How,Why,and When is the Average Age of Employees Related to Climate for Innovation? The Role of Age Diversity,Focus on Opportunities,and Work Engagement

Abstract

Folk wisdom suggests that “you cannot teach an old dog new tricks.” Accordingly, as the average age of the workforce increases, there is a potential concern based on negative stereotypes that organizations will become less innovative. Drawing from lifespan development theories and theorizing on innovation, we explore this concern by testing, at the organization level of analysis, whether the average age of employees is indirectly related to climate for innovation through employees’ aggregate focus on opportunities (i.e., a negative indirect effect) and work engagement (i.e., a positive indirect effect). Moreover, we proposed that organizational age diversity is a protective resource that moderates these relationships, such that they are weaker in organizations with high as compared to low age diversity. Organization-level data were collected from teaching and non-teaching staff in n = 133 schools across two time points separated by 4 years (Time 1 n = 3712 respondents; Time 2 n = 5183 respondents). Results suggest that the average age of employees within schools was negatively related to employees’ aggregate focus on opportunities which, in turn, positively predicted climate for innovation above and beyond the positive effect of work engagement. Moreover, the negative indirect effect of average age on climate for innovation through aggregate focus on opportunities was weaker for organizations with high age diversity. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of relationships between age and age-related characteristics and climate for innovation at the organization level, and challenge common misunderstandings regarding the role of age in the workplace.

Keywords

age age diversity climate for innovation focus on opportunities work engagement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amabile

T. M.

Barsade

S. G.

Mueller

J. S.

Staw

B. M.

(2005). Affect and creativity at work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 367–403. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.367

Anderson

Potočnik

Zhou

(2014). Innovation and creativity in organizations: A state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297–1333. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128

Anderson

N. R.

West

M. A.

(1998). Measuring climate for work group innovation: Development and validation of the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(3), 235–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379

Baas

De Dreu

C. K.

Nijstad

B. A.

(2008). A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood-creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus? Psychological Bulletin, 134(6), 779–806. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012815

Baer

Frese

(2003). Innovation is not enough: Climates for initiative and psychological safety, process innovations, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.179

Bakker

A. B.

Albrecht

(2018). Work engagement: current trends. Career Development International, 23(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207

Bakker

A. B.

Schaufeli

W. B.

Leiter

M. P.

Taris

T. W.

(2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 22(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649

Baltes

P. B.

(1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology, 23(5), 611–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.23.5.611

Baltes

P. B.

Baltes

M. M.

(1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. In Baltes

P. B.

Baltes

M. M.

(Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences. (pp. 1–34). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665684.003

10.

Bartko

J. J.

(1976). On various intraclass correlation reliability coefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 83(5), 762–765. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.83.5.762

11.

Binnewies

Ohly

Niessen

(2008). Age and creativity at work: The interplay between job resources, age and idea creativity. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(4), 438–457. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940810869042

12.

Bliese

P. D.

(1998). Group size, ICC values, and group-level correlations: A simulation. Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), 355–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819814001

13.

Bliese

P. D.

(2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein

K. J.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

(Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations. (pp. 349–381). Jossey-Bass.

14.

Böhm

S. A.

Dwertmann

D. J. G.

(2015). Forging a single-edged sword: Facilitating positive age and disability diversity effects in the workplace through leadership, positive climates, and HR practices. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1(1), 41–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/wau008

15.

Böhm

S. A.

Kunze

Bruch

(2014). Spotlight on age-diversity climate: The impact of age-inclusive HR practices on firm-level outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 67(3), 667–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12047

16.

Breevaart

Zacher

(2019). Daily selection, optimization, and compensation strategy use and innovative performance. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 18(2), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000224

17.

Carstensen

L. L.

(2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312(5782), 1913–1915. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127488

18.

Carstensen

L. L.

Isaacowitz

D. M.

Charles

S. T.

(1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165

19.

Chan

(1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 234–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.234

20.

Chang

C.-P.

Chuang

H.-W.

Bennington

(2011). Organizational climate for innovation and creative teaching in urban and rural schools. Quality & Quantity, 45(4), 935–951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-010-9405-x

21.

Chen

Mathieu

J. E.

Bliese

P. D.

(2005). A framework for conducting multi-level construct validation. In Multi-level issues in organizational behavior and processes. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

22.

Cohen

Doveh

Nahum-Shani

(2009). Testing agreement for multi-item scales with the indices rwg(j) and adm(j). Organizational Research Methods, 12(1), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107300365

23.

De Meulenaere

Boone

Buyl

(2016). Unraveling the impact of workforce age diversity on labor productivity: The moderating role of firm size and job security. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2036

24.

De Meulenaere

Kunze

(2020). Distance matters! The role of employees’ age distance on the effects of workforce age heterogeneity on firm performance. Human resource managemen, 60(4), 499–516. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.22031

25.

De Spiegelaere

Van Gyes

De Witte

Niesen

Van Hootegem

(2014). On the relation of job insecurity, job autonomy, innovative work behaviour and the mediating effect of work engagement. Creativity and innovation management, 23(3), 318–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12079

26.

Deller

Walwei

(2022). Workforce age trends and projections. In Zacher

Rudolph

C.W.

(Eds.), Age and work: Advances in theory, methods, and practice. (pp. 25–43). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003089674-3

27.

Dunlap

W. P.

Burke

M. J.

Smith-Crowe

(2003). Accurate tests of statistical significance for rwg and average deviation interrater agreement indices. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 356–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.356

28.

Fleiss

J. L.

(1986). The design and analysis of clinical experiments. Wiley.

29.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2003). Positive emotions and upward spirals in organizations. In Cameron

K. S.

Dutton

J. E.

Quinn

R. E.

(Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship. (pp. 163–175). Berrett-Koehler.

30.

Frosch

K. H.

(2011). Workforce age and innovation: A literature survey. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(4), 414–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00298.x

31.

Gielnik

M. M.

Zacher

Schmitt

(2017). How small business managers’ age and focus on opportunities affect business growth: A mediated moderation growth model. Journal of Small Business Management, 55(3), 460–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12253

32.

Gielnik

M. M.

Zacher

Wang

(2018). Age in the entrepreneurial process: The role of future time perspective and prior entrepreneurial experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(10), 1067–1085. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000322

33.

Gong

Huang

J.-C.

Farh

J.-L.

(2009). Employee learning orientation, transformational leadership, and employee creativity: The mediating role of employee creative self-efficacy. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.43670890

34.

Guillén

Kunze

(2019). When age does not harm innovative behavior and perceptions of competence: Testing interdepartmental collaboration as a social buffer. Human Resource Management, 58(3), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21953

35.

Hakanen

J. J.

Perhoniemi

Toppinen-Tanner

(2008). Positive gain spirals at work: From job resources to work engagement, personal initiative and work-unit innovativeness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(1), 78-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.01.003

36.

Heckhausen

Wrosch

Schulz

(2010). A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychological Review, 117(1), 32–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017668

37.

James

L. R.

Demaree

R. G.

Wolf

(1984). Estimating within group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.1.85

38.

Jenkins

J. M.

(2014). Early childhood development as economic development: Considerations for state-level policy innovation and experimentation. Economic Development Quarterly, 28(2), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891242413513791

39.

Johnson

Nguyen

Groth

White

(2018). Workplace aggression and organisational effectiveness: The mediating role of employee engagement. Australian Journal of Management, 43(4), 614–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896218768378

40.

Kooij

D. T. A. M.

Zacher

Wang

Heckhausen

(2020). Successful aging at work: A process model to guide future research and practice. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 13(3), 345–365. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2020.1

41.

Kozlowski

S. W.

Chao

G. T.

(2012). The dynamics of emergence: Cognition and cohesion in work teams. Managerial and Decision Economics, 33(5–6), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.2552

42.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Chao

G. T.

Grand

J. A.

Braun

M. T.

Kuljanin

(2013). Advancing multilevel research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organizational Research Methods, 16(4), 581–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428113493119

43.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Chao

G. T.

Grand

J. A.

Braun

M. T.

Kuljanin

(2016). Capturing the multilevel dynamics of emergence: Computational modeling, simulation, and virtual experimentation. Organizational Psychology Review, 6(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386614547955

44.

Kunze

Boehm

S. A.

Bruch

(2011). Age diversity, age discrimination climate and performance consequences: A cross organizational study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 264–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.698

45.

Kunze

Boehm

S. A.

Bruch

(2021). It matters how old we feel in organizations: Testing a multilevel model of organizational subjective‐age diversity on employee outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(4), 448–463. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2505

46.

Kunze

Raes

A. M.

Bruch

(2015). It matters how old you feel: Antecedents and performance consequences of average relative subjective age in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(5), 1511–1526. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038909

47.

LeBreton

J. M.

Senter

J. L.

(2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642

48.

Marko

K. W.

Savickas

M. L.

(1998). Effectiveness of a career time perspective intervention. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52(1), 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.1566

49.

Matthews

R. A.

Mills

M. J.

Wise

(2020). Advancing research and practice through an empirically validated short-form measure of work engagement. Occupational Health Science. 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-020-00071-4

50.

Newman

D. A.

Cottrell

J. M.

(2015). Missing data bias: Exactly how bad is pairwise deletion? In Lance

C. E.

Vandenberg

R. J.

(Eds.), More statistical and methodological myths and urban legends. (pp. 133–161). Routledge.

51.

T. W.

Feldman

D. C.

(2008). The relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 392–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.392

52.

T. W. H.

Feldman

D. C.

(2010). The relationship of age with job attitudes: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 63(3), 667–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01184.x

53.

T. W. H.

Feldman

D. C.

(2012). Evaluating six common stereotypes about older workers with meta‐analytical data. Personnel Psychology, 65(4), 821–858. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12003

54.

T. W. H.

Feldman

D. C.

(2013a). Age and innovation-related behavior: The joint moderating effects of supervisor undermining and proactive personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(5), 583–606. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1802

55.

T. W. H.

Feldman

D. C.

(2013b). A meta-analysis of the relationships of age and tenure with innovation-related behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86(4), 585–616. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12031

56.

T. W.

Lucianetti

(2016). Within-individual increases in innovative behavior and creative, persuasion, and change self-efficacy over time: A social-cognitive theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(1), 14–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000029

57.

Park

Kim

(2015). The differentiating effects of workforce aging on exploitative and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of workforce diversity. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32(2), 481–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-014-9407-7

58.

Park

Y. K.

Song

J. H.

Yoon

S. W.

Kim

(2014). Learning organization and innovative behavior: The mediating effect of work engagement. European Journal of Training and Development, 38(1–2), 75–94. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-04-2013-0040

59.

Patterson

M. G.

West

M. A.

Shackleton

V. J.

Dawson

J. F.

Lawthom

Maitlis

Robinson

D. L.

Wallace

A. M.

(2005). Validating the organizational climate measure: Links to managerial practices, productivity and innovation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 379–408. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.312

60.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J. Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

61.

Posthuma

R. A.

Campion

M. A.

(2009). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions. Journal of Management, 35(1), 158–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308318617

62.

Preacher

K. J.

Selig

J. P.

(2012). Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures, 6(2), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2012.679848

63.

R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical com- puting. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from. http://www.R-project.org/

64.

Rank

Frese

(2008). The impact of emotions, moods and other affect-related variables on creativity, innovation and initiative. In Ashkanasy

Copper

(Eds.), Research companion to emotion in organizations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

65.

Reilly

R. C.

Lilly

Bramwell

Kronish

(2011). A synthesis of research concerning creative teachers in a Canadian context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(3), 533–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.10.007

66.

Rietzschel

E. F.

Zacher

(2015). Workplace creativity, innovation, and age. In Pachana

N. A.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of geropsychology. New York: Springer. https://10.1007/978-981-287-080-3_202-1

67.

Rietzschel

E. F.

Zacher

Stroebe

(2016). A lifespan perspective on creativity and innovation at work. Work, Aging and Retirement, 2(2), 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw005

68.

Rosenbusch

Brinckmann

Bausch

(2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4), 441–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.12.002

69.

Rosseel

(2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02

70.

Rothermund

Klusmann

Zacher

(2021). Age discrimination in the context of motivation and healthy aging. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 76(Suppl_2), S167–S180. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbab081

71.

Rousseau

M. B.

Mathias

B. D.

Madden

L. T.

Crook

T. R.

(2016). Innovation, firm performance, and appropriation: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(03), 1650033. https://doi.org/10.1142/S136391961650033X

72.

Rudolph

C. W.

(2016). Lifespan developmental perspectives on working: A literature review of motivational theories. Work, Aging and Retirement, 2(2), 130–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw012

73.

Rudolph

C. W.

Kooij

D. T. A. M.

Rauvola

R. S.

Zacher

(2018a). Occupational future time perspective: A meta-analysis of antencedents and outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(2), 229–248. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2264

74.

Rudolph

C. W.

Marcus

Zacher

(2018b). Global issues in work, aging, and retirement. In Shultz

Adams

(Eds.), Aging & work in the 21st century. (2nd Edition, pp. 292–324). Routledge/Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315167602-14

75.

Schaufeli

W. B.

Bakker

A. B.

Salanova

(2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471

76.

Schaufeli

W. B.

Shimazu

Hakanen

Salanova

De Witte

(2019). An ultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000430

77.

Schmitt

Zacher

de Lange

A. H.

(2013). Focus on opportunities as a boundary condition of the relationship between job control and work engagement: A multi-sample, multi-method study. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(5), 505–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.698055

78.

Schneid

Isidor

Steinmetz

Kabst

(2016). Age diversity and team outcomes: A quantitative review. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-07-2012-0228

79.

Shanker

Bhanugopan

Van der Heijden

B. I. J. M.

Farrell

(2017). Organizational climate for innovation and organizational performance: The mediating effect of innovative work behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 100, 6767–7777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.02.004

80.

Shrout

P. E.

Bolger

(2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422

81.

Thomas

(2002). Effective classroom teamwork: Support or intrusion? Routledge.

82.

van Knippenberg

De Dreu

C. K.

Homan

A. C.

(2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008

83.

Verworn

Hipp

(2009). Does the ageing workforce hamper the innovativeness of firms? (No) evidence from Germany. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 9(2–3), 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijhrdm.2009.023452

84.

Volmer

Richter

Syrek

C. J.

(2019). Creative at each age: Age‐related differences in drivers of workplace creativity from an experience sampling study. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 53(4), 531–545. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.233

85.

Von Bonsdorff

M. E.

Zhou

Wang

Vanhala

Von Bonsdorff

M. B.

Rantanen

(2018). Employee age and company performance: An integrated model of aging and human resource management practices. Journal of Management, 44(8), 3124–3150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316662314

86.

Wang

Fang

(2020). Age diversity in the workplace: Facilitating opportunities with organizational practices. Public Policy & Aging Report, 30(3), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppar/praa015

87.

West

M. A.

Farr

J. L.

(1990). Innovation at work. In West

M. A.

Farr

J. L.

(Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies. Wiley.

88.

Williams

K. Y.

O'Reilly

C. A.

(1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.

89.

Wohlwill

J. F.

(1970). The age variable in psychological research. Psychological Review, 77(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028600

90.

Zacher

(2015). Successful aging at work. Work, Aging and Retirement. 1(1), 4–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/wau006

91.

Zacher

Frese

(2009). Remaining time and opportunities at work: Relationships between age, work characteristics, and occupational future time perspective. Psychology and Aging, 24(2), 487–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015425

92.

Zacher

Froidevaux

(2021). Life stage, lifespan, and life course perspectives on vocational behavior and development: A theoretical framework, review, and research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 126, 103476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103476

93.

Zacher

Rudolph

C. W.

Baltes

B. B.

(2019). An invitation to lifespan thinking. In Baltes

B. B.

Rudolph

C. W.

Zacher

(Eds.), Work across the lifespan. (pp. 1–14). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-812756-8.00001-3

94.

Zenger

T. R.

Lawrence

B. S.

(1989). Organizational demography: The differential effects of age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 353–376. https://doi.org/10.5465/256366