Careers Lasting Only Fifteen Years

The issue of age diversity is taking on a new importance in the context of the debate around diversity management, the set of company policies aimed at managing and valorizing employees' diversity. HR managers in European companies deem it an essential priority. In managerial discourse it is thus a well-known conclusion that if you want to engage in diversity management you need to go beyond gender and deal with the problem of age. Many studies point out that age discrimination on the job is the biggest source of complaint among current and prospective workers. The age issue is all the more urgent because the workforce is aging (as direct consequence of a global demographic shift) and because EU policies (including the Monti-Fornero pension reform) are pushing toward a postponement of the retirement age. The Monti-Fornero reform makes firm reconsider their equilibrium between hirings and (early) retirements. Sustainability in the near future means to be able to keep motivating the senior workforce while keeping the job market active to hire and develop young talent. Many companies have implemented interesting cross-fertilization projects to manage the conflict between Millennials and Baby Boomers, projects for the engagement of senior employees, as well as mentoring and reverse mentoring projects. As highlighted in a recent study of ours (Engagement and Career: The Burden of Age), the main problem is the management of careers, which is currently focused on a minority of the organizational population. Companies are willing to invest in individuals belonging to a specific age cohort: only if the employee has between 30 and 45 years of age, companies are ready to cultivate and develop his/her talent. Conversely, employees younger than 30 or older than 45 are paying a price in term of lost opportunities. This short-life, high-selection management model appears to be a major source of conflict and resentment among employees. The model is no longer attractive for young people, either, because the total work approach it entails is not consistent with the search for a better work-life balance to which younger employees are particularly sensitive. It also creates negative stereotypes vis-à-vis senior employees, often seen as slow-minded and having lesser productivity and performance.

But the ability to valorize the skills of the various age groups within the firm will be increasingly crucial to create value and maintain competitive advantage. And in our view, a revision of the current career model is a fundamental step in this direction.