Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Generational Ethics: Age Cohort and Healthcare Executives' Values

  • Published:
HEC Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This cross-sectional study of three generations of healthcare executives examines whether age cohort is the key determiner of ethical values. Responses to a national survey using the Rokeach Value Survey indicate that, contrary to widely reported beliefs that suggest otherwise, the age cohort groups in this sample exhibit virtually identical value preferences. The concept of career attraction is introduced to explain the similarities in value preference, and it is further suggested that generational differences may be nullified by the homogeneous demands of organizational life in a healthcare setting. Implications for ethical decisionmaking are discussed.

Does age cohort affiliation influence healthcare executive values and consequent ethical judgements? The greater body of literature clearly suggests the answer is yes, yet an empirical assessment of the question has never before been reported. The attention given this issue to date has been focused on the generational differences between the three age cohorts in the workplace today: Matures, Boomers, and Generation Xers (1). Defined as a group of people who share a given historical or socially structured life experience, an age cohort is believed to have a relatively stable influence over the decisionmaking of individuals, and serves to distinguish one generation from another (2)(3)(4). ‘Generation X,’ or ‘GenXers’ as they are commonly referred to, are comprised of individuals born between 1961 and 1981. ‘Baby Boomers,’ or ‘Boomers’ as they are popularly known, are those born between 1943 and 1960. ‘Matures’ is the name given to characterize the group of people born between born 1925 and 1942. [Birth dates defining generational cohorts vary slightly among multiple sources. The dates used in this study are from Strauss and Howe (1991), though the nomenclature is not.]

The literature suggests that certain values are more important to one age cohort than another, that the values they place greater weight upon distinguish them as unique (2). As our values form the basis of our decisionmaking criteria (5)(6), and as a great deal (some argue all) of the behavior we engage in is attributable to the values we hold (7)(5)(8)(9)(10)(6), empirically assessing whether the value differences between age cohorts are supported by data is key to an understanding of how healthcare executives make ethical decisions. This essay empirically examines the effect of age cohort affiliation on value preferences and consequent decisionmaking. Results from a national survey of three generations of healthcare executives are reported and analyzed, offering a first time glimpse into the value systems that guide the key decisionmakers in the delivery of healthcare in America.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Laabs JJ. Today's priorities may not be tomorrow's: Eyeing future HR concerns. Personnel Journal. 1996;75: 28-36.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Conger JA. How generational shifts will transform organizational life. In: Heselbein F, Goldsmith M, Beckard R (eds.) The Organization of the Future. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1997: pp. 17-24.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rosow J. The Worker and the Job. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beech RP, Schoeppe A. Development of value systems in adolescents. Developmental Psychology. 1974;10(5): 644-56.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hopkins G, Prescott S. Instrumental and terminal values and attitudes of preservice and experienced teachers. Educational and Psychological Research. 1983; 3(3): 123-32.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rokeach M. Beliefs, Attitudes, and Values. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Feather NT. Attitudes, values, and attributions: Explanations of unemployment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1985 48(4): 876-89.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Parish TS, Rosenblatt RR, Kappes BM. The relationship between human values and moral judgement. Psychology: A Quarterly Journal of Human Behavior. 1980; 16(4): 1-5.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Petty RE, Wegener DT, Fabrigar LR. Attitudes and attitude change. In: Spence JT, Darley JM, Foss DJ (eds.) Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 48. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews Inc; 1997: pp 609-47.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Finch FE. Managing for Organizational Effectiveness: An experiential approach. New York, NY: McGraw Hill 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tybout AM, Scott CA. Availability of well-defined internal knowledge and the attitude formation process: Information aggregation versus self-perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983 (March): 474-91.

  12. Taylor SE. On inferring one's attitudes from one's behavior: Some delimiting conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1975 (January):126-31.

  13. Kiesler CA, Nisbett RE, Zanna MP. On inferring one's belief from one's behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1969 (April): 321-27.

  14. Jurkiewicz CL. The trouble with ethics: Results of a national survey of healthcare executives. HEC Forum. 2000; 12(2).

  15. Jurkiewicz CL, Thompson CR. An empirical inquiry into the ethical standards of healthcare administrators. Public Integrity. 1999; 1(1).

  16. Tetlock PE. A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986; 50(4): 819-27.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Crites Jr. SL, Fabrigar LR, Petty RE. Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and methodological issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1994 (December): 619-34.

  18. Breckler SJ. Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1984; 47(6): 1191-1205.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rokeach M, Regan JF. The role of values in the counseling situation. Personnel and Guidance Journal. 1980; 58(9):576-82.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bednar A, Levie WH. Attitude-change principles. In: Fleming C, Levie LH (eds.) Instructional Message Design: Principles from the behavioral and cognitive sciences. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Educational Technology Publications; 1993: pp. 58-71.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rokeach M. The nature of human values. New York, NY: Free Press; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rokeach M, Ball-Rokeach SJ. Stability and change in American value priorities, 1961-1981. American Psychologist. 1989 (May):775-84.

  23. Meglino BM, Ravlin EC. Individual values in organizations: Concepts, controversies, and research, Journal of Management. 1998; 24(3): 351-90.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pitts RE, Woodside AG. Personal value influences on consumer product class and brand preferences. Journal of Social Psychology. 1983; 119(1): 37-53.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Simon HA. Administrative Behavior. New York, NY: Free Press; 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Tulgan B. Managing Generation X: How to bring out the best in young talent. New York, NY: Nolo Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Deutschman A. What 25-year-olds want. Fortune. 1990 (August): 27-35.

  28. Raelin JA. The 60's kids in the corporation: More than just dream believers. Academy of Management Executive. 1987 (February): 21-30.

  29. Cherrington DJ, Condie SJ, England JL. Age and work values. Academy of Management Journal. 1979; 22: 617-23.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Aldag RJ, Brief AP. Some correlates of work values. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1975; 60: 757-60.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ehlen J, Sprenger G. Ethics and decision making in healthcare. Journal of Healthcare Management. 1998; 3: 219-21.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Burke GC, Johnson M. The lessons of a profession: 25 years later. Journal of Healthcare Management. 1998; 43(3): 223-27.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jacobs LR. America's supply state: Health reform and technology. Health Affairs. 1995; 14(2): 143-57.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hatwick RE. The behavioral economics of business ethics. Journal of Behavioral Economics. 1986; 15(1-2): 87-101.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Strauss W, Howe N. Generations: The history of America's future, 1584-2069. New York, NY: William Morrow & Co.; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hall MA.Playing their strengths: The hows and whys of Generation X. Campus Activities Programming. 1995; 28: 46-53.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Slotterback CS. Projections of aging: Impact of generational differences and the aging process on perceptions of adults. Psychology of Aging. 1996; 11: 552-59.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Heckhausen J, Krueger J. Developmental expectations for the self and most other people: Age grading in three functions of social comparison. Developmental Psychology. 1993; 2: 539-48.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Staw BM, Ross J. Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach to job attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1985; 70, 469-80.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schneider B, Dachler HP. A note on the stability of the job descriptive index. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1978; 63: 650-53.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pinder CC. Work motivation in organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ:: Prentice-Hall; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Poulin JE. Job task and organizational predictors of social worker job satisfaction change: A panel study. Administrations in Social Work. 1994; 18: 21-38.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Poulin JE. Job satisfaction of social work supervisors and administrators. Administrations in Social Work. 1994; 19: 35-49.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kacmar KM, Ferris GR. Theoretical and methodological considerations in the age-job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1989 74: 201-07.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Hilton JL, von Hippe W. Stereotypes. In: Spence JT, Darley JM, Foss DJ (eds.). Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 47. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.; 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Forgionne GA, Peters VE. Differences in job motivation and satisfaction among female and male managers. Human Relations. 1982; 35: 101-18.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Mottaz C. Determinants of organizational commitment. Human Relations. 1988; 41: 359-78.

    Google Scholar 

  48. La Rocco JM, House JS, French Jr. JRP. Social support, occupational stress, and health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1980; 2: 202-18.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Yankelovich D. The New Morality: A profile of American youth in the 70s. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Hornblower M. Great expectations. Time. 1997; 149: 58-68.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Cannon D. Generation X: The way they do the things they do. Journal of Career Planning and Employment. 1991; 51: 34-38.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rhodes, S R. Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 1993 (March): 328-67.

  53. Kalata P. Generational clash in the academy: Whose culture is it anyway? In: Princeton University, Issues of Education at Community Colleges: Essays by fellows in the Mid-career Fellowship Program at Princeton University. Princeton, NJ Princeton University Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Coolidge, SD. In first jobs, grads sport skills-and attitude. The Christian Science Monitor. 1997; 89: 1, 119.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Bradley DB. A reason to rise each morning: The meaning of volunteering in the lives of older adults. Generations. 2000; 23(4):45-50.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Flynn G. Xers vs. boomers: Teamwork or trouble? Personnel Journal. 1996; 75:86-90.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Robbins S. Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Smith JW, Clurman AS. Rocking the Ages: The Yankelovich report of generational marketing. New York, NY: Harper Business; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Lankard BA. Career Development in Generation X: Myths and realities. Columbus, OH: Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Coupland D. Generation X: Tales for an accelerated culture. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Hardy MA, Hazelrigg LE. Changing policies on employment and pension coverage in U.S. firms. Aging International. 1999; 25:24-25.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Mutran EJ, Reitzes DC, Fernandez ME. Factors that influence attitudes toward retirement. Research on Aging. 1997; 19: 251-73.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Holtz GT. Welcome to the Jungle: The why behind Generation X. New York, NY: St. Martin's Press; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Russell C. War between generations? American Demographics. 1996; 18:4-5.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Guest D. What's new in motivation. Personnel Management. 1984; 13: 20-23.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Yankelovich D. Yankelovich on today's workers. Industry Week. 1979 (6 August):61-68.

  67. Galen M. Myths about older workers cost business plenty. Business Week. 1983 (10 December): 83.

  68. Bernstein P. American Work Value.. New York, NY: State University of New York Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Coolidge SD. I'm new: When's vacation? The Christian Science Monitor. 1997; 89:155.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Caudron S. Can Generation Xers be trained? Training and Development. 1997; 51:20-24.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Miller KI, Monge PR. Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal. 1986; 29:727-53.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Schneider B, Gunnarson SK, Wheeler JK. The role of opportunity in the conceptualization and measurement of job satisfaction. In: Cranny CJ, Smith PC, Stone EF (eds.) Job Satisfaction: How people feel about their jobs and how it affects their performance. New York, NY: Lexington Books; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Fried Y, Ferris G. The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology. 1986; 40:287-322.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Hackman JR, Oldham GR. Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1975;60:159-70.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Rosen B, Jerdee TH. The nature of job-related age stereotypes. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1976;61:180-83.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Dalton AH, Marcis JG. Gender differences in job satisfaction among young adults. Journal of Behavioral Economics. 1987;16:21-32.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Abramson M. Reflections on knowing oneself ethically: Toward a working framework for social work practice. Families in Society. 1996; 77:195-202.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Darr K. Ethics in Health Service Management. Baltimore, MD: Health Professions Press;1997.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Balda JB. The liability of nonprofits to donors. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 1994;5:67-83.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Posner BZ, Schmidt WH. Values and the American manager: An update updated. California Management Review. 1992: 80-94.

  81. Cyert RM. Defining leadership and explicating the process. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 1992;1:29-38.

    Google Scholar 

  82. O'Neill M. Ethical dimensions of nonprofit administration. Nonprofit Management & Leadership. 1992;3:199-213.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Cooper TL. The Responsible Administrator. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass;1998.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Denhardt K. The Ethics of Public Service. New York, NY: Greenwood Press;1998.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Weiss, HM. Subordinate imitation of supervisory behavior: The role of modeling in organizational socialization. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1977;19:89-105.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Johnston CS. The Rokeach value Survey: Underlying structure and multidimensional scaling. Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary and Applied. 1995;129(5):583-97.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Braithwaite VA, Law HG. Structure of human values: Testing the adequacy of the Rokeach value survey. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1985;49(1):250-63.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Rankin WL, Grube JW. A comparison of ranking and rating procedures for value system measurement. European Journal of Social Psychology. 1980; 10(3):233-46.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Munson JM, Posner BZ. The factorial validity of a modified Rokeach value survey for four diverse samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1980; 40(4):1073-79.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Feather NT, Peay ER. The structure of terminal and instrumental values: Dimensions and clusters. Australian Journal of Psychology. 1975;27(2):151-64.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Miethe TD. The validity and reliability of value measurements. Journal of Psychology. 1985;119(5):441-53.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Young RA. Vocational choice and values in adolescent women. Sex-Roles. 1984: 10(1):485-92.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Bennett RR. Becoming blue: A longitudinal study of police recruit occupational socialization. Journal of Police Science and Administration. 1984;12(1):47-58.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Feather NT. Reasons for entering medical school in relation to value priorities and sex of student. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 1982;55(2):119-28.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Pitts RE. Value-group analysis of cultural values in heterogeneous populations. Journal of Social Psychology. 1981;115(1):109-24.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Jurkiewicz CL, Massey JR TK, Brown RG. Motivation in public and private organizations: A comparative study. Public Productivity & Management Review. 1998;21:230-50.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Jackall R.. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press;1988.

  98. Savishinsky J. The unbearable lightness of retirement: Ritual and support in a modern life passage. Research on Aging. 1995;17:243-59.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Wray LA. The role of ethnicity in the disability and work experiences of pre-retirement-age Americans. The Gerontologist. 1996;36(3):287-98.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Santiago AM, Muschkin CG. Disentangling the effects of disability status and gender on the labor supply of Anglo, Black, and Latino older workers. The Gerontologist. 1996;36 (3):363-73.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Honig M. Retirement expectations: Differences by race, ethnicity, and gender. The Gerontologist. 1996;36(3):373-82.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Cochrane R. The impact of training school experience on the value systems of young offenders. British Journal of Criminology. 1974; 14(4):336-44.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Grube JW. Can values be manipulated arbitrarily? A replication that controls for regression effects. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1982;8(3):528-33.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Paloutzian RF. Purpose in life and value changes following conversion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1981; 41(6):1153-60.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Rokeach M. Can computers change human values? Revista-Latinoamericana-de-Psicologia. 1977;9(3):449-58.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Bagarozzi DA. The effects of cohesiveness on distributive justice. Journal of Psychology. 1982;110(2):267-73.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Walker WV, Campbell JB. Similarity of values and interpersonal attraction of whites toward blacks. Psychological Reports. 1982; 50(3):1199-205.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Feather NT. Human values and the work situation: Two studies. Australian Psychologist. 1979;14(2):131-41.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Butler AJ, Cochrane R. An examination of some elements of the personality of police officers and their implications. Journal of Police Science and Administration. 1977;5(4):335-52.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Guillemard AM, Rein M. Comparative patterns of retirement: Recent trends in developed countries. Annual Review of Sociology. 1993; 19:469-503.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Doeringer PB. Bridges to Retirement: Older workers in a changing labor market. Ithaca, NY: IRL Press;1990.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Bourne RS. The two generations: In: Thau RD, Heflin JS (eds.) Generations Apart. New York, NY: Prometheus Books;1997.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Comer C. A letter to the rising generation. In: Thau RD, Heflin JS (eds.) Generations Apart. New York, NY: Prometheus Books;1997.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Thau RD, Heflin JS (eds.) Generations Apart. New York: Prometheus Books;1997.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Hobsbawm E. The Age of Extremes. New York, NY: Vintage Books; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Louisiana State University, USA

    Carole L. Jurkiewicz & Dana Burr Bradley

Authors
  1. Carole L. Jurkiewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dana Burr Bradley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jurkiewicz, C.L., Bradley, D.B. Generational Ethics: Age Cohort and Healthcare Executives' Values. HEC Forum 14, 148–171 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020907731617

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020907731617

Keywords

Search

Navigation