Age Diversity in the Workplace: The Effect of Relative Age within Supervisor-Employee Dyads on Engagement

Background/ Purpose: The US workforce is aging fast. In 2012, adults aged 55 and older represented 20.9% of the workforce compared to 11.8% in 1992. Work-related engagement has been found to be an important determinant of older workers’ overall subjective well-being. The disengagement hypothesis—that older employees increasingly disengage from their work as they age and start to “come in for a landing”—has been widely refuted, but little research has explored how age-related diversity factors such as age similarity/dissimilarity to one’s supervisor might contribute to engagement levels and thus, undermine or enhance performance, subjective well-being and healthy aging at work. The current study uses theories of relational demography to understand how relative age within supervisor-employee dyads influences worker engagement.

Methods: A multi-worksite sample of 1,817 workers age 18 to 81 collected in 2007/2008 for the Age & Generations Study was used to test our hypotheses. Work engagement was measured using the vigor, dedication, and absorption subscales (3-items each) of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. The relative age of supervisor-employee dyads was measured as a series of dummy variables representing the following categories: employees with younger supervisors (approximately 10 years or more), employees with similar-age supervisors (within 10 years), and employees with older supervisors (approximately 10 years or more). Hierarchical linear modeling was used to account for the nested nature of the data.

Results: After accounting for a variety of factors that could influence engagement levels (i.e., gender, race, marital status, education, health, intent to leave the organization, supervisor support and inclusion in decision making), findings indicate that employees with younger and similar-age supervisors were less absorbed (i.e., fully concentrated and happily engrossed in their work) than employees with older supervisors and those with similar-age supervisors were less dedicated (i.e., a sense of significance, enthusiasm, inspiration, pride, and challenge when it comes to one’s work) than employees with older supervisors. However, age similarity/dissimilarity to supervisor was not related to vigor (i.e., high levels of energy and mental resilience while working). 

Conclusions and Implications:  Diversity has always been core to social work practice and research; however, there has been limited attention given to age diversity in general and age diversity at the workplace, in particular.  In the context of the “gift of longevity” which expands the opportunities for older adults to assume (or continue to assume) roles such as paid employment, social workers can make significant contributions to our understanding of the implications of this dimension of diversity since it may well have significant impacts on the well-being of older adults. Recommendations for programs or policies will be discussed to mitigate difficulties that workers may face in adapting to non-traditional supervisor-employee age dynamics—including working to recruit and retain older workers in supervisory roles, implementing age diversity training and developing intergenerational mentorship models within teams.