The presence of different generational groups in a modern workplace adds a complex element to power dynamics within the organization. As Baby Boomers, Generation X, Millennials, and Generation Z work together, each group's unique values, expectations, and experiences affect how they view authority and hierarchy in the workplace (Flinchbaugh et al., 2018, p. 520). Power distance is the degree to which individuals who have less influence are willing to accept and anticipate unequal distribution of power (Hofstede, 2011, p. 9). Even as the initial study of Hofstede focused on defining the characteristics of power distance at a national level, several researchers have looked into understanding how power distance influences communication (Khatri, 2009, p. 3), leadership effectiveness (Avolio et al., 2004, p. 962; Schaubroeck et al., 2017, pp. 211–212), and employee engagement (Brockner et al., 2001, p. 314) at an organizational level, proving that deeper understanding of power distance as important to management.
Power distance between generations can greatly impact how employees perceive and comply with corporate regulations and practices. For example, older generations may perceive organizational change as unnecessary and non-impactful, but younger generations may consider them vital for the firm’s increased efficiency (Caldwell et al., 2004, p. 878). This discrepancy might result in difficulties with overseeing teams, and even in daily operations of organizations.
While there is increasing awareness of how generational diversity impacts organizational dynamics (Lyons & Kuron, 2014, p. S153), there is a significant lack of understanding on how to control for the adverse effects of high power distance between any two generations present in an organization. Current research tends to oversimplify power relations throughout an organization's workforce (Lyons & Kuron, 2014, pp. S151–S152), neglecting to analyze how different age groups may perceive and react to authority and hierarchical systems in unique ways. Insufficient detail in current studies can result in management strategies that do not effectively deal with or may worsen intergenerational conflicts about power dynamics (Urick et al., 2017, p. 168). When generational divides in power distance are not adequately addressed, organizations risk creating a culture of disengagement and low morale (Durán-Brizuela et al., 2016, p. 73; Paulus et al., 2005, p. 52), leading to higher turnover rates as employees, particularly those from young generations, seek workplaces that align more closely with their values of inclusivity and empowerment (Xu et al., 2023, p. 9). Additionally, innovation suffers in environments where open communication and idea-generation are stifled by hierarchical barriers (Di Toma & Ghinoi, 2021, p. 1072; Keum & See, 2017, p. 666). Thus, addressing power distance is crucial for fostering a cohesive, innovative, and high-performing organizational culture that leverages the strengths and perspectives of all its members.
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework on Affective Factors of Power Distance
Note: Own work.
Findings
This researcher was able to deduce three primary themes that were mirrored across the majority of the evidence reviewed. To recall, the primary objective of this study was to investigate the factors affecting power distance across generations.
Finding 1 – Younger Generations Prefer Lower Power Distance
Younger generations, particularly Millennials and Generation Z, are marked by their distinct preference for lower power distances, reflecting broader societal shifts and values shaped by the unique cultural and technological landscapes of their upbringing. In contrast, Baby Boomers and Generation X often adhere to more traditional views on organizational hierarchy, having spent much of their careers within well-defined hierarchical structures where leadership and respect are often correlated with tenure and title.
Baby Boomers and early Generation X members typically value a clear chain of command and may equate age and experience with wisdom and leadership capability. This cohort often views hierarchical structures as necessary for maintaining order and efficiency within organizations (Au et al., 2018, p. 619; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 578). They might see the chain of command as essential to establishing accountability and may be more comfortable with top-down communication approaches (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 465; Warshawski et al., 2017, p. 702). For these older generations, respect for authority often comes with the position, and they might expect younger employees to earn their place through traditional routes such as tenure and adherence to established protocols (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 11; İlhan, 2020, p. 124; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 581).
Conversely, Millennials and Generation Z, who were raised in an era of “…[digital] technology and the emergence of social networking sites…[which] have provided an entirely new vehicle for individuals to be connected, decreasing the need for the social outlet that work environments can provide” (Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1137), challenge these traditional structures (Easton & Steyn, 2022, p. 7). They respect leadership that is earned through the leader’s impact and actions rather than their title. They expect leaders to demonstrate competence, transparency, and accountability, viewing these qualities as indicative of true leadership rather than mere positional power (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 11; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, pp. 580–581; Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 453). This generational shift in expectations leads to a fundamentally different view of power dynamics, favoring a more horizontal relationship with supervisors and a collaborative decision-making process (İlhan, 2020, p. 125; Warshawski et al., 2017, p. 701).
The advent of digital technologies has further shaped these expectations, particularly among younger workers. Tools like instant messaging, video conferencing, and collaborative platforms have democratized the flow of information and facilitated communication that bypasses traditional hierarchical barriers (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 464; İlhan, 2020, p. 125). This technological empowerment supports a culture where communication is based on relevance and contribution rather than rank, aligning with the younger generations' preference for a more inclusive and dynamic organizational culture (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 12; Twenge et al., 2010, p. 1135; Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 453).
Finding 2 – Uncertainty as a Driver of Power Distance
This REA discovered that the evidence reflected the belief that uncertainty is a driver of power distance. During uncertain times, firms tend to rely on established hierarchical structures to mitigate risks and maintain stability in operations (Au et al., 2018, p. 619). This change usually leads to a rise in power distance, which is evident in many generational groups in the workforce. As power centralizes, the organizational structure tends to mirror the strict hierarchies seen in the careers of previous generations like Baby Boomers and the elder section of Generation X (İlhan, 2020, pp. 124–125; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 579). These groups associate power distance with a well-defined hierarchy and a dominant leadership that they view as beneficial for efficient governance and decision-making, particularly in times of uncertainty (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 465).
However, this increase in power distance can lead to significant challenges in intergenerational dynamics within the workplace. Heuss et al. (2022) determined that younger generations “…want to find open doors and ears for their concerns.”, which are not necessarily shared by their older counterparts (p. 12). These younger generations advocate for organizational cultures that promote collaborative decision-making and flatter hierarchies (İlhan, 2020, p. 126). They view such democratic environments as essential for fostering inclusivity and driving innovation. When organizations respond to uncertainty by reinforcing traditional hierarchies, it not only leads to generational clashes but also makes younger employees feel marginalized and disempowered (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 464; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 579). This perceived regression in workplace democracy can be particularly disenfranchising for younger workers, who might see these old-school power structures as a step backward.
The way organizations react to heightened hierarchical systems during uncertain times greatly affects the exchange of information within the organization. As power distance increases, the flow of information tends to become more limited, usually being channeled via and regulated by top management (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 465; Au et al., 2018, p. 619; Heuss et al., 2022, p. 13). Younger generations are more significantly impacted by this communication constraint due to their familiarity with candid and unrestricted information sharing (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 12; Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 453). A communication gap can hinder effective collaboration and innovation by preventing lower-level thoughts and creative ideas from reaching senior decision-makers.
Economic instability can worsen the division induced by heightened power distance. In these situations, organizations may increase control, consolidating decision-making power among a small group of senior leaders, typically from older age groups (Atasever et al., 2023, p. 465). This concentration of authority frequently leads to younger employees feeling a reduction in their impact and chances for progression, resulting in decreased job satisfaction and increased turnover rates within this demographic (İlhan, 2020, p. 124; Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 580). Youthful employees feeling undervalued and lacking trust to contribute during difficult periods can exacerbate generational gaps and weaken corporate unity (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 11).
Finding 3 – Leadership is Crucial to Lowering Power Distance
Leadership plays a foundational role in shaping organizational norms and behaviors, particularly regarding the management of power distance. Leaders who naturally embody certain traits can foster a workplace environment that inherently encourages lower power distance, which is essential for accommodating the needs and preferences of a multigenerational workforce. By understanding the intrinsic qualities of such leaders, organizations can better cultivate environments that bridge generational divides.
Approachability is a critical leadership trait that promotes reduced power distance. Approachable leaders create an environment where employees feel at ease expressing their opinions and concerns, irrespective of their rank or age group. Approachable leaders demonstrate transparent communication, genuine concern for employee welfare, and are easily reachable (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 13). Leaders who are accessible and open create a more collaborative and inclusive environment by reducing the psychological and emotional distance that employees may perceive (Au et al., 2018, p. 619; Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 453).
Empathy is another significant characteristic. Empathetic leaders are “able to exchange knowledge without overstepping boundaries and roles, leading to greater acceptance of new ideas…” (Au et al., 2018, p. 619). Leaders demonstrate empathy to acknowledge their colleagues' emotions and worries, especially important for younger employees who could feel excluded in hierarchical work settings (İlhan, 2020, pp. 124–125). Empathetic leadership fosters trust and a feeling of inclusion among employees, crucial for diminishing perceptions of power disparities (Lynton & Beechler, 2012, p. 577).
Flexibility in leadership style is also critical for reducing power distance (Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 464). Leaders who demonstrate flexibility in their management approach can adapt to the needs and expectations of different generations within the workforce (Heuss et al., 2022, p. 12). For instance, while Baby Boomers may appreciate more traditional, directive leadership styles, Millennials and Generation Z might prefer a more collaborative and participative approach (Heuss et al., 2022, pp. 11–12; İlhan, 2020, p. 125). Leaders who can navigate these preferences and adjust their style accordingly help to minimize power distance by aligning their leadership with the expectations of their diverse team members (Lynton & Beechler, 2012, pp. 577–578).
Lastly, transparency is a key factor that greatly impacts power distance in organizations (Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 454). Transparent leaders provide crucial facts to their teams, engage them in decision-making, and provide explicit explanations for their conclusions (Heuss et al., 2022, pp. 11, 13). This transparency helps clarify the functions at upper management levels, making the leadership appear more approachable and inclusive (Zehetner et al., 2022, p. 453). Transparency promotes fairness and enables employees to participate more fully in the organization's mission.
Practical Implications
In light of the findings from this rapid evidence assessment, it becomes imperative for organizations to consider implementing management strategies that are sensitive to the distinct preferences across generational cohorts regarding power distance. One viable approach involves the integration of leadership styles that meld the assertive decision-making favored by older generations with the inclusive and consultative style preferred by younger workers. Such a hybrid approach can facilitate a more harmonious work environment that respects traditional values while embracing modern egalitarian principles.
In addition, organizations should consider the strategic deployment of technology to enhance communication flows and decision-making processes. Embracing digital tools that support transparent and democratic engagements can help align organizational practices with the expectations of digitally-native younger generations, without alienating older employees who value structured, clear communication protocols.
References
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(8), 951–968. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.283
Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., Leung, K., Bierbrauer, G., Gomez, C., Kirkman, B. L., & Shapiro, D. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(4), 300–315. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2000.1451
Caldwell, S. D., Herold, D. M., & Fedor, D. B. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment fit: A cross-level study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868–882. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.868
Di Toma, P., & Ghinoi, S. (2021). Overcoming hierarchy in business model innovation: an actor-oriented approach. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(4), 1057–1081. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-10-2019-0307
Durán-Brizuela, R., Brenes-Leiva, G., Solís-Salazar, M., & Torres-Carballo, F. (2016). Effects of power distance diversity within workgroups on work role performance and organizational citizenship behavior. Revista Tecnología En Marcha, 29(2), 63. https://doi.org/10.18845/tm.v29i2.2691
Flinchbaugh, C., Valenzuela, M. A., & Li, P. (2018). Developing employee socio-technical flexibility in a multigenerational workforce. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(4), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1017/JMO.2016.38
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014
Keum, D. D., & See, K. E. (2017). The influence of hierarchy on idea generation and selection in the innovation process. Organization Science, 28(4), 653–669. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1142
Khatri, N. (2009). Consequences of power distance orientation in organisations. Vision: The Journal of Business Perspective, 13(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/097226290901300101
Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), S139–S157. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOB.1913
Paulus, T. M., Bichelmeyer, B., Malopinsky, L., Pereira, M., & Rastogi, P. (2005). Power distance and group dynamics of an international project team: a case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 10(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1356251052000305525
Schaubroeck, J. M., Shen, Y., & Chong, S. (2017). A dual-stage moderated mediation model linking authoritarian leadership to follower outcomes. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000165
Urick, M. J., Hollensbe, E. C., Masterson, S. S., & Lyons, S. T. (2017). Understanding and managing intergenerational conflict: An examination of influences and strategies. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(2), 166–185. https://doi.org/10.1093/WORKAR/WAW009
Xu, W., Zhang, Y., Yan, M., Zhang, J., & Fan, X. (2023). How empowering leadership promotes millennial employees’ voice behavior. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 51(11), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.12525
Great post, Lem! Well done, Dr. Bob