one is learning opportunity
provided by supervisor, another side is a wiliness of learning drive by employee selves.
Regarding the learning opportunity in business, the upper administration need to aware that learning and development opportunity take a critical factor of organization development in order to succeed in the rapid business environment. On the other hand, company competitive advantage as well as cultivated and established by employee initiative and proactive to participate in learning activities. In others words, the effectiveness of training outcome is relay on employee’s initiative on self-learning, in other word, the training outcome will not be useful or applicable if employee lacking of learning intention to take the chances to learn.
(Kyndt et al., 2013)
Career Adaptability
According to the career construction theory proposed by Savickas (2005), it explains the process of individuals build their career by construct themselves, impose direction on their vocational behavior, and make meaning of their career in a same age group.
To denote the perspective of career constructions, Savickas (2005) used the roles of playing a film as a metaphor: (a) Self as actor. The perspective describes a story about occupations’ order from being a student to retirement, (b) Self as agent. The perspective on agent put emphasis on strivings and adaptations pursued by the occupant plot, and (c) Self as author. The perspective on self as author delineates individuals’ reflection on their own life stories.
Adaptability indicated the personality traits of flexibility and willingness to change. In psychosocial construct theory, career adaptability denoted the individual’ willingness of taking part in both predictable and unpredictable tasks which is under changing work circumstance.
Savickas (1997) have had established a fundamental concept of career adaptability and defined as “the readiness of cope with the predictable tasks of preparing for and participating in the work role and with the unpredictable adjustment prompted by changes in work and working conditions”.
In 2012, Savickas advanced structured a model and proposed four major dimensions to assess individual’s career adaptability. These dimensions represent general adaptability resources and strategies of individuals when they are manage critical tasks, transition, and traumas as they construct their career. Those four dimensions are: (a) Career concern, (b) Career control, (c) Career curiosity, and, (d) Career confidence.
Career concern. Career concern is a fundamental dimension of career adaptability, means essentially a future orientation, a sense that it is important to prepare for tomorrow.
Individual who concerning about their own career will foster themselves looking forward and starting prepare for coming vocational tasks and occupational transition. An attitude of future orientation enables person become optimism about the achievability of future goals embedded in the construct, and well aware of the connecting experience between preferred occupation and present occupation. A belief in persisting difference experience provide people to explore possible selves. Most of all, the attitude and belief encourage people to promote advanced competencies in order to planning and preparing for the future.
Career control. In career construction theory, define control as an aspect of intrapersonal processes that stimulate self-regulation. Individual controlling enables people being conscientious, deliberate, organized and to use self-discipline and persistence to shaping themselves in performing vocational development tasks and making occupational transitions clearly.
Career curiosity. In career construction theory, career curiosity means a sense of curiousness of exploring career information and simultaneously arouses motivation to seeking differences experiences and roles when exploring possible selves and alternative scenarios. The attitude of inquisitiveness enables people to scan the environment to learn more about self and situations.
Career confidence. The person who is confidence means he or she possess certain ability to perform things successfully, feeling peaceful when encountering challenges and overcoming obstacles. In career construction theory, career confidence is a sense of self-efficacy, self-esteem, and feeling of encouragement.
To sum up, it is a progress of exploring and seeking experience, people execute an action and choose a suitable education and occupation.
Employee Retention
Nowadays, VUCA world has become a best description of external business environment; VUCA is represent volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. Indeed, the tremendous global economic changed, rapidly technological innovation has formed a dynamic and unpredictable world. Based on the impact of external environment, companies need to be able to anticipate technological innovation and be able to compete with other companies worldwide by considering employees’ knowledge and skills as an asset to companies (Burke & Ng, 2006). Having and retaining skilled and employees is significant link to the continuous learning and development of the employees, which is critical to retention process, as Hiltrop (1999) stated, employees’ knowledge and skills have become the key for companies to be economically competitive.
Gberevbie (2008) further found that adopting and implementing appropriate retention
strategies would achieve organizational terminal goal and remain employees successfully, Workforce Planning for Wisconsin State Government (2005) defined employee retention as
“.... a systematic effort to create and foster an environment that encourages employees to remain employed by having policies and practices in place that address their diverse needs.”
In terms of the definition, several researches aimed to investigate the factors of employee retention, these factors can roughly divide into three dimensions, social, mental, and physical.
The social dimension is refers to the internal contact and external contact among employees, the mental dimension is refers to the opportunity that employee could apply their knowledge flexibility and see the result of their efforts, which can help them in retaining the valuable resources. The physical dimension refers to working conditions and compensation. Several research provide some factors that all included in the three dimensions, for example, Walker (2001) listed seven factors of retention: (a) compensation and appreciation of the performed work, (b) provision of challenging work, (c) chances to be promoted and to learn, (d) invitational atmosphere within the organization, (e) positive relations with colleagues, (f) a healthy balance between the professional and (g) good communications. Plus, Cascio (2005) suggested that recognizing employees’ performance, establishing harmonious working atmosphere, provide a safe and healthy working environment.
Apart from the organizational systematic effort of retention people, the aspect of personal factors also considered as a critical element of employee retention. Curtis and Wright (2001) supported that if employees who with a high organizational commitment and value the sense of membership, agree with its objectives and value systems, are more likely to remain in an organization, also be well-prepared to align the organizational value.
Furthermore, Stauss et al. (2001) defined retention with same concept, “customer liking,
identification, commitment, trust, readiness to recommend, and repurchase intentions, with the first four being emotional-cognitive retention constructs, and the last two being behavioral intentions.” As the definition, it is focus on the employee’s mental contract with organization, and tends to emphasize employee take the initiative to be to part of organization.
In the research point of view, retention is an initiative of individual that can keep them stay in an organization by managerial approach. Thus, the current paper adopts the definition of employee retention from Stauss et al. (2001), which is an anchor for retention investigation of Gen Y.
Gen Y will occupy the primary population in workforce both in global, thus, the characteristic is necessary to considered when organization are going to set up a retention strategy. Gen Y tend to switching jobs or careers in terms of “search interesting”, and account for 60% of Gen Y have changed jobs at least once when they are just getting into workplace not so long, “job hopping” become a common stereotype and impression to Gen Y (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). In addition, people need to remain a job for 33.6 months to be proficient, and do not unemployed more than 4.5 months because people will custom the status of unemployment by staying at home, and afraid of get into wok place after a long time stay at home, further become a problem to society. View on Gen Y characteristic, researcher found that the Yers are not afraid of becoming unemployed because they believe in their families can support them during that time. On the other hand, Gen Y is open to change, no
Gen Y will occupy the primary population in workforce both in global, thus, the characteristic is necessary to considered when organization are going to set up a retention strategy. Gen Y tend to switching jobs or careers in terms of “search interesting”, and account for 60% of Gen Y have changed jobs at least once when they are just getting into workplace not so long, “job hopping” become a common stereotype and impression to Gen Y (Thompson & Gregory, 2012). In addition, people need to remain a job for 33.6 months to be proficient, and do not unemployed more than 4.5 months because people will custom the status of unemployment by staying at home, and afraid of get into wok place after a long time stay at home, further become a problem to society. View on Gen Y characteristic, researcher found that the Yers are not afraid of becoming unemployed because they believe in their families can support them during that time. On the other hand, Gen Y is open to change, no