Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Human Resources Strategies For The Recruitment and Retention of Generation Y Employees
Human Resources Strategies For The Recruitment and Retention of Generation Y Employees
1 Araş. Gör., Aksaray Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Merkez / AKSARAY, serifeuguz@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-7922-4597
2 Dr. Öğr. Üyesi, Aksaray Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Merkez / AKSARAY, yildirimmh@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-7001-5705
431
Ş. UĞUZ ARSU- M. H. YILDIRIM
best workforce to have entered the business The earliest date for the beginning of
world up until now (Nicholas, 2008). Thus, in Generation Y is defined as 1977, while the latest
order to sustain a successful business, is 1981. The earliest date for the end of the
employers will need effective practices to generation, however, is defined as 1994 and the
attract, retain and manage Generation Y, who latest is 2002 (Tolbize, 2008; Brown et al.,
have different characteristics compared to 2009). Likewise, according to various
other generations, look for more than a stable researchers in the literature, this generation
job, challenge existing work values and involves people born between the years of
consider quitting their jobs if they’re not 1980 and 2000 (Zemke, 2000), 1982-1991
satisfied with the workplace (Chao and (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005); 1978-1999
Gardner, 2008). However, before employers (Martin and Tulgan, 2006); 1982-2000
can identify human resources (HR) strategies to (Lancaster, 2004); 1981-2000 (Reeves and Oh,
attract and retain Generation Y, they must get 2008); 1977-1994 (Broadbridge et al., 2007);
to know this generation. 1980-2005 (Heinig, 2009).
In this regard, this study aimed to determine Generation Y has been dubbed the Internet
the elements that affect the motivation of Generation, 2011 Generation, Einstein
Generation Y in terms of recruitment and Generation, Next Generation, www Generation,
retention strategies. In line with this aim, Digital Generation, Dot.com Generation, Net
questionnaires were distributed to managers Generation, Hybrid Generation, Echo Boom
and employees working in the HR departments Generation, Post-80s Generation and MySpace
of firms registered to the Gaziantep Chamber of Generation (Zemke et al., 2000; Buahene and
Industry and Commerce to determine what Kovary, 2003; Senbir, 2004; Martin, 2005;
they paid attention to when recruiting Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005; Martin and
Generation Y, which practices they used to Tulgan, 2006; Yan, 2006; Murphy, 2007;
retain Generation Y and what kind of strategies Broadbridge et al., 2007; Tolbize, 2008;
they adopt regarding this generation. The Behrstock and Clifford, 2009; Sullivan et al.,
collected data were analyzed by using the 2009; Valley, 2010; Kandelousi and Seong,
model developed in the study. 2011; cargill.com.tr, 2013). Some members of
2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Generation Y are called Echo Boomers as they
are the children of the Baby Boomers
2.1. Generation Y Generation. In addition, Generation Y has been
Generation Y, also known as the Millennial called the Net Generation on account of the
Generation, are those born between the years influences of the rapid development in digital
of 1979 and 1994. They are the children of technology (Lancaster, 2004; Huybers, 2011).
Generation X, namely the Baby Boomers, who The term Millennial Generation is used for
were born between 1964 and 1970 Generation Y as this generation involves the
(capital.com.tr, 2000). According to Senbir developmental years of the beginning of the
(2004), Generation Y are the children of the new century and in order to identify the young
years when computer and GSM technologies people who grew up exposed to sensory
were first introduced and a technology- invasion by digital technology and tools of mass
friendly, individual, comfortable world began communication (Lancaster, 2004; Huybers,
to globalize. Although they are individualistic, 2011: 16). The term Generation Y first
they are a generation that bears the reflection appeared in the lead article of the Advertising
of the souls of the contended and idealist Age magazine, which focused on the data
Generation X, who are their elder brothers and analysis of marketing and media in order to
sisters. Today, the Pre-Y Generation are define the people born between the years of
especially significant as they are the fathers and 1980 and 1993 (Schlitzkus et al., 2010).
mothers of Generation Z.
432
İzmir İktisat Dergisi (İzmir Journal of Economics) , Yıl:2020, Cilt:35, Sayı:2, ss. 431-443
Lancaster (2004) indicate that since then, the development, work/life balance, proving
scale of this term has been developed as oneself and taking responsibility, good
maximum 2000 and minimum 1982. It is also management and managerial style, being
suggested that this generation is called the Why rewarded, competitive salary, working
Generation (Chester, 2002), which is shortly atmosphere and workplace culture, career
spelled “Y” (Arman, 2013), as they question development opportunities, constant learning
everything. In addition, Generation Y have and team-oriented working (McCrindle
called themselves various names such as the Research, 2006; NAS, 2006; NAS, 2007;
Nuclear-free Family Generation, Imitators, Karefalk et al., 2007; Felix, 2007; Glass, 2007;
Good Feeling Generation, Cyber/Virtual Cruz, 2007; MonsterTRAK, 2008; Meier and
Children, Do or Die Generation and Identity Crocker, 2010; Keleş, 2011). In this context,
Search Generation (Martin, 2005; Tolbize, members of generation Y transfer their
2008; Srnivasan, 2012). aforementioned characteristic features into the
work environment. The relevant literature
2.2. Workplace Characteristics of
suggests that the most fundamental workplace
Generation Y
features that bear the characteristic features of
Life is rarely straight forward and in order in Generation Y are as follows: Good Management
the 21st century. Traditionally, first the and Ideal Manager: McCrindle Research
education stage is completed, then working life (2006); RHI (2007); Rolljsö (2008); Crampton
begins and after that comes either career and Hodge (2009), Work Environment: Cole et
change or retirement. However, the life of al.(2002); RHI (2007); Deloitte (2007); Yeaton
Generation Y is more different with various (2008); Datta Gupta and Christensen (2008);
careers, roles and stages. Today, education in Meier and Crocker (2010); Hoff (2010), Trust
the life of Generation Y continues until and Loyalty towards the Organization: Martin
adulthood and then expands into multiple and Tulgan (2006); Karefalk et al. (2007);
careers and retraining throughout their whole Hastings (2007); Als (2008); Hewlett et al.
life (McCrindle Research, 2006). Thus, (2009); Huybers (2011); Mukundan et al.
Generation Y has several requirements from a (2013), Leadership Styles: Dulin (2008),
workplace. Those are receiving financial Communication and Feedback: Spiro (2006);
rewards after completing a given task, Hart (2006); Cruz (2007); Rollsjö (2008);
entertainment, social relations, training, Crampton and Hodge (2009); Fox (2011);
personal development, satisfaction and Jokela (2012), Work/Life Balance and
environmental sustainability (McCrindle Flexibility: RHI (2007); Deloitte (2007); Yeaton
Research, 2006). Research suggests that (2008); Rollsjö (2008); Crampton and Hodge
Generation Y demands the most from working (2009); Twenge et al. (2010); Huybers (2011);
life (GWI, 2010; Yüksekbilgili, 2013). D'Netto (2011), Team Work: Cole (2002);
Generation Y is different from the previous Buanhe and Kovary (2003); Martin (2005);
generations in many respects. One of these Spiro (2006), Performance, Salary and
differences is their work ethic. The main Rewards: Martin and Tulgan (2006); Martin
characteristics that Generation Y demands in a (2005); Jones et al. (2005); RHI (2007); Deloitte
workplace are an enjoyable working (2007); Rollsjö (2008); MonsterTRAK (2008);
atmosphere, non-financial additional payments Meier and Crocker (2010); Naidoo (2010),
and flexible working hours (Cole et al., 2002). Motivation: Oliver (2006); Hulett (2006); Glass
Some resources have collected the fundamental (2007); Sayers (2007); Cheese (2007); Yeaton
motivational factors that Generation Y (2008); Twenge and Campbell (2008); Lowe et
considers important regarding work and career al. (2008); Blain (2008); Kim et al. (2009);
under certain titles. However, the general Meier and Crocker (2010); D'Netto (2011);
factors that are common among all are self- Luscombe et al. (2013), Personal and
433
Ş. UĞUZ ARSU- M. H. YILDIRIM
434
İzmir İktisat Dergisi (İzmir Journal of Economics) , Yıl:2020, Cilt:35, Sayı:2, ss. 431-443
H1= Sub-dimensions of the factors that In order to test the research hypotheses,
affect the motivation of Generation Y affect primarily factor analysis was applied to the
the strategies for the recruitment of Scale of the Factors Affecting the Motivation of
Generation Y Generation Y. As a result, the sub dimensions of
the factors were achieved. The coefficients
H2= Sub-dimensions of the factors that obtained as a result of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
affect the motivation of Generation Y affect (0,649) and Barlett’s (sig. p≤0,05) tests
the strategies for the retention of indicated that the data set was sufficient for
Generation Y factor analysis. The values and factor loads are
This study was performed at a 95% given in Table 2.
confidence level with a 5% margin of error via As a result of the descriptive factor analysis, the
snowball sampling, which is a non-random sub-dimensions were determined as: (1)
sampling technique. Incomplete and unsuitable work/life balance, training opportunities and
questionnaires were eliminated from the study. team work, (2) salary and incentives, (3)
The universe of the study consisted of large leadership and mentoring programs and (4)
enterprises registered to the Gaziantep taking responsibility. Regression analysis was
Chamber of Industry and Commerce and the used to test the research hypotheses formed
sampling of the study was comprised of 46 regarding the measurement of the effects of the
firms. A total of 108 questionnaires were sub dimensions achieved as the result of the
distributed to the HR authorities and managers factor analysis on the strategies for the
of the firms. One-hundred questionnaires were recruitment and retention of Generation Y.
considered appropriate for analysis after the
incomplete and unsuitable questionnaires
435
Ş. UĞUZ ARSU- M. H. YILDIRIM
Table 2: Factor analysis of the Scale of the accepted. The related values are demonstrated
Factors that Affect the Motivation of Generation in Table 3.
Y Table 3: The impact of the factors that affect
the motivation of generation y on recruitment
No of Items
Eigenvalue
Explained
Cronbach
Variance
strategies
Factor
Alpha
Unstandardized Standar
Factor Coefficients dized
Items Load Coefficie
Value nts t Sig.
integrity ,752
Opportunities and Team Work
Work/Life Balance, Training
B Std. Beta
and honesty
Error
Team
,675 (Constant) 1,744 ,537 3,247 ,002
building
Support Work/life
work/life ,672 balance, training
0,92 5,46 30,373 5 ,493 ,146 ,389 3,380 ,001
balance opportunities and
Increasing team work
responsibili ,665 Salary and
-,141 ,129 -,111 -1,095 ,276
ty incentives
Flexibility Leadership and
in ,502 mentoring ,380 ,113 ,355 3,355 ,001
Scheduling programs
Incentives ,782 Taking
-,229 ,103 -,229 -2,233 ,028
responsibility
Salary and
Incentives
Rewards ,724
Receive Anova F Value: 8,876 Anova Sig Value: 0,000<0,05
0,88 2,341 13,004 5 ,653 Adjusted R2: 0,241 Durbin Watson: 1,674
feedback
Salary ,630
Benefits ,603 The findings suggested that while the salary
Social and incentives variable was not significant for
media ,718
Leadership and Mentoring
Career
0,83 1,728 9,599 5 advanceme ,659 balance, training opportunities and team work
nt plan
Mentoring
,637
sub-dimension (B=0,493) was the first most
programs
Training
effective variable, while the leadership and
opportuniti ,531 mentoring programs sub-dimension (B=0,38)
es was the second most effective. It can be said
Challenging
,781 that, any improvements applied to the
Responsibility
work
Are motivation increasing factors present in the sub
Taking
also and it was concluded that the data were other generations. Even if it is harder to work
sufficient for the regression analysis. In order to with Generation Y compared to previous
determine which independent variables generations, firms both try to find ways to
affected the dependent variable, the motivate this generation and also develop
significance of the sub-dimensions was many strategies to benefit from their skills and
examined. As a result, it was determined that qualifications. In this study, the effects of the
two independent variables affected the factors affecting the motivation of Generation Y
retention strategies. Thus, H2 was partially on the strategies of recruitment and retention
accepted. The related values are demonstrated of Generation Y were investigated. In order to
in Table 4. test the research hypotheses formed within this
scope, multiple regression analysis was
Table 4. The impact of the factors that affect
performed.
the motivation of generation y on retention
strategies The first hypothesis of the study, “Sub-
Unstandardized Standardized dimensions of the factors that affect the
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Beta
t Sig. motivation of Generation Y affect the strategies
Error for the recruitment of Generation Y” was
(Constant) 1,800 ,588 3,059 ,003
Work/life
partially accepted. According to the results of
balance, training
,439 ,160 ,337 2,751 ,007
the regression analysis, the work/life balance,
opportunities
and team work
training opportunities and team work sub-
Salary and
-,173 ,141 -,132 -1,22 ,225
dimension affected the strategies for the
incentives recruitment of Generation Y. This finding was in
Leadership and
mentoring ,274 ,124 ,249 2,209 ,030 line with the literature. The studies of Roy and
programs
Taking
Kreiss (2011) and Yeaton (2008) determined
-,107 ,112 -,104 -,951 ,344 that the work/life balance variable, which is
responsibility
Anova F Value: 4,957 Anova Sig Value: 0,001<0,05 one of the fundamental motivation factors of
Adjusted R2: 0,138 Durbin Watson: 1,601
Generation Y, positively affected the strategies
According to the findings of the analysis, the for the recruitment of Generation Y. According
salary and incentives variable and the taking the findings of the present study, the training
responsibility sub-dimension were not opportunities varies, which is within the same
significant for the regression equation. The sub dimension as work/life balance, also
dependent variable was most affected by the affected the strategies for the recruitment of
work/life balance, training opportunities and Generation Y. As the most educated generation,
team work sub-dimension (B=0,439) and the Generation Y, places great importance on
leadership and mentoring programs sub- training opportunities when choosing jobs,
dimension (B=0,274). Accordingly, it can be thus, training becomes an important
said that any improvements applied to the motivation factor in the strategies for the
motivation increasing factors present in the sub recruitment of this generation. According to the
dimensions of work/life balance, training Deloitte Survey (2009) report, 63.5% of the
opportunities and team work and leadership participants chose the opportunities of
and mentoring programs shall positively affect improvement factor as the factor that they give
the strategies used for the recruitment of the highest importance to when choosing jobs,
Generation Y. which supports the finding of the present study.
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION In addition, Generation Y is more eager,
compared to other generations, in terms of
The personality traits, life styles, expectations team work and sees this as a motivation factor.
and many other characteristics of Generation Y, In their studies VanHecke (2006), and Oblinger
who constitute the majority of the current labor and Oblinger (2005) determined that team
market, are remarkably different from those of work positively affected the strategies for the
437
Ş. UĞUZ ARSU- M. H. YILDIRIM
recruitment of Generation Y. This finding was in 2008; Reynolds et al., 2008; Behrstock and
line with the findings of the present study. Clifford, 2009; Zemke et al., 2000).
It was also determined that the leadership and Generation Y is significantly different from
mentoring programs variable had a positive previous generations. Generation Y employees
effect on the strategies for the recruitment of do not wish to work on hard or boring jobs.
Generation Y, which supports the literature. They prefer jobs that are different and make
According to D'Netto (2011), organizations them feel that they are a part of the decision-
should provide opportunities such as on the job making processes. Generation Y employees do
training, work rotation, counseling, and not perceive the work done as an investment
mentoring etc. to Generation Y employees in for the future of the company as previous
order to increase their recruitment, retention generations did, instead they wish to collect the
and motivation. rewards of the work they perform immediately
via various opportunities such as
The present study found that the taking
independence, flexible working hours,
responsibility sub-dimension negatively
comfortable clothing and enjoyable work
affected the strategies for the recruitment of
environment. In addition, Generation Y
Generation Y. This result contradicted the
employees wish to know how they shall enter
literature. In their study, Martin and Tulgan
the business, how they can be included in
(2001) stated that Generation Y added value to
decision making processes and whether their
organizations and wanted to take on
opinions are valued or not. They wish to be
responsibility to contribute to the
comfortable and work in jobs where career
organizations. Additionally, according to
opportunities are plentiful. If businesses can
Martin (2005) and SHRM (2009), Generation Y
provide these opportunities to Generation Y
employees see increasing responsibility not as
employees, they can also benefit from their
a burden to be avoided but as an opportunity to
skills that are superior to the previous
prove their abilities.
generations.
The second hypothesis of the study, “the sub
In this study, in order to determine the effects
dimensions of the factors effecting the
of the factors affecting the motivation of
motivation of Generation Y affect the strategies
Generation Y on the strategies for their
for the retention of Generation Y” was partially
recruitment and retention, information was
accepted. According to the findings, the work-
collected from HR managers. In future studies,
life balance, opportunities of training, and team
the data can be collected from Generation Y
work and leadership and mentoring programs
employees themselves and the factors that
sub dimensions positively affected the
increase their motivation can be updated.
strategies for the retention of Generation Y.
Furthermore, as the Generation Y employees of
The factors positively affecting the recruitment today shall be the managers of the future, they
strategies in the first hypothesis, were found to shall apply motivation increasing factors to the
also positively affect the retention strategies in Generation Z employees, which are the next
the second hypothesis. Various studies in the generation. Therefore, in future studies, the
literature, suggested that the motivation recruitment and retention strategies
factors present in the work-life balance, Generation Y managers apply to Generation Z
training opportunities and team work sub employees and the motivation increasing
dimension and the leadership and mentoring factors affecting the said strategies can be
programs sub dimension should be used as a studied.
strategy by the employers wishing to retain
Generation Y (Roy and Kreiss, 2011; Yeaton,
438
İzmir İktisat Dergisi (İzmir Journal of Economics) , Yıl:2020, Cilt:35, Sayı:2, ss. 431-443
REFERENCES
ALS, M. (2008), “Recruiting and Retaining CHEESE, P. (2007), “The abc of generation y”,
Generation Y: A New Workforce”, Unpublished Director, 61(5), 33.
master’s thesis, Aalborg University, Denmark. CHESTER, E. (2002), Employing generation
ARMAN, A. (2013), “Yaşasın Y Kuşağı”, Hürriyet, why?, Tucker House Books, Lakewood.
9 June, COLE, G., SMITH, R., LUCAS, L. (2002), “The
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/234657 debut of generation y in the American
15.asp. (9.12.2013).
workforce”, Journal of Business Administration,
BEHRSTOCK, E., CLIFFORD, M. (2009). Leading 1(2), 1-10.
gen y teachers: emerging strategies for school CRAMPTON, S. M., HODGE, J. W. (2009),
leaders, National Comprehensive Center for “Generation y: unchartered territory”, Journal
Teacher Quality, Washington, DC. of Business and Economics Research, 7(4), 1-6.
BLAIN, A. (2008), “The millennial tidal wave: CRUZ, C. S. (2007), “Gen y: how boomer babies
five elements that will change the workplace of are changing the workplace”, Hawaii Business,
tomorrow”, Journal of the Quality Assurance http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/Hawaii-
Institute, 22(2), 11-13. Business/May-2007/Gen-Y/. (16.12.2013).
BROADBRIDGE, A. M., MAXWELL, G. A., OGDEN, DATTA GUPTA, N., KRISTENSEN, N. (2008),
S. M. (2007), “Experiences, perceptions and
“Work environment satisfaction and employee
expectations of retail employment for health: panel evidence from Denmark, France
generation y”, Career Development and Spain”, The European Journal of Health
International, 12(6), 523-544. Economics, 9(1), 51-61.
BROWN, S., CARTER, B., COLLINS, M., DELOITTE (2005), “Connecting across the
GALLERSON, C., GIFFIN, G., GREER, J., generations in the workplace: what business
GRIFFITH, R., JOHNSON, E., RICHARDSON, K. leaders need to know to benefit from
(2009), “Generation y in the workplace”, The generational differences”, Talent Market Series
Bush School of Government & Public Service: Vol. 1, http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/wp-
Texas A&M University, content/uploads/2007/07/deloitte-
http://bushdev.tamu.edu/research/capstones generations.pdf. (18.01.2014).
/mpsa/projects/2009/2009GenerationYinthe
Workplace.pdf (28.05.2014). DELOITTE (2007), “Generation y. moving with
the times”, Deloitte,
BUAHENE, A. K., KOVARY, G. (2003), “The road http://www.deloitte.com/assets/DcomUnited
to performance success: understanding and Kingdom/Local%20Assets/Documents/Servic
managing the generational divide”, n-gen es/Tax/UK_Tax_MTF_Movingwiththetimes.pdf,
People Performance Inc., (28.05.2014).
http://www.ngenperformance.com/pdf/white
/ ManagingGenDivide.Overview.pdf DELOITTE (2009), “Generation y: powerhouse
(28.05.2014). of the global economy”, Deloitte,
http://www.deloitte.com/assets/DcomUnited
CHAO, D.G., GARDNER, D. P. (2008). “Young States/Local%20
Adults at Work: What They Want, What They
Assets/Documents/us_consulting_hc_Generati
Get and How to Keep Them”, Maynard: onY_Snapshot_041509.pdf, (05.12.2013).
MonsterTRAK,
http://ceri.msu.edu/publications/pdf/yadults D'NETTO, B. (2011), “Generation y: human
wk3-26-09.pdf (13.06.2017). resources management implications”,
439
Ş. UĞUZ ARSU- M. H. YILDIRIM
440
İzmir İktisat Dergisi (İzmir Journal of Economics) , Yıl:2020, Cilt:35, Sayı:2, ss. 431-443
half-generation-y-white-paper-def. http://www.cioindex.com/nm/articlefiles/64
(06.01.2019). 130-UnderstandingGenY.pdf. (18.12.2018).
RICKS, R. S. (2010), “Managing Generation Y in SRNIVASAN, V. (2012), “Multi generations in
a Multigenerational Workplace”, Unpublished the workforce: building collaboration”, IIBM
master’s thesis, The University of Texas at Management Review, 24, 48-66.
Austin, Austin. SULLIVAN, S. E., FORRET, M. L., CARRAHER,
ROLLSJÖ, A. (2008), “Attraction and Retention S.M., MAINIERO, L. A. (2009), “Using the
of Generation Y Employees”, Unpublished kaleidoscope career model to examine
master’s thesis, Baltic Business School, Kalmar generational differences in work attitudes”,
University, Sweden. Career Development International, 14(3), 284-
302.
ROY, J. G., KREISS, S. (2011), “Ten tips for
retaining the next generation”, Oil and Gas THE MILLENNIAL IMPACT REPORT (2013),
Journal, 109 (19A), 11-12. “The 2013 Millennial 2013 Impact Report”,
http://www.themillennialimpact.com/researc
SALT, B. (2007), “Beyond the baby boomer: the
h# researchemail. (28.01.2014).
rise of generation y: opportunities and
challenges for the funds management TOLBIZE, A. (2008), “Generational differences
ındustry.” Investment Management & Funds, in the workplace”, working paper, Research and
Zurich, Switzerland: KPMG International, Training Center on Community Living,
https://www.kpmg.com/CN/en/IssuesAndIns University of Minnesota, Minnesota, 16 August.
ights/ ArticlesPublications/Documents/rise-
TWENGE, J. M., CAMPBELL, S. M. (2008),
generation-y-O-0706.pdf . (05.01.2014). “Generational differences in psychological
SAYERS, R. (2007), “The right staff from x to y: traits and their ımpact on workplace”, Journal
generational change and professional of Managerial Psychology, 23(8) , 862-877.
development in future academic libraries”, TWENGE, J. M., CAMPBELL, S. M., HOFFMAN, B.
Library Management, 28(8/9), 474-487. J., LANCE, C. E. (2010), “Generational
SCHLITZKUS, L. L., SCHENARTS, K. D., differences in work values: leisure and extrinsic
SCHENARTS, P. J. (2010), “Is your residency values ıncreasing, social and ıntrinsic values
program ready for generation y”, Journal of decreasing”, Journal of Management, 36(5),
Surgical Education, 67(2), 108-111 1117-1142.
SENBIR, H. (2004), Z son insan mı?: z kuşağı ve VALLEY, P. M. (2010), “Generation Y and Vocal
sonrasına dair düşünceler. Okuyan Us Yayın Fry”, Unpublished master’s thesis, Virginia
Eğitim Danışmanlık Tıbbi Malzeme ve Reklam Commonwealth University Richmond, Virginia.
Hizmetleri San. Tic. Ltd. Şti, İstanbul. VAN HECKE, J. R. (2006), “Serving the
SHRM (2009), “The multigenerational millennial student: how far should we go?”,
workforce: opportunity for competitive http://www.nyu.edu/frn/publications/millen
success”, Society For Human Resource nial.student/ VanHecke%20Keynote.html.
Management, (18.12.2013).
https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/h YAN, S. (2006), “Understanding generation y”,
r-topics/employee-relations/Documents/09- The Oberlin Review,
0027_RQ_March_2009_FINAL_no%20ad.pdf http://www.oberlin.edu/stupub/ocreview/20
(27.01.2019). 06/12/08/features/Understanding_Generatio
SPIRO, C. (2006), “Generation y in the n_Y.html. (02.11.2018).
workplace”, Workplace Transformation,
442
İzmir İktisat Dergisi (İzmir Journal of Economics) , Yıl:2020, Cilt:35, Sayı:2, ss. 431-443
YEATON, K. (2008), “Recruiting and managing veterans, boomer, xers, and nexters in your
the 'why?' generation: gen y”, The CPA Journal, workplace, American Management Association,
1, 68-72. New York, NY.
YÜKSEKBILGILI, Z. (2013), “Türk tipi y kuşağı”, ZHAO, H. (2006), “Expectations of recruiters
Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(45), 342- and applicants in large cities of china”, Journal
353. of Managerial Psychology, 21(5), 459-475.
ZEMKE, R., RAINES, C., FILIPCZAK, B. (2000),
Generations at work: managing the clash of
443