A generation, or cohort, is “an identifiable group that shares birth years, age location, and significant life events at critical developmental stages.” This includes “shared historical or social life experiences whose effects are relatively stable over the course of their lives... A cohort develops a personality that influences a person’s feelings toward authority and organizations, what they desire from work, and how they plan to satisfy those desires.” [3]

One of the difficulties of discussing things in generation terms lies in defining boundaries, and the span of years covered by a generation. For example, if CFO Barbara was born on 31st December 1964, she falls into Generation X. Do her attitudes really differ from those of CEO Jane born the day before? What of executives born on the border of Generation X and Y (Millennials)? Enter the Xennials, a micro- or cross-over generation born between the late 1970s and early to mid-1980s. Now aged 40 to 50, they make up a large proportion of the senior executive population. They also account for 70% of the respondents to a recent Amrop Study whose findings we’ll touch on in a moment. 

What is a stereotype? 

Stereotypes are “overgeneralized expectations and beliefs about the characteristics and traits of social outgroup members (Fiske 1998). Stereotypes represent negative, distorted, and usually inaccurate perceptions of individuals... and the inference that all members of that group hold or display these same characteristics.” Significantly, this can lead to bias in selection, promotion decisions and training. [4]

An executive problem

Fredy Hausammann is a member of Amrop’s Board Services Practice and Chair of Amrop’s Global Nomination and Governance Committee. He welcomes the focus on senior level diversity, and particularly gender diversity. However he argues that diversity of age and background is just as important — and an ongoing challenge. 

“Every week I see discrimination against candidates aged between 55 and 60; they fail to make shortlists. I cannot understand why a 50 year-old is preferred over a peer aged 55, 56 or 57. If some firms oblige you to retire at 62, many others encourage you to work up to 65. Most candidates in these age brackets are as fit as people five to ten years younger.” [5]  

Stereotypes — what the researchers found

In our daily interactions with clients and candidates, we encounter stereotyping on an all-too-frequent basis. To check whether our anecdotal evidence was backed up by serious investigators, we dived into several research papers that examined common age-related stereotypes. The authors either drew on their own studies, on academic literature, or conducted meta-analyses. 

Some stereotypes were identified by more than one author and there was some cross referencing between the papers. You can find all our sources in the Full Article (appendix).  

• Older executives lack motivation 
• Older executives are unwilling or unable to learn 
• Older executives are closed to diversity 
• Older executives are tech resistant 
• Older executives are loyal traditionalists

We’d also like to propose a 6th stereotype:

• Older executives don’t (really) care about sustainability or ethics 

Stereotypes — what our own study found

Several of the research papers we looked at presented evidence that undermined one or more stereotypes. In other words, they are indeed distorted perceptions.  

Age stereotyping is a widespread and sticky problem.  

It ranges from popular culture to workplace discrimination that can expose companies to legal risk, undermine talent management, and damage the prospects of senior executives. 

In our full article we question these six stereotypes (five identified by robust academic research). And we find that older executives are not, as the stereotyping suggests, unmotivated members of the organizational community who are no longer willing or able to learn. They are not all technically-illiterate. Nor are they largely loyal traditionalists who seek comfort in the single organization career model. And the assumption that they are generally uninterested in socio-environmental concerns is simply unfounded. 

Diversity of thought (and age) is like a catalyst: it creates thriving and innovative organizational cultures that benefit all generations — with a positive impact on performance. Manfred Kets de Vries recently warned that many of today’s most famous companies work in the opposite way: recruiting and functioning on the basis of ‘fit’ and tending towards group-think [6]. According to our research, senior executives are first in line to demand diversity of thought, and rightly so. 

The statistics don’t lie: the ageing demographic is set to occupy a growing proportion of the executive population. Furthermore, many of today’s seniors bring health and wealth to the table (in terms of experience and wisdom). These are precious resources indeed. Today’s organizations (and the next generation of leaders) will need to draw heavily on this well in the VUCA times ahead. 

From Stereotypes to Solutions 

If older executives are anything but dinosaurs, how can we make the best of what they have to offer? Read our Full Report to find out.

References

[1] Torres, E 2020, abc news online, Jan 15

[2] Tippet, EC 2019, ‘Why you shouldn’t say ‘OK boomer’ at work’, pbc News Hour, 28 November

[3] Wey Smola, K & Sutton, CD 2002, ‘Generational differences: revisiting generational work values for the new millennium’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23: 363-362

[4] Toomey, EC & Rudolph, CW 2015, ‘Age Stereotypes in the Workplace’, Encyclopedia of Geropsychology, DOI 10.1007/978-981-287-080-3_30-1

[5] Hausammann, F 2021, ‘The Age of No Age’, Ethical Boardroom Magazine, Summer Edition 2021 and Amrop

[6]  Kets de Vries, M 2019, ‘Is Your Corporate Culture Cultish?’ Harvard Business Review, 10 May