Ageism and Intergenerational Dynamics in the Workplace: A Scoping Review with Implications for Gender and Sustainable Human Resource Management (HRM)

2.1 Inclusion Criteria

The selected articles had to meet the following inclusion criteria: 1) published in peer-reviewed journals; 2) written in English; 3) published between 2007 and 2023; 4) empirical research, reviews or opinion articles (excluding gray literature). To ensure transparency and rigor in the study selection process, the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines (Tricco et al. 2018) were followed.

2.2 Search Strategy

There were four steps in the search strategy. To commence, an initial exploratory search, informed by the research teams own existing knowledge of the topic, identified published journal articles within the research area. These articles were then reviewed to identify key concepts and phrases in the literature to inform the development of a comprehensive keyword search string using Boolean operators (Harter 1986) to focus search results. Thirdly, the keyword search string was used to query article titles and abstracts contained in relevant electronic databases. Finally, following screening, the reference lists of included studies were reviewed to locate any additional studies for inclusion.

The terms used were (“worker*” OR “employee” OR “workforce” OR “employment” OR “labor market” OR “labour” OR “job*” OR “work” OR “workplace” OR “work environment”) AND (“ageing” OR “aging” OR “old*” OR “mature” OR “ageism” OR “ageist” OR “age discrimination”) AND (“intergenerational” OR “multigenerational” OR “generational” OR “age diversity” OR “age-diverse” OR “interpersonal” OR “younger worker*” OR “generation*” OR “friendship*” OR “interaction*” OR “interpersonal” “behaviour” OR “behavior” OR “solidarity” OR “dynamic*” OR “conflict” OR “relations” OR “mentor*” OR “difference*” OR “collaboration” OR “gap” OR “exchange”).

Five databases were searched: Web of Science (177 results), ProQuest Social Science Collection (151 results), Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA) (95 results), PsycINFO (85 results), and Scopus (9 results).

2.3 Screening and Study Selection

In total, 517 articles were identified following the search strategy steps as detailed and were imported into Covidence screening and data extraction manager (Veritas Health Innovation 2023). Duplicates were automatically removed, yielding a total of 245 articles for screening. Following the guidance by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien (2010), a transparent and reproducible screening process to assess eligibility for full text evaluation was undertaken. Firstly, titles and abstracts were reviewed for adherence to the inclusion criteria. 157 further studies were deemed as not fully complying with the inclusion criteria and were excluded, resulting in 88 studies for full text review. The full text of these potential articles were retrieved and assessed and 28 were selected for extraction and further analysis. Finally, the reference lists of these included studies were scrutinised for additional articles and a further 22 articles were identified for inclusion. Reasons for exclusion varied, including not relating specifically to older workers, intergenerational relations or ageism. Following further review and scrutiny, the screening and study selection process yielded a total of 25 studies for inclusion in the review and is reported and presented in a PRISMA-ScR flow diagram (see Figure 1).

Figure 1:

PRISMA-ScR flow diagram of study selection process.

2.4 Data Extraction

The finalised 25 included articles were examined for compliance with the objectives of the scoping review by the research team. To chart the data and record characteristics and key information, a systematic record of the following was extracted and compiled into a data extraction table: author(s), year, region, title, publication, study aims, population and methods. In doing so, the researchers were able to characterise the research conducted to date and identify any potential research gaps. The extraction is presented in Table 1.

2.5 Study and Population Characteristics

The selected articles comprised of 18 quantitative studies (Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi 2020; Claes and Bart Van de Ven 2008; Desmette and Gaillard 2008; Fasbender, Burmeister, and Wang 2023; Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021; Hanrahan, Thomas, and Finkelstein 2023; Iweins et al. 2013; Jelenko 2020; Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019; Lagacé et al. 2022; Lagacé et al. 2023; Lavoie-Tremblay et al. 2010; McCann and Keaton 2013; McConatha, Kumar, and Magnarelli 2022; Moriarity, Brown, and Schultz 2014; Tybjerg-Jeppesen et al. 2023; von Humboldt et al. 2023; Yeung et al. 2021), two qualitative studies (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017; Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018), two review articles (Dencker, Joshi, and Martocchio 2007; Finkelstein, King, and Voyles 2015) and three opinion articles (Barabaschi 2015; Sudheimer 2009; Weingarten 2009). Of these, six studies explored not only ageism but also age discrimination with an intersectional gender perspective (Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi 2020; Desmette and Gaillard 2008; Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021; Lyons and Schweitzer 2017; Moriarity, Brown, and Schultz 2014; von Humboldt et al. 2023).

Geographically, 14 studies were conducted in the US and Canada, 10 in Europe and one study was located in Asia. The articles investigated workers aged 16 and older, focusing on diverse questions related to ageism and intergenerational relationships in the workplace, particularly between younger and older workers. The definitions of younger and older workers varied significantly across the studies, influenced by cultural and policy contexts. Younger workers are often defined as individuals aged 15–24, with some policies extending this to 29 years (Haar Ter and Rönnmar 2014) and older workers as those aged 55–64 (Steiber 2014). Among our selected articles, the Slovenian study (Jelenko 2020) defined the younger workers as 18–35 years old and older workers as 55 years and above. In the UK study (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018), younger workers were those below 35 years old and older workers were individuals above 50 years old. The Danish study by Tybjerg-Jeppesen et al. (2023) considered younger workers as those aged 18 to 30 and older workers as those 50 years and above. However, in the Hong Kong study (Yeung et al. 2021), younger workers were people aged 20–34 while older workers were those aged 40–68 years old, and the Canadian study defined the group of older workers as employees aged 45 years and above (Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019).

2.6 Data Coding and Analysis

Following the thematic analysis guidelines proposed by Braun and Clarke (2021), patterns within the data were identified and analysed to capture the spectrum of concepts across the literature. This was achieved by reading and noting features in a systematic way. The codes were grouped into four overarching themes with associated sub-themes and are now discussed. The themes and examples extracted from the literature are presented in Table 2 (The codebook with detailed examples from the literature is available upon request from the authors).

3.1 Ageism and Gender in Workplace Discrimination

Age discrimination affects job satisfaction and engagement across all age groups, and it can influence broader socio-economic outcomes, such as social cohesion, economic growth and the sustainability of healthcare and retirement systems (Jelenko 2020). Ageist attitudes are not limited to any one age group, and both young and older workers who experience ageism at work report decreased work engagement and a reduced intention to stay in their jobs (Lagacé et al. 2023). Interestingly, von Humboldt et al. (2023) found that as people age, their perception of experiencing age discrimination tends to increase. Ageist stereotypes towards older workers can harm both organizations and individuals. When older workers leave, organizations may suffer lose valuable knowledge, which affects the sustainability of institutional memory (Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019). At an individual level, older workers who report age-related discrimination often experience lower life satisfaction (McConatha et al. 2022).

Gender can influence generational differences in workplace settings (Moriarity, Brown, and Schultz 2014). For older women, employment experiences are often shaped by the intersection of age-based discrimination and gendered roles. For example, Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi (2020) found that gender can significantly impact older workers’ sense of competence and their intentions to remain in the workforce. Older female workers are often less motivated by receiving knowledge from their colleagues (Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi 2020), which can affect their job satisfaction and decision about continuing employment (McConatha et al. 2023). Technology also poses unique challenges. Albinowski and Lewandowski (2024) found that advancements in ICT and robots have reduced the sectoral employment opportunities and wage shares of European women aged 60 and above. In blue-collar jobs, older female applicants experience greater age discrimination during hiring compared to older men (Drydakis et al. 2017). In some industries, older women face compounded challenges. For instance, in the IT sector, they are underrepresented and often part of a vulnerable group (Brooke 2009). Similarly, Fitzpatrick and O’Neill (2023) highlighted that older women in the film industry encounter significant ageism, with stark underrepresentation in leadership roles.

Besides gender, such factors as life-cycle stage and work culture also can interact with age to influence how workers define their social identity and generational affiliations (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017). For instance, social roles tied to family responsibilities, like caregiving, often lead women (but not men) to retire early to meet family needs (Wu, Li, and Waern 2022), while men may seek ways to stay active in the workforce as they age (Desmette and Gaillard 2008). Furthermore, research by Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé (2021) suggests that age can moderate the negative impact of gender on ageist practices toward older workers, which indicates the need for more detailed research into how factors like gender, education level, and profession interact and influence age-related stereotypes and discrimination in the workplace (von Humboldt et al. 2023).

3.2 Generational Identity and Stereotyping in the Workplace

Identifying with a generational group is a way for individuals to make sense of the workplace social context, providing a basis for both social and individual identity within an organisation (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017). Across the literature, age-related patterns in workers’ identification with generational groups highlight how people view themselves, understand workplace group dynamics and relate to organisational culture (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017). Workers often prefer interacting with colleagues of their own age group (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018), however, recognizing similarities between age groups has been found to mediate negative stereotypes about other groups and foster positive relationships (Iweins et al. 2013).

Workplaces with distinct generational groupings tend to develop more positive attitudes toward older workers. Yet, when older workers identify closely with age-related peers, they often hold more negative attitudes toward their work and express a stronger desire to retire early (Desmette and Gaillard 2008). Generational identity at work can influence perceptions with the group and, in the case of older workers, it may lead to disadvantages compared to younger age groups (von Humboldt et al. 2023). Younger workers, on the other hand, may be shielded from awareness of negative stereotypes about older workers due to their generational identity (Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021). While misconceptions exist for every generation (Weingarten 2009), Patel, Tinker, and Corna (2018) found that the tendency for workers to form groups based on age can intensify conflicts and add complexity to the work environment, which is in line with the findings of Weingarten (2009).

Perceptions of other generational groups reveal how generational identity can shape workplace stereotypes. Younger workers often view older colleagues as reliable, hardworking, experienced, and willing to share knowledge, contributing to better decision making and a positive work environment (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). These positive views about older workers have been linked to increased work engagement for all employees (Lagacé et al. 2022). However, when younger workers tend to have neutral or mixed perceptions about the cognitive abilities of their older colleagues (McCann and Keaton 2013), they may also perceive older colleagues as resistant to change or less adaptable (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017; McCann and Keaton 2013; Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018; von Humboldt et al. 2023).

Contradictions arise in perceptions of older workers. They are often seen as loyal to their employer (McCann and Keaton 2013) but may be viewed as prioritizing responsibilities outside of work, such as caregiving (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). A study by Van Dalen and colleagues (2010) involving 10 Dutch companies found that both employers and employees across all age groups view older workers as loyal to employers and highly committed to organization. Older workers are sometimes perceived as less uncomfortable with new technology (McCann and Keaton 2013), which can reinforce generational stereotypes (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017). As to younger workers, there is a general perception that they lack a strong work ethic and are more self-centred (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017) and are less likely to do additional shifts at work (Sudheimer 2009).

Stereotypes about generational groups shape workplace perceptions across the literature, with younger workers more often holding different views about both their own and other generations (McCann and Keaton 2013). Age meta-stereotyping refers to the process by which one group perceives how they believe another group views them (Vauclair et al. 2016), and it adds an additional layer of complexity to age-diverse interactions (Finkelstein, King and Voyles 2015). Negative stereotypes about older workers, for instance, viewing them as inflexible or outdated, are often deeply entrenched (von Humboldt et al. 2023). Violating age-related expectations, such as an older worker ‘acting young’, can lead to negative judgments about their stability (Hanrahan, Thomas, and Finkelstein 2023).

Positive intergroup contact can improve perceptions across generational lines, in particular, toward older workers and has been associated with increased work engagement (Lagacé et al. 2022). Encouraging open communication and understanding (Weingarten 2009), and promoting intergroup interactions, can help reduce stereotypes and foster a more inclusive workplace environment (Lagacé et al. 2022).

3.3 Intergenerational Dynamics and Knowledge Transfer in the Workplace

A positive intergenerational climate at work has been shown to enhance job satisfaction and employee retention (Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021). The prevailing findings of the study by Patel, Tinker, and Corna (2018) revealed that many workers appreciate a generational mix in the workplace, as different age groups often bring complementary skills. For instance, older workers tend to excel in customer service and social skills, while younger workers often perform better with technical skills (Van Dalen, Henkens, and Schippers 2010). Additionally, research by Frerichs et al. (2012) indicates that knowledge transfer between younger and older workers is an effective practice for active ageing. This exchange of knowledge and skills not only promotes the retention of older employees but also helps organizations address the challenges of an ageing workforce (Frerichs et al. 2012).

In general, younger workers who interact frequently with older colleagues hold more positive attitudes toward them (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). However, motivations for social interactions at work differ between age groups. Older workers see these interactions as a measure of personal success and a way to boost productivity, while younger workers view them as opportunities for mentorship and network-building (Moriarity, Brown, and Schultz 2014). Younger workers generally respect their older colleagues, though this respect often leads to more formal communication with them (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). Older workers reported that their work domain was devalued when their social identity as an older worker did not translate into meaningful relationships at work (Desmette and Gaillard 2008), and younger workers found that older colleagues could be intimidating, resulting in a hesitation to ask questions for fear of being judged (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). When the boundaries between older and younger groups are rigid, it can lead to disengagement (Desmette and Gaillard 2008).

Intergenerational tensions are often rooted in differing approaches to work and can be exacerbated when generational groups become insular (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018). A lack of understanding about generational cultures, styles, and backgrounds could lead to conflict in the workplace (Weingarten 2009). Generational differences in workplace friendships have also been linked to role conflicts and incivility toward colleagues of other generations (Fasbender, Burmeister, and Wang 2023), and these generational differences can negatively impact on job satisfaction (Jelenko 2020). Older workers in poor health or in physically demanding roles are more likely to engage in intergenerational competition (Desmette and Gaillard 2008), while younger workers may feel competitive when they perceive that older workers are staying in higher positions longer than expected (Sudheimer 2009). Remarkably, older workers tend to manage emotional reactions to workplace conflict more effectively than younger employees (Yeung et al. 2021).

Knowledge transfer across generations in the workplace is widely recognized as mutually fulfilling and beneficial. According to Barabaschi (2015), the French government introduced a labour market policy in 2013 aimed at supporting the entry of young people into the workforce and retaining older workers. This initiative promotes sustainable employment and the transfer of knowledge and skills by pairing young employees with experienced senior workers (Barabaschi 2015).

Mentorship opportunities also provide motivational benefits for all age groups and contribute to staff retention (Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi 2020). Research by Wikström and colleagues (2023) highlights the importance of trust and a sense of community in mentorship relationships. These factors enhance socialization, leading to increased social capital through learning and retaining employees (Wikström et al. 2023). However, younger workers are often in the role of receiving knowledge without reciprocating, due to organizational age norms and their own goal priorities (Burmeister et al. 2024). They may also hesitate to ask questions or be vulnerable (Patel, Tinker, and Corna 2018; Wikström et al. 2023). Meanwhile, older workers may feel that participating in intergenerational knowledge sharing does not always lead to a sense of inclusion or value (Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019). Therefore, organizational support, along with a culture that promotes knowledge-sharing, should be prioritized (Burmeister et al. 2024).

Additionally, bi-directional knowledge sharing practices between younger and older workers is crucial for fostering positive attitudes toward ageing (Lagacé et al. 2023), as it increases younger workers’ awareness of ageist behaviours in the workplace (Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021). Moreover, continual, trustful interactions between mentors and mentees are essential for building strong, mutually beneficial relationships (Wikström et al. 2023).

3.4 Workplace Climate and Generational Work Experiences

Older workers often place greater value on organisational structures and processes compared to younger workers (Lavoie-Tremblay et al. 2010). Benefits such as pensions and medical care are more important to older workers, while younger workers tend to focus on wage levels to meet higher housing and child-rearing costs (Dencker, Joshi, and Martocchio 2007). These differences in priorities can sometimes lead to intergenerational conflict, as younger workers may view older employees as having more favourable work conditions (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017). Generational differences also emerge in attitudes toward job loyalty and job insecurity tends to have a more negative impact on older workers (Claes and Van de Ven 2008), since they often value long tenures as a sign of loyalty and perseverance; in contrast, younger workers often prefer flexibility and are less inclined to commit to a single employer long-term (Lyons and Schweitzer 2017).

An inclusive intergenerational workplace is one of the most effective defences against ageism (Barabaschi 2015; Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019), as it reduces feelings of discrimination among older workers and fosters a sense of belonging for all employees (Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019). Positive intergenerational collaborations can also raise younger workers’ awareness of ageist practices, promoting mutual respect across age groups (Firzly, Van de Beeck, and Lagacé 2021). From human resource management (HRM) perspective, organisational performance is closely linked to HR activities in recruitment, development and employee management, therefore, effective HR practices can boost employee commitment and drive greater effort (Dastmalchian et al. 2015).

A positive workplace climate contributes to more favourable perceptions of ageing, as it is associated with better self-perceived ageing, increased work engagement and lower turnover intentions (Tybjerg-Jeppesen et al. 2023). A supportive and friendly work environment benefits employees of all generations in the workplace (Lavoie-Tremblay et al. 2010) by enhancing job satisfaction (Lagacé, Van de Beeck, and Firzly 2019). A study by Biswas, Boyle and Bhardwaj (2021), involving 182 human resource managers in Bangladeshi companies, concluded that supportive HR practices foster a positive organisational climate, promoting equal opportunity for everyone to grow and succeed irrespective of their background and identity. This inclusive climate enables organisations to take advantage of creativity and innovation offered by their diverse talents, which is a critical factor for the organisation to thrive in a dynamic market (Biswas, Boyle, and Bhardwaj 2021). Furthermore, organisational fairness, particularly when combined with opportunities for skill discretion, has been found to predict job satisfaction and commitment to the employer (Claes and Bart Van de Ven 2008). Fairness in organisational procedures also help improve attitudes toward older workers (Iweins et al. 2013), and employers play a critical role by facilitating mentoring and age-diverse learning opportunities (Burmeister, Wang, and Hirschi 2020).