LEADERSHIP'S ROLE IN MOTIVATING MILLENNIALS A study of how organizational leaders motivate millennials in the workplace

HANSSEN, SARAH

ROJAS, AYELEN

School of Business, Society & Engineering

Course: Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration Supervisor: Leanne Johnstone

Course code: FOA243 Date: 21st of January 2021

15cr

2

Abstract Date: 21st of January 2021

Level: Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration, 15 cr

Institution: School of Business, Society and Engineering, Mälardalen University

Authors: Sarah Hanssen and Ayelen Rojas Alvarez

Title: Leadership's role in motivating millennials

Supervisor: Leanne Johnstone

Keywords: Leadership, Motivation, Millennials, Work-environment

Research

question: How can organizational leaders motivate millennials in the workplace?

Purpose: To gain an understanding of how organizational leaders lead and influence to ensure highly motivated millennial employees. Furthermore, the authors want to help close the academic knowledge gap in understanding millennials in the work environment and most importantly organizational leaders' influence on millennials work motivation.

Method: Since the thesis in nature is of a qualitative form, the authors have conducted 4 semi-structured interviews, 1 of which was in person while 3 of the interviews were conducted through digital softwares. All of which were managers from Swedish retail stores. The authors used a thematic analysis to sort and figure out which data was relevant for the thesis which laid the foundation for the discussion and conclusion of the thesis.

Conclusion: The authors of this bachelor thesis have concluded that along with previous studies, organizational leaders focus on extrinsic motivation strategies to motivate employees and do not take into consideration each individual's internal motivation. It was also discovered that organizational leaders focus on fulfilling the lower level and higher level needs of the employees, known as the hygiene factors and motivators. Furthermore, it finds that leaders do not differentiate between younger and older employees in their motivational strategies. Together, these findings mean that perhaps the correct strategies or techniques to motivate particular groups of employees are not being realized in practice by leaders, motivating the need for further studies, especially from the millennials’ perspective.

3

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Problematization ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Aim and Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 6 1.4 Research Question ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Delimitation ................................................................................................................................ 7

2. Theoretical Framework .................................................................................. 9

2.1 Organizational Leadership ........................................................................................................ 9 2.2 Motivation ................................................................................................................................. 13

2.2.1 Motivation-hygiene theory .................................................................................................................. 15 2.3 Millennials ................................................................................................................................. 17

2.3.1 Millennials in the workplace ............................................................................................................... 17 2.4 Summary of the Theoretical Background .............................................................................. 19

3.Methodology ................................................................................................... 21

3.1 Qualitative research method .................................................................................................... 21 3.1.1 Semi-structured interviews .................................................................................................................. 21 3.1.2 Operationalization ............................................................................................................................... 23

3.2 Purposive sampling method ..................................................................................................... 25 3.3 Sources and Data ...................................................................................................................... 26

3.3.1 Interview participants ....................................................................................................................... 27 3.4 Thematic Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 28 3.5 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 29

4. Empirical Findings ....................................................................................... 31

4.1 Leadership style and qualities ................................................................................................. 31 4.2 Employees (Millennials) ........................................................................................................... 33 4.3 Manager and Employee Relationship ..................................................................................... 34

4.3.1 Work environment .............................................................................................................................. 35 4.4 Motivation ................................................................................................................................. 36

5. Discussion ...................................................................................................... 39 6. Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 44 7. Future Research ............................................................................................ 45 8. Bibliography .................................................................................................. 46

4

1. Introduction The introduction will firstly include an overview of the authors of this thesis research topic

with essential background information, secondly, a problem discussion and a purpose & aim

section. Lastly, in the introduction section, the authors will present the research question, and

the delimitation of the thesis.

1.1 Background

Organizational leaders are preparing for a new generation entering the labor market, resulting

in a generational shift within the labor market (Onukwuba, 2020). Generation Y, also called

millennials, are gradually entering the workplace and will become the majority of the

workforce in the near future (Espinoza et al., 2016). According to Weber (2017), the birth years

for millennials is from the year 1980 up to 2000. According to Statista (2020), it is predicted

by the end of 2020 that the global workforce will be dominated by both generation Y and

generation X. Bejtkovský (2016) defines generation X to be those individuals that are born

between the years of 1965 and 1976. The study by Statista states that generation Y and

generation X, at the time of writing, compose approximately 35% of today’s workforce

individually, thus together being a majority of 70%. However, Generation Y will increase and

eventually become a single dominating workforce in the next upcoming years as generation X

will retire (Statista, 2020).

Given the changes in the composition of the global workforce, organizational leaders are

therefore required to adapt and change their strategies in order to motivate and understand

millennials' motivational driving forces in the workplace (Jerome, et al., 2014). On the one

hand, Stewart et al. (2017) state that studies have indicated that millennials can be difficult to

work with since the characteristics of this generation are distinguished as being ineffective,

unwilling to learn, and unmotivated in the workplace. On the other hand, Bennett et al. (2012)

imply that the motivational factors of millennials have changed from previous generations.

However, Bennet et al. indicate that millennials differ especially when it comes to working

ethics. Particularly, Bennet et al. suggest that millennials are known to be a self- fulfilling

group, with the need for a purpose in the work environment and to be part of a change.

Nevertheless, according to Kornelsen (2019), millennials can be seen as difficult to lead

because of their strong independence and capability of managing and controlling their own

work. Moreover, millennials make their decisions based on their own preferences and do not

5

require much attention and help from leaders. Arguably, an increase in the millennial workforce

can cause uncertainty within the market. Therefore, it is vital for leaders to prepare for future

obstacles and to increase the effectiveness of millennials (Bennett et al., 2012).

According to Jerome et al. (2014), it is important for organizational leaders to be aware of the

different motivational factors of the current generation in the labor market as well as their

underlying driving factors. Jerome et al. express the need of knowing what drives employees

in order to develop strategies, as well as to improve effectiveness and keep unity among all

employees. Common among all generations, is that motivation is one of the driving factors

behind the effectiveness of the labor force, yet the motivational factors can differ between

generations. Jerome et al. (2014) indicate that millennials are keener to having a clear purpose

and determination in their work life in order to feel motivated. Jerome et al. also explained that

millennials are a generation heavily influenced by technology which can make millennials

more informed on their surroundings and keen to constantly learn new things to develop and

receive self-fulfilment in their work. Dadwal (2019) further adds to Jerome that millennials

have been brought up in a society where many evolutionary technological discoveries from

previous generations have been made. Therefore, Dadwal indicates that millennials have

gained a wide insight into technology which has had and still have an impact on millennials'

decision making. Jerome et al. (2014) further add that organizational leaders have a

responsibility to learn what type of factors can motivate employees of different generations in

order to improve efficiency within the organization. This is especially important during

generational shifts in the labor market. Simms (2019) further adds to Jerome (2014) that it is

important for managers to have knowledge and to be aware of the differences between the

generations that are employed by the organizations. Simms states that if organizations take

time to understand and know the different driving forces and values of the employees it can

help the organization to improve its management strategies.

1.2 Problematization

From the managers perspective, it is important to motivate employees and it can often be seen

as a part of the manager's job. This could be seen as vital due to manager’s having the ability

to drive employees to meet the organisation's future targets (Khan & Wajidi 2019). According

to Holton and Naquin (2001) it is especially important for organizations to keep good

employees for as long as possible due to high expenses that come with hiring and training new

6

employees to meet criterias. These expenses could be avoided by keeping employees in the

long term.

According to Kowske (2010), a limited number of studies have been generated in regards to

millennials (see also Onukwuba, 2020) and other generations' different behavior within the

work environment. Onukwuba (2020) further adds that studies have shown that millennials are

less interested in adapting to organizational routines and unmotivated by guidance from

superiors in the working environment. However, an earlier study conducted by Myers and

Sadaghiani (2010) goes against Onukwuba´s statement, by stating that millennials are

encouraged by and value a close relationship with organizational leaders, as well as expect

open communication and guidance from their leaders. Long (2017) stands with Myers and

Sadaghiani (2010) by further adding that the millennials' upbringing can influence their

behavior in the working environment, especially towards management. Long indicates that this

behavior is not due to a lack of interest towards supervisors, but rather the way that millennials

have learned to interact with managers. Kriegel (2016) furthers that millennials value guidance

and support from their superiors. However, earlier studies conducted by Kornelsen (2019) have

shown similar statements to Onukwuba (2020) which goes against the theory of Myers and

Sadaghiani (2010); among others (e.g., Long, 2017; Kriegel, 2016).

According to Kornelsen (2019), millennials do not value guidance and extensive

communication with their supervisors. Kornelsen further states that millennials are aware of

the accessibility of information online and that millennials can find and gather information

quite easily. Therefore, millennials do not appreciate managers leading and controlling them.

Millennials are in this sense very independent and have a strong belief in their own process and

ideas without support from their superiors. Hence, showing that there is a lack of research

within the subject of millennials combined with a current debate regarding millennials

characteristics and motivational behavior within the working environment. To finally provide

an understanding on how leaders should interact and motivate millennials with consideration

to the difference in characteristics from previous generations.

1.3 Aim and Purpose

The purpose of the bachelor thesis is to gain an understanding of how organizational leaders

work to ensure highly motivated employees, especially in the younger generation (i.e.

Generation Y or millennials) that will - in the near future - become the majority of the

7

workforce. Hence, the specific business problem that this study addresses is to help close the

academic knowledge gap that there is in understanding millennials in the labor market, and

especially organizational leaders' influence on millennials' work motivation. Understanding

this is also arguably important for organizational managers.

1.4 Research Question

With consideration of the new difficulties concerning the generation shift in the labor market

and the different understandings in the existing literature of work motivation of millennials,

combined with the knowledge gap concerning millennials in the workforce, the authors of this

thesis have developed a research question that attempts to answer:

How can organizational leaders motivate millennials in the workplace?

1.5 Delimitation

Due to the extensive subject area, the authors of this bachelor thesis have decided that the thesis

must be delimited to ensure high quality. As the core of this thesis is focusing on how

organizational leaders motivate millennials, the thesis will narrow down motivation to a

specific type of motivation. When the authors are discussing motivation, this will mainly focus

on the motivation-hygiene theory, as it provides an insight on how organizational leaders can

motivate their employees. Hence, not including other factors that can influence the motivation

of millennials, such as culture in general and gender differences. Although, the authors want to

address that there is an awareness of other factors which can impact the motivational behavior

of millennials.

The authors also want to address that the study should not be used as a general picture of how

leaders motivate millennials in all industries. The industry that the authors have narrowed down

the research subject to is the Swedish retail industry. As of writing the thesis the authors only

had access to organizational leaders within the Swedish retail industry. The authors are aware

of the specific industry and its effect on how leaders motivate their employees. However, the

authors of this bachelor thesis are not going to investigate nor receive an in-depth

understanding of the retail industry. The authors want to receive an understanding of what type

of motivational tools organizational leaders can use to motivate millennials in the workplace.

Therefore, the research question of how organizational leaders motivate millennials is more

8

important for this thesis than the Swedish retail industry itself. Furthermore, the nature of the

study is qualitative as it aims to gain an understanding of how organizational leaders motivate

millennials. Therefore, the results of the thesis cannot be seen as general for all industries, nor

can it be seen as general for the Swedish retail industry itself as the research has been limited.

9

2. Theoretical Framework To respond to the research question of how organizational leaders can motivate millennials in

the workplace. The authors have found vital concepts and a theory to provide an understanding

of organizational leadership, motivation and ´millennials´.

2.1 Organizational Leadership

According to Volckmann (2012), the concept of leadership can be hard to define. Antonakis

(2016) adds that there is a lack of studies and that the concept of leadership can be seen as

diffuse. Furthermore, Akinola and Olusanya (2011) defined leadership as, “[...] getting people

to do things they never thought of doing, do not believe are possible or that they do not want

to do” (p. 62). Akinola and Olusanya describe that leaders have an ability to affect people and

their choices based on the effective communication and convincing skills that the leader

possesses, which can result in people committing to completing tasks. Furthermore, Silva

(2016) states that leadership can be defined as a procedure where things are constantly

progressing. Silva further mentions that leadership is leaders who have an ability to affect and

lead people towards similar targets. Leaders have an effect on people which makes people

understand the leader and their decisions. According to Portugal and Yukl (1994),

organizational leadership researches how the leader can impact the organization's work and

achievements, by having an impact on both the personal and organizational level. Bratton

(2020) adds that the leader also has the ability to impact relationships within the internal and

external environment of the organization. Leaders can influence other individuals on a personal

level through the leader's communication skills and personal characteristics, in which the leader

uses their communication skills to motivate their employees. Furthermore, Bratton states that

leaders' can impact the organizational level by influencing the employees through various

changes in work routines and administration in different departments of the organization as

well as by promoting or demoting the organizational culture.

According to Kornelsen (2019, p.27) “Leadership is typically influenced by three component

factors which are leader, follower, and context”. When these three factors are combined and

working together, it can result in more successful leadership.

10

The statement by Kornelsen will be further described in the following sections after figure 1.

Figure 1 Leadership as an interconnected process (Bratton, 2020, p.5)

Regarding context, Bratton (2020) states that the context has an impact on followers’ behaviors.

Bratton's context consists of factors such as “... -social, technology, economic, political, legal,

ecological (STEPLE) - as well as organizational design and strategy considerations inside the

organization.” Bratton describes that these external factors have an impact on the organization

internally. The context, furthermore, consists of the organization's business plan on how to

progress and work as well as the structure and format of the organization. These, at the same

time, are factors that can impact and create motivation in the organization which in turn can

lead to change within the organization.

Regarding the leadership, a leader that can affect and inspire their employees can impact the

overall performance of the organization in a progressive and efficient way (Bratton, 2020).

Furthermore, Bratton explains that the leaders’ personality traits, performance, competence and

skills affects the leaders’ ability to influence individuals. According to Bratton “Leadership

involves both direct and indirect forms of influence” (2020, p.14). The direct type of influence

is when the leader can impact employees through team gatherings, in which the leader has

direct contact with the employees, for example through work presentations. Indirect leadership,

on the other hand, refers to the influence that leaders apply to those individuals with lower

11

positions within the organization through codes of conduct with whom they do not have a direct

contact with.

Regarding followers, Bratton states that the employees within the workplace are the followers

who are affected by the leader's influence. The followers can have different positions within

the company, such as low and middle positions. Hollander (1992) adds that followership is

important to research when studying leadership. In relation to the role of followers,

the individuals’ actions, relationships, and point of view affect the individuals way of

influencing others such as working together and achieving goals.

The LMX theory (leadership-member exchange theory) also called vertical dyad linkage theory

was created during the 1970s and the theory focused primarily on the different relationships

and leadership styles leaders have with employees (Goethals et al., 2004). In the LMX theory,

there are two different groups that the employees can be divided into, these are known as the

in-group and out-group. (See figure 2)

Figure 2 The leader member-exchange model (Dubrin, 2013, p.291)

In the in-group the leader has a good and favorable relationship with their employees. While

the out-group is when the employees and leader relationship is balanced or unsatisfactory and

careless. The relationships in the in-group are satisfactory and the relationships in the out-group

are less satisfactory. However, the relationship is still different to each employee in the group,

12

one relationship with one employee in the in-group can be quite positive, while with another

employee in the in-group the relationship can be exceptional (Dubrin, 2013). Therefore, the

leader has a different relationship with each employee and can for this reason create a unique

relationship with each employee. By doing this, the leader can avoid treating every group of

employees exactly the same way. The LMX model can therefore help improve the interaction

and relationship between leaders and their employees (Goethals et al., 2004).

When considering leaders, the quality of LMX can be affected by “leader attributes such as

emotional intelligence, the personality trait agreeableness, ethical behavior and support for

HRM policies” (Bratton, 2020, p.178). Bratton indicates that the leader and follower

(employees) relationship can become affected by the leader's personality, such as likeability,

knowledge and how leaders make decisions regarding ethics and morals. In contrast, when

considering followers, (employees) Bratton (2020) states that the quality of LMX can be

affected by the Big Five widely accepted framework for personal attributes. The big five is a

model that shows an individual's personality type. The model also divides the personality into

different characteristics to give more clarification. The big five contain”[...] five dimensions:

extraversion/surgency (assertiveness), agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability,

and intellect/openness to experience” (Goethals et al., 2004, p.96). Extraversion/surgency can

be explained as a person who is talkative, open and not afraid to speak their mind.

Agreeableness can be a person who has it easy to cooperate with other people and reach a

common ground. Conscientiousness can be explained as a person who is consistent and

straightforward with their meanings. Emotional stability refers to a person who is secure in

themselves which makes them more peaceful and collected. Openness to experience refers to

a person who is willing to participate and try new things as well as brave and spontaneous

(Goethals et al., 2004).

A high-quality LMX indicates a strong relationship between leaders and employees. The

employees enjoy working for the organization and are more likely to work more effectively

and consistently. A high-quality LMX might also lead to highly motivated employees.

Therefore, employees are more likely to work for the organization in the long-run (Goethals et

al., 2004). A high-quality LMX can be created when individuals are dependable, brave and

very easy to cooperate with combined with not being afraid of making decisions and taking

control (Bratton, 2020).

13

2.2 Motivation

It was noted during the writing of the thesis, that a confusion appeared concerning motivation

and motivators. Therefore, the authors decided to add a clarification of the meanings of the

two terms. According to Cambridge University Press (2020a), motivation is through the eyes

of the individual and how the individual becomes motivated by themselves. While motivators

(motivational factors) are defined by Cambridge University Press (2020b) as other individuals

or things that act, which motivate another person.

A strong relationship between the leader and employee can impact the overall performance of

the company. Furthermore, leaders' influence over the employees can affect the employees

motivation and effectiveness in their job performance. The definition of motivation has been

described in numerous forms in academia. Mitchell defines motivation to be “[...]

psychological processes that cause the arousal, direction and persistence of behavior”

(Mitchell, 1982, p.81). Thus, Mitchell indicates that motivation is an internal psychological

process that influences human behavior. Ford further adds to Mitchell´s (1982) definition by

stating that motivation is determined by each “[...] individuals personal goals, emotions and

personal agency beliefs” (Ford, 1992, p.78). Hence, Ford states that motivation is highly

individual and that the motivation for one person might not be the same motivation for another

person.

In the early 20th century, the controversial psychiatrist Freud began his studies on motivation

(Carsrud & Brännback, 2011; Vijver et al., 2002). Freud believes that motivation was set by

different internal concepts which influence the individuals’ behavior and mindset. According

to Smith, Freud's three concepts which can be found in each individual's personality consists

of “id, ego, and superego” (Smith, 1972, p.13). Smith describes the id to be the identity of the

person where the motivation partly is built on the unapprehensive decisions humans make

automatically. The unapprehensive decisions humans make are in turn limited by the

individual's ego. The ego is on the other hand limited by the superego which influences the

individual's ethics and morale. Dickerson states that: “The ego is considered the "executive" of

the personality because it makes all the important and crucial decisions and is responsible for

self-preservation” (2006, p.48). Thus, Dickerson means that the ego is in charge of decisions

that have a major impact on a person's life. While the superego mainly influences the identity

together with the ego by affecting a person's thoughts on what is perceived as right or wrong.

14

Long (2017) states that there is a connection between employee motivation and the

effectiveness of the employee, which in turn affects the overall results of the organization.

According to Long, organizational leaders have to take into consideration the motivational

levels of the employees and work to keep the motivational levels high. The motivational levels

need to be high as it can ensure that the organization's operations work as efficiently as possible.

Long describes two types of motivational factors, these are the intrinsic and extrinsic

motivations. According to Long, intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are the internal and

external factors that affect individuals’ motivation. Although, in academia these factors tend to

be separated from one another, Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000) suggest that both intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation can be influenced by the same variables. Long (2017) states that

intrinsic motivation can be considered as the motivation individuals have in which they perform

tasks that they are interested in. These tasks can be performed without a need for an external

reward as the reward lays in their own interest for the task. However, Law et al. (2017), states

that employees' intrinsic motivation can, from the leaders’ point of view, be problematic. Law

et al. further describes the issue with highly intrinsic motivated employees to be that

“intrinsically motivated employees do not always work to the benefit of their employers […]”.

Rather, employees must be motivated to perform in a “[...] coordinated and goal oriented way”

(Osterloh & Frey, 2000, as cited in Law et al., 2017, p.1488). Thus, the statement indicates the

importance of knowing how organizational leaders should cope with intrinsically motivated

employees as these employees may not always work towards similar goals as the organization.

However, Thomas (2002) on the other hand states that employees who are intrinsically

motivated are vital for the organization’s overall performance. Thomas indicates that an

employee that is more intrinsically motivated, respects the organization and enjoys their work,

which can lead to greater individual performance than extrinsically motivated

employees. Furthermore, Thomas states that individual internal motivation has a big impact

on the employees' performance, whereas the rewards in forms of salaries that employees

receive remains to have impact on the employees' effectiveness and willingness to work.

Thomas describes that managers must know how to balance the extrinsic and intrinsic

motivations of their employees for the best effectiveness and results. The extrinsically

motivated employees are, in contrast to the intrinsically motivated employees, not interested in

the work itself, but rather on what will be given by performing the task (Wu & Lu, 2013). Wu

and Lu further explain that some of the common compensations extrinsically motivated

15

employees try to attain are “[...] a prize or a salary increase” (Wu & Lu, 2013, p.156). Hence,

extrinsic motivated employees are required to have a form of compensation for their efforts.

Without compensation, the work the employees are supposed to do will not be completed.

Tampu (2015) states that when it comes to payment and bonuses, it has to be at such a level

that the employee feels that the time spent on the work is relatively equal to the amount that is

received. Otherwise, the motivation cannot be increased by payment and bonuses.

2.2.1 Motivation-hygiene theory

In the 1960s, Herzberg presented a new theory called motivation-hygiene theory. The

motivation-hygiene theory consists of two categories known as the hygiene factors and

motivator factors, see figure 3. Watson (2003) describes these categories to fulfill different

levels of individual needs, that is higher and lower (basic) level needs. Watson further states

that hygiene factors fulfill the basic needs of individuals, while motivators fulfill the higher

needs.

Figure 3 (More et al., 2017, p.143)

According to Cote (2019) hygiene factors can affect the employees well-being. Cote states that

the hygiene factors can be seen as negative as these factors can be the reason why employees

feel displeased with their work-related activities. Cote further describes the hygiene factors to

be the internal environment within the organization such as the relationships with other

employees and the management. The hygiene factors also include the working protocol,

financial security, and terms of employment. Cote describes that the organization needs to

develop a well-planned and balanced working environment for employees to reduce the

dissatisfaction among the employees. Cote states that the balance and reduced dissatisfaction

among employees can be achieved by meeting the basic hygiene needs of employees. This can

16

be done by developing fair work protocols and an enjoyable work environment in combination

with good communication and guidance from management. The positive hygiene factors that

organizational leaders are able to establish within the organization includes areas for relaxation

and team building activities. Long (2017) adds that a clear and simple workplace combined

with minor contributions such as having fun during working hours can increase the employees’

motivation. Long further states that “[...] positive relationships with other individuals,

learning, creating, and being part of a positive movement also motivates employees” (2017,

p.25). Thus, Long indicates that organizations with a positive internal atmosphere can

contribute to the motivation of the employees and thereby making the employees work more

effectively. Moreover, Miner (2007) states that the lack of basic needs (hygiene factors) or the

basic needs not being fulfilled, such as a workplace with poor working conditions can lead to

increased dissatisfaction in the workplace. However, when basic needs are increased or

fulfilled, it cannot lead to increased satisfaction. Cote (2019) argues that it is not possible to

make employees more motivated through hygiene factors, due to hygiene factors being the

basic needs of an employee, that have to be fulfilled. Shell (2003) further states that when the

basic needs are not fulfilled, it will result in employees not being affected at all by the higher

level needs (motivators).

The second category mentioned by Cote (2019) is motivators. The motivator factors are

according to Cote related to what the employee receives from the organization's management

that are not basic needs. Cote states that the employee needs to receive attention from the

management for their work, this attention can be in the form of more responsibility within the

organization as well as the potential to grow within the organization. Long (2017) adds to

Cote’s (2019) description by stating that the motivator factors can affect the employees

motivation level in a positive or negative way based on how the management is managing their

employees. According to Knight and Westbrook (1999), the employees’ mindset towards work

is more likely to be constantly impacted by motivators rather than hygiene factors. For instance,

employees who have their basic needs covered (hygiene factors) and feel joy, recognition and

a sense of responsibility (motivators) over their work duties will feel satisfied for a longer

period of time. On the other hand, an employee that has the basic needs covered and is not

satisfied with their work will only receive satisfaction for a short period of time from receiving

an increase in hygiene factors.

17

According to Cote (2019), there have been criticisms against Herzberg's motivation-hygiene

theory. The criticism is raised due to Herzberg's theory having a lack of support and thereby

reduced trustworthiness. Ruthankoon and Ogunlana (2003) state that employers who want to

improve the effectiveness of their employees by using hygiene factors can backfire. When

employees receive increased income or bonuses within the organization, it will only result in

enjoyment over a short period of time. When the increased income and bonuses become

common, the employees will expect additional benefits for their work. The benefits will

eventually become an evil circle for the employer and result in economic issues for the

organization.

2.3 Millennials

A definition of generation is needed in order to understand Generation Y. Underwood states

that (2007, as cited in Delcampo et al., 2011) “generations are defined as an ‘age cohort’ that

shares unique formative years´ experiences, teachings and develop unique core values and

attitudes that are different from different generations” (p.5). In addition, Delcampo (2011)

states that the characteristics a generation shares, have a permanent impact on the decision

making of the same generation. Underwood and Delcampo et al. describe that the different

personality traits individuals of each generation endure as well as the different experiences and

learnings has an impact on each generation's future behaviors and the choices made. Moreover,

what differentiates each generation is that each one has different characteristics, which are

determined by birth years and the important events that took place in that period. Millennials

were born during the dotcom era, and have lived through various important events that have

had a severe impact on people (Okros, 2019). Moreover, millennials value environmentally

and ethically prone organizations to work for and their social life outside of work. Millennials

are also prone to work towards personal goals and promotion in their work life combined with

finding ways to relax, adapt to work situations and changes within the work environment

(Festing & Schäfer, 2014).

2.3.1 Millennials in the workplace The introduction has already touched upon the characteristics of millennials in the workplace.

Nevertheless, there are further studies that comment on millennials as a generational ‘cohort’,

which will be briefly overviewed here.

18

Delcampo et al. (2011) describe millennials as “[...] forward-thinking, positive and achieve

what they set their sights on” (p.15). They indicate that millennials are goal-oriented, focused

on their future and their achievements. Wiedmer (2015) adds that millennials, apart from

multitasking, are very invested in technology and creative thinking. Millennials are additionally

keen to learn new approaches and develop new ideas where millennials can find answers and

meaningfulness in their work. Furthermore, millennials are very independent when it comes to

trying to solve problems by themselves before asking superiors for help. Millennials rely on

the knowledge available online when learning and solving issues. Moreover, millennials can

be seen as very self-reliant when receiving feedback or guidance from superiors since

millennials rather want to follow their own ideas and preferences (Kornelsen, 2019).

Altinbasak-Farina and Guleryuz-Turkel (2015) add that millennials are hard workers, open to

new opportunities as well as assignments in the workplace. Jerome et al. (2014) describe that

millennials have high skills in technology and are very involved in the Internet using online

communication channels. Thus, indicating that millennials are more open to communication

through various virtual channels at work. Jerome et al. (2014) further add, in contrast to

Wiedmer (2015), that millennials prefer a lot of attention from supervisors through appraisal

and clear guidelines to be able to work efficiently and effectively. Gursoy et al. (2013) state

that millennials need a lot of recognition at their workplace, this can include recognition by

receiving bonuses or comments on their hard work from superiors as well as an increased

salary. Hence, showing that millennials feel more motivated by rewards in the form of a

promotion and better salary as well as tangible rewards such as diplomas (Prawitasari, 2018).

Overall, millennials are very focused on their careers, work opportunities and development

within their professional advancements.

Furthermore, Kostanek and Khoreva (2018) state that millennials are driven and motivated in

their work ethics and do not find it difficult to change job or working environments in order to

achieve their goals. Millennials are also very open to finding work where they feel appreciated

and where they can visualize potential future advancements within the company long-term.

Moreover, millennials want to feel meaningful and appreciated in their workplace as well as

work for organizations that are up to date in using technology and are keen to adapt to future

technological advancement (Kostanek & Khoreva, 2018; Prawitasari, 2018). Gursoy et al.

(2013) state that millennials value their time off work where millennials can spend time on

personal interest since personal time is more valuable than working towards a promotion for

millennials. A workplace that is enjoyable, and where millennials feel at ease is very important

19

for millennials when choosing where to work. Therefore, millennials are very open to changing

their career and work with various jobs to find meaning combined with working for their own

personal advancement and to seek new job opportunities (Wiedmer et al., 2015). Moreover,

millennials find it vital that organizations take into consideration the environment and social

issues, regarding ethics and morals. A company that works towards finding solutions and

solving environmental and social issues are seen as more appealing for millennials to work for

(Formánková et al., 2019).

2.4 Summary of the Theoretical Background The theoretical background develops different theories regarding leadership, motivation, and

millennials. Since the author's purpose is to study how leaders can motivate millennials, figure

4 has been developed by the authors of this thesis as a theoretical framework to connect to the

literature applied in this study. It is further explained in the summary below.

Figure 4 (Hanssen and Rojas, 2020)

(Inspired by Long, 2017; Onukwuba, 2020; Kornelsen, 2019; Knight and Westbrook, 1999)

20

Organizational leaders can have strategies which can influence the workforce extrinsic

motivation. Bratton (2020) states that leaders can use their abilities to inspire and affect the

employees and thereby improve the overall performance of the organization. Long (2017)

states that extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are the determining factors behind each

individual's level of motivation towards their work. The intrinsic motivation includes the

individuals’ preferences and internal drive, while the extrinsic motivation can influence the

individuals through external driving forces such as rewards and leaders’ acknowledgement (see

also Wu & Lu, 2013). The motivation-hygiene theory factors also have an impact on the

employee's motivation. The motivators and hygiene factors affect employees' individual needs

on a lower and higher level. Employees' motivation and satisfaction can remain for a longer

period of time when the basic needs (hygiene factors) are satisfied combined with the higher

level needs (motivators) being fulfilled (Knight & Westbrook, 1999).

Espinoza et al. (2016) further describes a new generation shift in the workforce, leading to a

higher percentage of millennials in the workforce. Thus, resulting in a superior number of

millennials in the workplace. There are current disagreements within academia on the

characteristics of millennials. One side within academia indicates that millennials are difficult

to work with and lead due to millennials following an independent path (Kornelsen, 2019).

Wiedmer (2015) further adds that millennials rarely seek guidance and support from superior

managers as millennials often try to solve issues by themselves. The other side in academia,

goes against this by stating that millennials value coaching and mentoring from superior

managers to receive a feeling that their work is being noticed and that they are appreciated for

their work (Jerome et al., 2014) Thus, showing that there is a connection between leaders and

how the leaders influence their workforce. However, there is a conflict in academia on how

leaders should motivate and handle millennials when the millennials become a majority within

the workforce.

Therefore, taking the arguments above into consideration, figure 4 summarizes the theoretical

framework that guides the design of this thesis to offer a better understanding into how leaders

motivate millennials in the workplace.

21

3.Methodology

The authors have developed this chapter with the research method as a starting point.

Secondly, the sample technique is justified. Subsequently, the different data collection methods,

as well as the type of data and the participant selection are detailed. To finally provide the

method analysis and conclude with an explanation of the limitation of the thesis.

3.1 Qualitative research method

The authors chose a qualitative research method as it seemed to be the most suitable method

for the thesis. According to Saunders et al. (2016), a qualitative research method can provide

an in-depth and insightful bachelor thesis by researching people's stories and knowledge.

People's experiences and information can provide more meaningful and thorough research.

Furthermore, people's wisdom and narratives can provide useful information that is needed in

order to answer the research question. Thus, showing that a qualitative research method is the

most applicable method for this bachelor thesis. A quantitative research method is therefore

not useful for this thesis as it is more based on statistics and can therefore not provide a deeper

understanding of human behavior. The authors of the bachelor thesis have been aware of the

negative traits that come with using a qualitative research method. Bryman and Bell (2013)

state that in qualitative research the author has the power to focus and guide their work into a

certain direction. Therefore, qualitative research can be seen as less trustworthy, because of the

authors ability to change according to their own preconceptions of the research. The authors

preferences and thoughts on what the focus of the study should be, and where the patterns lay,

affects the overall study. Thus, affecting the study's result by the authors own preferences and

perspectives. To avoid this, the authors have cross-checked sources to assure validity. The

authors also had a clear structure with guidelines of the criteria that the participants met in

order to participate in the interviews. Furthermore, the transcriptions can be provided by

contacting the authors of this bachelor thesis, to allow the reader to make their own judgement.

3.1.1 Semi-structured interviews

In qualitative research methods, there are different approaches to use when proceeding with

the data gathering. These approaches can be various types of firsthand-information through

interviews such as semi-structured interviews, focus groups, other measurements, or

22

experiences the author can use to receive a deeper understanding in their research area

(Saunders et al., 2016). Bryman and Bell (2013) state that semi-structured interviews are a

common qualitative approach for researchers to use. Here, the interviews are planned ahead of

time and contain questions that are structured based on the authors chosen categories that are

connected to the literature. The interview questions are not narrowly formulated, which gives

the participants that are being interviewed the possibility to give more detailed answers, based

on their own opinions and preferences. Therefore, the authors have designed open-ended

questions for the semi structured-interviews. Hence, giving the interviewer more information

and more thorough answers to use in the research. Furthermore, Saunders et al. (2016) state

that it is crucial for the interviewer to have follow-up questions that can be used in situations

during the interview when the participant(s) have short answers to the questions. Saunders et

al. further describe follow-up questions as being useful for the researcher to receive more

clarification on what the participants mean with their answers as well as to receive more

information.

During the interview, it is possible for the participants to answer the questions by mentioning

other topics within the research area as well as other subjects that can also be relevant and

useful for the interviewer. Bryman and Bell (2013) state that it can be positive to prepare the

participants prior to the interview, as this can result in increased trust between the participant

and the interviewer. Saunders et al. (2016) add to Bryman and Bells´ statement by mentioning

that the participants who are provided with the interview questions, or information about the

interview topic prior to the interview can become more prepared. Hence, giving the interviewer

well-thought out answers to the research questions that can provide more quality answers and

trustworthiness in the interview. Based on the statements by Bryman and Bell and Saunders,

the authors provided the participants with the interview guide prior to the interview to allow

the participants to be prepared and increase trust between the participants and the interviewer.

Saunders et al. (2016) state that the structuring of interview questions is based on the research

topic as well as relevant patterns that can help the author receive further detailed information

from the participants. Saunders et al. further add that spending a lot of time structuring the

interview and creating a plan can help the interviewer avoid potential issues that can arise

during the interview. These issues include the participants' answers which may not fit with the

research question. Saunders et al. further add that it is important for the interviewer to avoid

affecting the participants' answers. In order to prevent this, the interviewer could have follow-

23

up questions to ask in order to receive clarification. Bryman and Bell (2013) add to this

statement by mentioning that it is important for the participants to have the ability to answer

the questions in their own way and based on their own perception of the questions, this to

ensure increased trustworthiness of the interview.

In this bachelor thesis, all of the interviews conducted were audio-recorded, with the

permission of all of the participants, to be able to fully transcribe what each participant

answered to the interview questions. The majority of the interviews were conducted in English,

however one interview was conducted in Spanish due to one of the authors and the participant

being native Spanish speakers. All of the English interviews were first recorded, saved as an

audio-recording, and then transcribed in English. The Spanish interview was recorded, saved

as an audio-recording, transcribed in Spanish and later translated to English. Microsoft word

translation function was used to translate from Spanish to English and lastly interpreted and

corrected by the native Spanish speaking author in order to avoid minor mistakes made by the

software.

The interview questions were created and formulated based on relevant subjects and problem

areas within scientific articles, as these were found useful in writing the interview questions.

Thus, to ensure that the interview questions were more suitable to use in the interview. The

authors have developed questions based on the different concepts and the theory that have been

chosen such as organizational leadership, motivation, and millennials.

3.1.2 Operationalization In table 1 below, the authors have developed 17 interview questions, where relevant themes to

the questions are presented and linked to the literature.

Questions Question themes Link to literature concepts

a) How would you describe the environment of your workplace?

Leadership (see Bratton, 2020)

Interconnected process

b) How would you describe your relationship with your colleagues and employees? (Do you have a similar bond with all of them or do you have stronger connections with some of the employees?, if so why do you think that is?)

Leadership (see Portugal & Yukl 1994)

Internal leadership

24

c) What would you say are the average age of your employees within the company?

Millennials (see Onukwuba 2020)

Workforce of the future

d) Do you have team-work activities, work related or outside of work? (If yes: give examples of these team-work activities)

Motivation (see Long 2017) Hygienic motivational factors

e) What type of leader do you believe you are? Leadership (see Bratton 2020)

Interconnected process

f) What would you say are your best qualities as a leader?

Leadership (see Bratton 2020)

Leadership traits

g) What type of leadership do your employees respond to best? (do you have any examples?)

Leadership (see Long 2017) Transformational leadership

h) Tell us about any routines, policies or procedures that you have in place for employees to follow?

Leadership (See Long 2017) Work environment

i) How do you build trust/increase trust between you and your employees?

Motivation (See Long 2017)

Transformational leadership

j) How would you describe the typical employee within the company? (Do you have any examples?)

Millennials (See Cote 2019)

Generation traits

k) What would you say are the best attributes for an employee to have?

Millennials (See Bratton 2020) The big five framework

l) How do you motivate your employees? (If Yes: Do you have any examples? If No: Are there any particular reasons why you are not motivating your employees?)

Motivation (See Jerome et al. 2014)

Intrinsic/ Extrinsic motivation

m) Are there differences in how you motivate your employees of different age groups? (If Yes: What differences? Do you have any examples? If No: Would you say that the different age groups are identical in what motivates them?)

Millennials (See Long 2017) Generational differences

n) Some argue that it is more difficult to motivate younger employees to work, what is your opinion on that?

Millennials (See Onukwuba 2020)

Generational differences

o) How would you, as a manager, like to motivate your employees? (Do you have any examples?)

Motivation (See Long 2017) Intrinsic/ Extrinsic motivation

p) How are employees rewarded for meeting targets? Do you think that the employees work more effectively based on these rewards?)

Motivation (See Long 2017 Intrinsic/ Extrinsic motivation

q) How do employees usually receive feedback on their performance (that include both positive and negative feedback)

Motivation (See Ng et al., 2016)

Intrinsic/ Extrinsic motivation

25

r) Is there any other information you would like to add that you believe can be useful for our paper?

3.2 Purposive sampling method

A purposive sampling technique was chosen by the authors. According to Saunders et al.

(2016), a purposive sampling technique is where the researcher has the ability to decide what

type of participants are the most suitable for their research. The authors decided that a purposive

sampling method would be the most applicable method to use in order to conduct the thesis

and receive vital information that can answer the research question. Saunders et al. (2016) state

that purposive sampling is not applicable for bigger research with several participants, instead,

a more useful sample size would be to only have a few people participating. The researcher

can with a sample consisting of a few people focus more vividly on the participants and achieve

more profound information. Since the researcher had most influence on the sampling strategy,

purposive sampling can be seen as unobjective. Therefore, it is important for the author to be

aware of how to choose and what to focus on when collecting participants. Purposive sampling

method is a useful method to choose when the researcher wants to have a selective and limited

sample to be able to attain more deep-rooted information.

The purposive sampling technique was conducted by first contacting 80 participants through

email, in which the authors described vital information regarding the interviews and the

research topic to see whether there was an interest or not. Due to a short time frame of three to

four weeks to contact potential participants, the authors were only able to contact 80

participants. Nonetheless, the authors of this thesis were only two individuals, therefore the

possibility to reach and receive more interviews to conduct has been limited. Out of the 80

people contacted, only four participants agreed to participate in an interview, the rest of the

participants who chose not to participate were due to time limitations. The authors searched

online for relevant managers in companies within the Swedish retail industry. The Swedish

retail industry was chosen due to a presumption by the authors that there are more millennials

working within the retail industry than in many other industries. Moreover, the retail industry

was chosen due to many millennials working in the retail industry, especially as a part time job

for millennial students (Chancer et al., 2019). The authors criteria for conducting the interviews

26

were that the managers must work in companies within the Swedish retail industry and that the

manager´s employees should consist of millennials.

3.3 Sources and Data

The authors have used both primary and secondary sources in the bachelor thesis. According

to Keller (2019), primary sources are first-hand information from individuals who have the

experience or qualified knowledge of the specific topic or research area. For instance, the

participants in interviews who provide information based on their own experience are seen as

first-hand sources. Keller further adds that secondary sources are information created from

individuals who do not have first-hand experience on the specific topic, these can include

literature and journals. Primary sources are often seen as more trustworthy since the

information provided is directly from the source. Primary sources can be seen as more reliable

and authentic as the source has relevant knowledge and involvement in the specific area.

Primary and secondary sources used together can ensure higher quality, by cross-checking the

information from both parts. Moreover, by combining primary and secondary sources the

authors can increase reliability and support to the gathered information (Chawla & Sondhi,

2011).

The authors have used articles and books that have been peer-reviewed, to establish further

reliability in the thesis. The articles and literature used have been published by independent

firms such as Sage and Springer Publishing. The authors choose these publishing firms as they

are seen as valid in academia with high-quality content. (Sage Publishing, 2020; Springer

Publishing Company, 2020). Thereby, increasing trustworthiness and reliability of the thesis.

The secondary sources applied for this research are gathered from individuals with a relevant

academic background to ensure higher quality and trustworthy content.

Furthermore, the authors have used secondary sources in the theory section, to receive an

understanding of the research topic. For the method section, the authors have used secondary

sources to ensure that the research that has been made is supported and in line with how

academic research papers should be written. The authors primary data was gathered through

semi-structured interviews, which became a base for the findings and discussion section. The

section below will further explain where the primary data was collected from.

27

The authors are aware that the low number of primary sources can lead to a vague conclusion

as there might be a debate on whether the number of interviews are enough to justify the

conclusion made by the authors. The authors primary choice to counter this issue was to add

secondary data. However, the authors of this thesis were not able to find relevant secondary

data that connects the companies policies and strategies towards motivation and hiring new

employees. Therefore, the authors of this thesis could only rely on the data provided by the

participants. Nonetheless, the authors argue that the combined knowledge and management

experience, see table 2, between the participants are enough to justify the conclusion made by

the authors.

3.3.1 Interview participants

Participant A is the general manager of company A. The manager has been working for the

company for four years, where the participant had a leadership role for one year and has been

in the general manager role for three years. Company A is a sub-company to a Swedish retail

store with several stores around Sweden.

Participant B has been a store manager for one and a half years in company B. However,

Participant B has had previous experience as a substitute store manager, and as a team leader

for five to six years. The store manager is in charge of 11 employees. Company B is a Swedish

retail store with several stores around Sweden.

Participant C is the store manager of company C and is in charge of three employees. The store

manager has been working for the company for 21 years and has been in the manager role for

21 years in company C. Company C is a Norwegian retail store with several stores around

Sweden.

Participant D is the CIO of company D and is in charge of 20 employees. The CIO has been

working for the company for only one year. However, Participant D has prior to working as a

CIO, worked in several management positions for more than a decade. Company D is a

Swedish retail store with several stores throughout Sweden.

28

The following table shows the Profile of each participant that was interviewed for the research

purpose. Table 2 below includes: position, years within the firm, a short background

information, and the interview date.

Participant Position Years

working as a leader

Participant Background and experience

Interview Date

A

General Manager

4 years

Former experience as a leader, 1 year. 3 years in the current position for a small Swedish company.

30/11-20

B Store Manager

6 in General

1.5 years working as a store manager in the current position for a large Swedish company.

1/12-20

C Store Manager

21 years

21 years working as a store manager in the current position for a large Norwegian company.

2/12-20

D CIO

10-12 years

Former experience in management. 1 year working as the head of IT-operations within a large Swedish company.

7/12-20

3.4 Thematic Analysis

Braun and Clarke (2006, p.6) state that “Thematic analysis is a method for identifying,

analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data”. Braun and Clarke mean that thematic

analysis is a method that seeks to discover and process different aspects and similarities within

certain research categories that can provide useful, relevant, and detailed information. Braun

and Clark (2006) mention that the information that has been gathered through thematic analysis

can be in-depthly processed. The information gathered is in great detail. However, there are

also other discoveries gathered outside of the research area through the thematic analysis

method that can bring further important insights to the data. Bryman and Bell (2016) add that

many researchers use thematic analysis and that the method differs from other methods.

Bryman and Bell mean that thematic analysis method does not have a lot of prior information,

as well as clarifications of the method overall in academia. Bryman and Bell further state that

there are different meanings to thematic analysis and how researchers should use and interpret

the method in practice. Lastly, Bryman and Bell state that thematic analysis can be seen as less

useful in business research since there is not a lot of studies about the method. However, Braun

29

and Clarke (2006) state that it is easy to understand, adapt, and follow the thematic analysis

method. The straightforward guidelines on how to use thematic analysis make the process

uncomplicated for the researcher. Braun and Clarke further state that thematic analysis can

provide clarity and deeper meaning within the data gathered. The method can also provide

information where certain areas within the data contradict each other. Furthermore, the data

can have a common ground, in which the researcher can analyze and discover new and useful

information. The authors chose thematic analysis as the method is easy to process and perform.

The method can also give the authors new perspectives and clarity to the gathered data. Thus,

helping the authors receive a less wide or shallow understanding of their research.

Furthermore, the authors have used open-coding in the bachelor thesis. Open-coding refers to

interpreting and categorizing the findings collected from the interviews. Open-coding is a tool

that can provide the authors with more apparent data and a deeper understanding, which can

make the data more simple to organize and interpret (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). The thematic

analysis allowed the authors to gather the most relevant information and filter out the

unnecessary information from the interviews. The relevant data was then color coded and

placed in specific themes which were discovered as a part of the color coding process. The

themes were based on similarities that were discovered from the information provided from

the semi-structured interviews. The themes discovered were, leadership style and qualities,

manager and employee relationship, employees with a focus on millennials, and lastly

motivation. The theme manager and employee relationship has been further divided into a

subcategory called work environment. These themes subsequently structured the presentation

of the findings section in this bachelor thesis.

3.5 Limitations

As of writing this bachelor thesis, the Covid-19 pandemic caused limitations in the society

which affected the authors and the thesis process (Folkhälsomyndigheten, 2020). There is a

hectic and uncertain period for companies within the retail industry. There are also restrictions

and guidelines in Sweden that must be followed, such as social distancing. Hence, limiting the

possibility to have face-to-face meetings. The authors conducted three interviews online

through various digital softwares, while one interview was conducted in person. The online

interviews affected the circumstances such as lack of seeing body language in the meeting and

30

face-to-face engagement between the interviewer and the participants. Due to time and access

limitations, the authors could not make a generalized paper on how leaders influence

millennials in the workforce. The authors could only access 4 participants from the leader

perspective of the leader-follower (employee) model, thus only gaining a leader's perspective

on how millennials are motivated. The participants included in the bachelor thesis have

different backgrounds within the retail stores in Sweden with a spread of four companies. The

low number of companies used within the Swedish retail industry for this paper means that the

thesis can neither be seen as a representation of the whole Swedish retail industry. Instead, the

thesis should be seen as a first attempt to explore the phenomenon of how millennials are

becoming motivated within, in this case due to access and time limitation, the Swedish retail

industry.

31

4. Empirical Findings In the findings chapter, the authors have provided the reader with the primary data that was

gathered through the semi-structured interviews with the participants presented in table 2.

These findings have been divided into four themes. The themes that are included in the findings

section are leadership style and qualities, employees with a focus on millennials, manager and

employee relationship, and lastly motivation. The theme manager and employee relationship

contain one subcategory called work environment, to make the information more

understandable and in-depth.

4.1 Leadership style and qualities Within the theme leadership style and qualities, different management strategies will be

presented as well as how these strategies and leadership qualities affect the employees.

When asked about what type of leader the participants believed they were, Participant A stated

that “I’m a feeler, I know, I feel my employees and know how they feel’’. Participant A saw

himself as a leader who is open and understanding towards his employees. Participant A

followed the statement by stating “My goal is that everybody in the team, they know what the

finish line is, what they think the final product is supposed to be.” Participant A described the

importance of having end goals and showing the employees what the main or finish goal is.

Participant B described his leadership style in a similar manner as Participant A by stating “If

they come with a problem to me, I always push that very high up on my agenda, depending on

the thing, just to have that trust between colleagues”. Participant B expressed to be a caring

leader that values trust between leader and employees. Participant C described using a similar

leadership style as Participant A and B by stating that Participant C wanted to make the

employees feel good, highlighting the importance of taking care of people in the work circle.

Participant D stated “I can grow [train] the employees so that they can feel that they are

important in their role” and further explained that it is important for a leader to provide

freedom and responsibilities for the employees to assure that they feel needed.

When Participant A was asked to provide an example concerning Participant A’s leadership

style, Participant A explained that having a clear guideline on what the goal is and why the

work is important to do, can help dismiss uncertainty and create more transparency in the

workplace. Participant A added “[…] because, like I’ve been transparent enough so they know

32

what to do, if I’m not there”. Hence, Participant A indicated that employees usually respond

best to a leader who values transparency and empowers the employees to take initiatives on

what the employees believe is right. When asked about good leadership qualities, Participant

A stated that employees value leaders that allow the employees to grow by having more

responsibility over their work environment. Participant A clarified that he believed a good

leader should set a direction and provide guidance to the employees, where everyone works

towards the same goal. Participant B stated, in line with Participant A, that a good leader should

“[…] lead by example“. Hence, Participant B described the importance of providing clear

guidance for the employees to follow. Which naturally would be by the leader to work as the

leader wants the employees to work. Participant B along with Participant A agreed that leader

characteristics for a good leader should include being open and transparent in the work

environment and towards the employees. Meanwhile, Participant C believed a leader should

remain friendly in all situations and that showing sympathy towards the employees are one of

the more important characteristics a leader can have. Participant C stated when asked about

good leadership qualities that leaders should “[…] have the heart, be kind and well to learn

things, it’s easier to sell”. Participants A and B agreed with participant C on the importance of

ensuring that the employees felt comfortable at work and were able to work with ease as it

could increase the work effectiveness. Participant C raised an interesting thought by stating

“sometimes the staff has better ideas than me, right?”. Thereby, indicating that Participant C,

although promoting the importance of clear guidelines and routines, remains open to thoughts

and ideas lifted up by employees. Participant D stated that it is important to allow employees

to be their own leader within their role. Thus, empowering the employees with such a freedom

that the employees are able to make their own decisions within their own work area.

When Participant B was asked if there was something particularly important with being a leader

that needed to be highlighted, Participant B noted that “[…] having a strong and simple core

is always good, something you can fall back on. Because there are always different situations

with different people, different times”. Thus, Participant B described the importance of having

a base in which the leader can land on and to always be aware that there is not always one right

leadership style or solution for an issue. Therefore, Participant B meant that leaders have to be

good at switching strategies and adapt to changes within the work environment.

33

4.2 Employees (Millennials)

Within the theme employees (Millennials), the typical employee and their characteristics will

be presented.

Participant A described the average employee within the company as a 21 to 30 year old

individual. Participant B and C described their average employee as quite similar to Participant

A, being between the ages of 20 up to 30 years old. While, participant D although unsure,

described the average age of their employees to be around 25-35 years old.

When describing the qualities of Participant A’s employees, Participant A stated that the

employees were “[…] good at being flexible […]”. Participant A followed the statement by

describing that important characteristics of an employee could be “[…] open minded,

committed, and kind […]”. Thus, indicating that an employee should have similar

characteristics as the leader, by being down to earth, professional and adaptable to changes.

Participant B described in a similar tone that an important characteristic of an employee is to

have “[…] a positive attitude […]”, which is a recurrent statement among all participants

regarding their employees. Participant B described their employees as being connected to the

core beliefs of the company as a whole by stating, “[…] as a company we have core values

and all of those are very strong in every employee”. Participant B followed the statement by

describing that Participant B always seeked specific expertise and characteristics when hiring

new employees. Furthermore, when Participant D was asked about company D and its

employees, Participant D stated that […] “if we should choose between one […] older person

from a younger person, take the younger person”. Indicating that Participant D had been

instructed to hire a younger person in front of an older one. Participant D further explained that

this was due to younger people having a younger mindset and newer insights to provide for the

company.

Moreover, when asked about motivating younger employees, participant A stated that younger

employees had more of a drive and desire to work. Participant C described that some

individuals in the younger generation are “[…] Lazy, I’ll tell you. But not most of them”. Hence,

describing that there can be an issue with passive and careless individuals, but that these should

not be considered as a majority and represent the generation as a whole. Participant C further

stated that the employees who are hired by Participant C are hard workers and are very effective

in their work. Thus, giving two different pictures on how the younger generation can be in the

34

workforce. Participant D described that the employees work more efficiently if there are

specific “guidelines, policy or manual to follow” as it would become easier for the employees

to work within specific lines. Thereby, the employees would have a safety barrier but at the

same time being empowered to make decisions accepted by the manuals and policies.

4.3 Manager and Employee Relationship Within the theme manager and employee relationship and subcategory work environment, the

findings about the relationships between employees and management in the workplace will be

presented.

When asked about the relationship between the managers and their employees, Participant A,

B and C stated a similar yet different manner. Participant C’s relationship with the employees

was described as the employees and leader being on an equal level, “in no store have I seen

myself more than them, right? That I’m always in the same”. Participant B described the

relationship in a similar manner as Participant C by stating “I see myself, someone as a friend

to them, I am one of the gang, not their boss so to say”. Thereby, describing a friendly, laid

back atmosphere among the employees and management. Participant C added that the

employees and managers usually spent time after work hours “[…] we go to dinners, we go

play “biljard” [billiards], “bowling” […] to make it interesting, right?” to build the

relationship further. Participant C indicated that allowing employees to spend time with

managers after work hours could ease the working atmosphere even further by developing a

social and friendly relationship between them. Participant A described the relationship with the

employees as “[…] friendly but professional” implying a friendly, yet a clear difference

between manager and employee position. Participant B added that the team is very open and

spends a lot of time together and therefore the mood between workers and leaders is more

relaxed and sociable. Participant C agreed with Participant A and B by stating that the

relationship is very relaxed and friendly.

When asked about how the participants provide feedback towards their employees, participant

A stated that “I would say I’m pretty good at giving positive feedback in like of the coffee [coffee

break], or like just, you know, over the desk, or in the room [casual feedback]”. Indicating a

very relaxed working environment and laid-back leadership style. Participant B added that

“[…] all types of feedback is always appreciated and that is the part of being here, that they

35

really appreciate and want more of”. Thereby, describing a group of employees that rely on

feedback and are grateful when receiving negative or positive comments on their work from

the management. Participant B further stated that providing feedback is part of Participant B’s

leadership style, where using feedback as a tool to uplift the employees’ abilities and

weaknesses to ensure that the employees grow personally. Participant C described in line with

Participant A and B that feedback is an important part of the job and that it can be used to let

the employees develop and grow more in their tasks. Participant D described that their

employees appreciate feedback and expected to receive feedback on their work. Although, it is

not only feedback from manager to employee, but rather group directed feedback in which

employees are able to comment on what they believe are important to each other. Participant

D stated “[…] giving feedback because I think that is a really good thing to strengthen the

team spirit”. Thus, indicating that the feedback can be used to build up the team spirit.

When asked about how trust is ensured and built between the managers and employees, the

answers among all participants were similar. Participant B stated “The door is always open,

that is building trust, they can share and I can share”. Thereby, indicating that Participant B

is a leader that is caring and by paying attention to the employees needs and feelings he can

build trust and a strong bond between them. Participant C described it in a similar way as

Participant B by stating “[…] I’m not boss, boss like the others, no, I’m more of a colleague

and friend like [to] them”. Thereby, describing the relationship as very open and friendly and

that Participant B is building trust by being more down to earth with the employees.

4.3.1 Work environment

Participant B described the importance of a pleasant workplace and open communication

between employees and leaders to build a better team spirit and increase the effectiveness in

the store. Participant B further stated that “I strive to have an open environment and there

should not be anything they do not want to come with to me […]”. Participant B described the

importance of having a down to earth work environment in which the employees feel safe

enough to be able to highlight uncertainties or issues to the management. Participant A

described the work environment as casual when asked about the workplace environment. He

stated that the work environment should be fun and open to allow for clear communication

between the employees and the management. Participant B described in similar tone as

36

participant A that the work environment is “Very open and happy, we strive to have an open

communication between the management and the sales assistants […]”. Participant B meant

that an open and joyful work environment would make the employees feel more appreciated

and that they belonged as a part of the team. In line with Participant A and B, participant C

stated “[…] it is important to welcome employees in a good way, right? Make them feel good”.

Participant D described their work environment as an open environment in which the

employees and the management could “chit chat” with each other throughout the work day.

Hence, all four participants expressed the importance of having a down to earth and joyful

work environment as this would assure that the relationship between the employee and the

manager is at a positive level.

4.4 Motivation In the final section the authors have added data that are related to the core of this thesis,

motivation. Which was essential to understand and answer how organizational leaders can

motivate millennials in the workplace.

The participants were asked whether they motivate their employees or not and if the

participants use motivation. Participant B stated “[…] we have everything from small

competitions to drive, like sales competition or just targets for the store in general. They can

be different targets like for the company in general or just for the store”. Thereby, describing

forms of extrinsic motivation in which the participant himself, or the organization in whole

used to push employees to work more efficiently to reach internal targets. Participant C

described similar strategies as Participant B by stating “Contest, yes. […] Because the company

wants us to sell several [products], that is what we have now.”. Thus, using contests and other

challenges to push the numbers as the head office in the company wants to increase sales for

specific brands that are newly launched. Participant B further explained that the organization

uses several methods to raise the spirit of the employees and to bond employees further with

the organization. Participant B stated “different team building exercises and small challenges,

exercises to lift our spirits or get some energy and stuff like that and after work sometimes

[…]”. Although, participant B further noted that, it is not always possible to use these types of

activities to increase the motivation of the employees, as unpredictable occurrences can lead to

less activities, such as a pandemic. Participant C stated that their organization also tends to use

minor competitions to increase motivation further. Participant C described weekly

37

competitions in which the employees worked to meet weekly targets and once the targets were

achieved, the reward could consist of dinners or trips.

Participant A prefers to motivate employees by building trust. Participant A described it as

“[…] actually to share as much information as I can, and then to be clear about what the goal

is with our business, what’s this year’s goal”. Participant A described that involving the

employees can increase trust and motivation. Participant A stated that motivating the

employees through visual gestures such as “A clap on the axel (A pat on the shoulder)”, is a

good way to motivate and show recognition of the employees work. Participant A further

described that visual gestures are highly appreciated by the employees as well and work great

as a motivator. Participant A described that compensation for the work did not lay in monetary

rewards but rather in seeing the results of the work that has been made and how the customers

react to the work. Participant A meant that employees would be more motivated for future tasks

by knowing that their contribution affects society in a positive way. Participant C described in

a similar tone as Participant A that providing the employees with results on their work and

providing feedback in such a way that the employees feel appreciated can increase the

motivation and also allow the employees to grow as sellers for the future. Participant C further

described that “[…] better feedback. Because that helps in the growth of the seller, here and

in the future”. Hence, describing how feedback in one way can be a better motivational factor

than tangible rewards as it can lay the foundation for a growing future career.

Participant D provided a particular tone of motivation and highlighted that “Noone is the other

like. So you have to be in some cases very listening [be attentive] and [of] the others, for

another person you can go straight forward to the point. I think it’s not the age thing”.

Participant D followed the statement by describing that there have been young employees

working for Participant D that have had a very old mentality while some of the older employees

have had younger mentalities. Therefore, Participant D could not choose a motivation strategy

based on age differences but rather on the personality differences. Participant B described it

along with participant D that one should not look at how to motivate employees through

presumed stereotypes. Participant B believed that age or gender is not an influencing factor

that should be taken into consideration when motivating the employees. Furthermore, when the

participants were asked about if there are differences in how the participants motivate their

employees of different age groups, the participants answered similarly. All of the participants

answered that they did not motivate their employees based on age differences.

38

A common thread among all participants was that the participants focused more on personality

differences among their employees when providing feedback or motivating these individuals

than age. Participant B clarified that “I would not say age or, it is more personal, how is their

personality it doesn’t matter if it’s a boy or a girl, if it is a young employee or an older one. It

is more of, how is that person’s personality”. Thus, adding the importance of being adaptable

as a leader to cope with each person’s personality and know how to best provide feedback and

motivate these individuals. Participant A described in a similar tone that it is important to

separate individuals based on personality and to guide employees based on their characteristics

rather than through pre assumed speculations. Participant C explained that all employees are

different. However, the working process is almost identical for each individual. Participant C

stated “[…] you know some people are sensitive and you have to think about that too, right?”.

Thus, indicating that emotion can differ between individuals and that a manager must take these

emotions into consideration when speaking to the employees.

39

5. Discussion

In the discussion chapter the authors will connect the theory and concepts with the findings.

The section will raise similarities, differences and new discoveries that can cover and help

answer the research question.

Bratton (2020) describes that a leader needs to have the ability to influence other individuals.

The leader has to be a good communicator, who can guide and impact individuals to complete

their assigned tasks. Common among all participants of this study is that the participants, in

line with Bratton, believed communication to be essential to succeed as a manager. Participant

B described how he consistently strives to have an open communication within the work

environment as the open communication would allow for a better connection between the

management and employees. The LMX theory by Goethals et al. (2004) on the different

relationships the leaders had with each employee was clearly linked to the findings of this

bachelor thesis. The participants described especially when providing feedback, that there were

numerous ways the leaders provided feedback. Although subtle when providing feedback, the

participants described how the unique characteristics of each employee affected the way the

leaders decided to provide feedback. Participant C indicated that employees' emotions had a

direct impact on how Participant C decided to communicate, critique and talk to the employees.

Participant D described how he had employees with a young mentality although older in age,

and vice versa, which is why Participant D has decided not to look at physical characteristics.

Although not directly connected to the LMX theory on relationships between employees and

leaders, it clearly presents an indirect connection that leaders admit diverse forms of

communications between employee and manager depending on the differences of each

individual. As the communication approaches vary among the individuals, it can be presumed

that the relationship varies as well.

Furthermore, according to Goethals et al. (2014) a high-quality LMX results in an overall

substantial and pleasant relationship between leaders and employees. Goethals et al. mean that

when the relationship between employees and leaders is strong; it can result in the employees

being highly motivated and more likely to work effectively and persistently. What was mainly

found from the findings from all of the participants was that a strong and pleasant relationship

was highly important for the leaders. Thus, indicating that a high-quality LMX relationship is

40

prioritized from the leaders which can lead to the employees working harder and more

consistent.

Good communication is one of the elements that needs to be fulfilled for a leader to be able to

provide feedback and motivate employees, thereby, satisfying the employees. Cote (2019)

described that leaders are able to secure satisfied employees through a combination of hygiene

factors such as good communication, guidance and fair working conditions. Participant D

explained that the employees were working more effectively if there are clear instructions and

guidelines to follow as the employees would know how they are expected to perform and that

the employees always had manuals to fall back on if insecure. Furthermore, all of the

participants stated that the relationship between them and their employees is very important to

create an enjoyable and efficient work environment. Thus, indicating that managers, although

not always aware of the academic term of hygiene factors, have been using the hygiene factors

to set up a good work environment for their employees. Therefore, hygiene factors can from

the managers perspective, be seen as very important as it allows for a continued favorable

performance within the stores.

Thomas (2002) described that managers must be able to balance the extrinsic and intrinsic

motivation to ensure that employees work as effectively as possible. Long (2017) described the

intrinsic motivation (not to be confused with motivators in the motivation-hygiene theory) to

be the internal desire that the individuals themselves chase without the need of external

motivation, such as bonuses or increased salary. The findings from the participants indicate

that the leaders do not take into consideration the intrinsic motivation. However, although not

contradicting Thomas (2002) on that managers must balance intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

The manager's responses show that intrinsic motivation is less relevant in their motivation

strategy. It is difficult to assure or with certainty based on the findings of this bachelor thesis

conclude what direction of motivation is really affecting performance. Thus, indicating that

one can assert that the managers focus on extrinsic motivation as these are easier to control and

use from the managers point of view as well as these being mainly tangible and results can be

seen. Furthermore, intrinsic motivation stems from within and therefore, it is not possible for

managers to determine what motivates employees from an internal point of view. Participant

B described that their company often uses sales competitions while Participant C described

weekly competitions as one of the extrinsic motivational strategies within the organizations.

41

Thus, Participants B and C provided clear examples that the managers are using extrinsic

motivational strategies as a method to motivate their employees.

Although writing generally about intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, it is important to highlight

that the needs of individuals must be taken into consideration. The individual needs and how

these needs affect the motivation has been described under the motivation-hygiene theory in

the theoretical framework. Retrospectively, Watson (2003) divided the theory into motivators

and hygiene factors, where motivators are connected to the higher-level needs of individuals

and hygiene factors the basic (lower) needs of individuals. It was discovered that the leaders

do take into consideration the lower and higher-level needs of the employees when motivating

them. All participants described the importance of having an open and friendly working

environment which shows the importance of a good interpersonal relationship that goes under

the basic needs (hygiene factors) of individuals. Participant C and D further highlighted the

importance of the policies that also go under the basic needs of individuals, by stating that

guidelines and clear protocols simplify the daily work activities. Arguably, it can also be

considered to be part of the security need within work, as employees feel safer during working

hours, by knowing that there are clear routines that the employees should follow. Thus,

showing that the participants agree with the academic perspective on the basic needs of

employees has to be fulfilled. Although, it is not clear from the findings whether the basic need

is fulfilled out of the firm's own courtesy or if it is regulated in Swedish law that all firms need

to meet the basic needs of employees.

Moreover, it was also discovered that the participants take note of the higher-level needs of

individuals. Based on the model of More et al. higher-level needs (motivators) included

“Achievement, Advancement, Recognition, Responsibility, Work itself” (More et al., 2017

p.143). All the participants found it important in line with More et al. to provide recognition in

the form of feedback to their employees. Participant B went further by describing how he

considered recognition to be one of the more important parts of Participant B’s job as a

manager. Participants A and C also believed that feedback could help the employees advance

and develop in their roles by letting the employees grow through feedback. By growing within

their roles the employees would then obtain more responsibility. The findings from Participants

A, B and C fits well with the description of Cote (2019) that management needs to recognize

the work of employees and that the recognition can influence the motivation of employees.

Long (2017), in addition to Cote, stated that the management's behavior towards their

42

employees in the form of providing attention and more responsibility to their employees can

be important for the employees to become highly motivated in the workplace. Furthermore,

Participants A, B and C in line with Cote and Long, stated that providing the employees

responsibility and freedom in their work roles could result in the employees feeling appreciated

and important in the workplace. Thus, indicating that giving feedback, and responsibility

(motivators) to the employees is just as important when motivating the employees as the

relationship between leader and employees in the workplace (hygiene factors). Therefore, one

can assert that both motivators and hygiene factors are important and need to be fulfilled in

order to increase satisfaction and motivation of the employees in the long-term.

According to Kornelsen (2019) millennials are very independent in managing their own work.

Furthermore, Kostanek and Khoreva (2018) described millennials as adaptable and open to

changes. Participants A and D mentioned that the employees hired in the company are usually

younger, i.e. millennials. Which can be due to younger employees having a drive and new

perspectives to give to the company. The other participants further mentioned that the

employees in their companies are of the ages of 20-35. The participants further mentioned that

a typical employee and the characteristics of an employee that the participants are looking for

is independent, adaptable to changes and eager to learn. Hence, indicating that there are

millennials working in the retail industry and that based on these participants' answers, it is

likely that the typical millennial characteristics are what the retail industry looks for and hires.

Kornelsen (2019) described millennials in a very negative form. Kornelsen stated that

millennials are very individualistic and that millennials do not enjoy extensive communication,

guidance and feedback from their superiors. Moreover, Onkuwuba (2020) adds that millennials

can be very hard to control and guide in the workplace as millennials are seen as a generation

that is not easily motivated, unwilling to adapt, follow rules and guidelines established by the

management. The findings from the participant seem to contradict the statements by Kornelsen

and Onkuwuba. The participants described millennials in a favourable form. Participant C

indicated that there are careless and inattentive millennials in the workplace, yet that these

individuals are very few and should not be considered as a majority. Hence, it should not be

seen as a generation characteristic. When the managers create motivation strategies, neither of

the participants described that they do take age and preconceptions concerning generational

differences in mind. The participants described how their strategies rather are based on the

individual's differences and that these differences included individuals’ personality, emotions

43

and capabilities. Participant A further described how Participant A as a manager sees the desire

of the younger generation and that they strive to work more. Participant B described that the

employees appreciate receiving feedback and quite often expect the management to provide

feedback for their work. Participant A further added to Participant B that visual gestures are

highly appreciated as well as a form of feedback, this could be a clap on the shoulder, indicating

a job well done. Participant A also described that the employees see feedback as a form of

reward that sometimes can be better than compensation in the form of money or bonuses. Thus,

contradicting the statement by Kornelsen (2019) in that millennials do not appreciate feedback.

Furthermore, the findings from the participant are rather in line with how Jerome et al (2014),

Wiedmer (2015) and Gursoy et al. (2013) described millennials in their appreciation for

guidance and acknowledgement from superiors.

Hence, similarities have been identified in the findings with the theory and concepts raised in

the theoretical framework concerning how organizational leaders motivate millennials.

However, there are dissimilarities as well, especially considering the millennials and their

behaviors in the workplace.

44

6. Conclusion

The aim of this thesis was to answer how organizational leaders motivate millennials in the

workplace. Through analyzing the findings and setting these findings against the theory and

concepts in the theoretical framework, the authors have concluded that most of the findings are

in line with previous researchers' discoveries; especially, the findings related to how

organizational leaders influence and motivate their employees. It has been clear that

organizational leaders, although not always aware of the academic expression, are motivating

their employees through extrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic motivation. Moreover, it is

clear that organizational leaders do take into consideration that the basic needs of every

employee are met, which provides the foundation in order for organizational leaders to focus

on motivators which increase the motivation of the employees.

Nonetheless, the authors have also concluded that there is a gray area when considering the

millennial workforce. Previous studies have determined that millennials are very difficult to

work with and that millennials rarely seek attention and feedback from superiors. Yet, the

authors of this bachelor thesis findings concluded that the previous studies are not in line with

how part of the Swedish retail industry pictures millennials in the workforce. The

organizational leaders in this thesis motivate millennials in a similar manner to the other

generations. The findings did not discover any differences that show how organizational

leaders change their motivational strategies to motivate millennials. The discoveries from the

authors rather show that millennials appreciate and seek feedback from superiors. The findings

from the authors also show that organizational leaders adapt to each individual's identity and

needs, taking into consideration the emotions and personalities of each individual and

providing feedback and motivating the employees based on their individual characteristics.

45

7. Future Research

The authors of this bachelor thesis, leadership's role in motivating millennials focused mainly

on the leaders’ perspective on how organizational leaders motivate millennials. To ensure a

better conclusion and to perchance find new discoveries, future research should view the same

study, however through the eyes of the employees as this could offer a better understanding of

intrinsic motivation. Moreover, a qualitative study that focuses more on the different ages of

the organizational leaders can lead to further discoveries that can be beneficial to understanding

the phenomena of millennials in the workplace and how organizational leaders can motivate

this generation. The bachelor thesis was also written through a qualitative approach, which

means that the findings of the authors cannot be generalized to the whole Swedish retail

industry and only the stores that have been analyzed. A quantitative approach can be written to

generalize the whole Swedish retail industry and thereby see if the discoveries of the authors

are in line with how the whole Swedish retail industry views the phenomenon.

46

8. Bibliography

Akinola, G., & Olusanya, O. (2011). Evaluation of Leadership and Employee Commitment to

Work in Nigeria Bottling Company. Studies In Sociology Of Science, 2(2). Retrieved

from: https://www.academia.edu/12047923/Evaluation_of_Leadership_and_Employee_Com

mitment_to_Work_in_Nigeria_Bottling_Company

Altinbasak, F & G-T, I (2015) Identifying the Needs of Gen Y by Exploring Their Value Systems:

A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 6 (6). Retrieved

from doi: 10.18178/ijtef.2015.6.6.484

Antonakis, J. (2016) Charisma: An Ill-Defined and Ill-Measured Gift. Annual Review of

Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. Retrieved

from https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062305

Bejtkovský Jiří. (2016). The Employees of Baby Boomers Generation, Generation X, Generation

Y and Generation Z in Selected Czech Corporations as Conceivers of Development and

Competitiveness in their Corporation. Journal of Competitiveness, 8(4), 105-123. Retrieved

from doi: http://dx.doi.org.ep.bib.mdh.se/10.7441/joc.2016.04.07

Bennett, J., Pitt, M., & Price, S. (2012). Understanding the impact of generational issues in the

workplace. Facilities, 30(7/8), 278-288. Retrieved from doi: 10.1108/02632771211220086

Bratton, J. (2020). Organizational leadership (pp. 5-6, 178). Sage.

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2013). Företagsekonomiska forskningsmetoder (pp. 476-477). Liber.

Cambridge University Press. (2020-a). Motivation. Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved 10

December 2020, Retrieved from

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/motivation

Cambridge University Press. (2020-b). Motivator. Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved 10 December

2020, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/motivator

Carsrud, A., & Brännback, M. (2011). Entrepreneurial Motivations: What Do We Still Need to

Know? Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 9-26. Retrieved from:

http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/852747737?accountid=12245

47

Chancer, L., Sánchez-Jankowski, M., & Trost, C. (2019). Youth, jobs and the future (pp. 56, 64).

Oxford University Press.

Chawla, D., & Sondhi, N. (2011). Research methodology (p. 90). Vikas publishing house.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research (4th ed., p. 87, 239,). Sage

Cote, R. (2019). Motivating Multigenerational Employees: Is There a Difference? Journal of

Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 16(2), 15-29. Retrieved from:

http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/2289559688?accountid=12245

Dadwal, S. (2019). Innovations in Technology and Marketing for the Connected Consumer (p.

244). IGI Global.

DelCampo, R. G., Haggerty, L. A., Haney, M. J., & Knippel, L. A. (2011). Managing the multi-

generational workforce: From the GI Generation to the Millennials. (p. 5, 15). Routledge.

Dickerson, L. (2006). Freudian concepts of id, ego, and superego, applied to chemical and other

addictions. (p.48). iUniverse, Inc.

Dubrin, A. (2013). Leadership (7th ed., p. 291). South-Western Cengage Learning.

Espinoza, C., Ukleja, M., & Rusch, C. (2016). Managing the Millennials: Discover the Core

Competencies for Managing Today (pp. 3-4). John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Festing, M., & Schäfer, L. (2014) Generational challenges to talent management: A framework

for talent retention based on the psychological-contract perspective. Journal of World Business,

49, 262–271. Retrieved from doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2013.11.010

Folkhälsomyndigheten. (2020). Covid-19 — Folkhälsomyndigheten. Folkhalsomyndigheten.se.

Retrieved 30 November 2020, from https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/smittskydd-

beredskap/utbrott/aktuella-utbrott/covid-19/.

Ford, M. (1992). Motivating humans. (p.78). Sage Publications.

Formánková, S., Trenz, O., Faldík, O., Kolomazník, J., & Sládková, J. (2019). Millennials’

Awareness and Approach to Social Responsibility and Investment—Case Study of the Czech

48

Republic. Sustainability, 11(2), 10. Retrieved from:

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020504

Goethals, G., Sorenson, G., & Burns, J. (2004). Encyclopedia of leadership (pp. 96, 836-837)

Sage Publications.

Gursoy, D., Chi, C., & Karadag, E. (2013). Generational differences in work values and attitudes

among frontline and service contact employees. International Journal of Hospitality

Management, 32, 40–48. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.002

Hollander, E. P. (1992). The essential interdependence of leader-ship and followership. Current

Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 71–75. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-

8721.ep11509752

Holton, E., & Naquin, S. (2001). Helping your new employee succeed (p. 6). Berrett-Koehler.

Jerome, A., Scales, M., Whithem, C., & Quain, B. (2014). Millennials in the workforce: Gen Y

workplace strategies for the next century. E - Journal of Social & Behavioural Research in

Business, 5(1), 1-12. Retrieved from: http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/1547942488?accountid=12245

Keller, S. (2019). What Are Primary Sources?. (pp. 4-6). Britannica Educational Publishing.

Khan, M. R., & Wajidi, A. (2019). Role of Leadership and Team Building in Employee

Motivation at Workplace. Global Management Journal for Academic & Corporate Studies,

9(1), 39-49. Retrieved from: http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/scholarly-journals/role-leadership-team-building-employee-

motivation/docview/2264569963/se-2?accountid=12245

Knight, P. J., & Westbrook, J. (1999). Comparing employees in traditional job structures vs

telecommuting jobs using Herzberg's hygienes & motivators: EMJ. Engineering Management

Journal, 11(1), 15-20. http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/208973167?accountid=12245

Kornelsen, J. (2019). The Quest to Lead (with) Millennials in a VUCA-World: Bridging the Gap

Between Generations. Contributions To Management Science. In Kok, J., & van den Heuvel,

S. (Eds.) Leading in a VUCA World (pp. 27-41). Springer International Publishing.

49

Kostanek, E & Khoreva, V. (2018) Multi-generational workforce and its implications for talent

retention strategies. In Coetzee, M., Potgieter, I., & Ferreira, N. (Eds.) Psychology of Retention:

Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 203-222). Springer Publications

Kowske, B. J., Rasch, R., & Wiley, J. (2010). Millennials' (Lack of) Attitude Problem: An

Empirical Examination of Generational Effects on Work Attitudes. Journal of Business and

Psychology, 25(2), 265-279. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org.ep.bib.mdh.se/10.1007/s10869-

010-9171-8

Kriegel, J. (2016). Unfairly Labeled: How Your Workplace Can Benefit From Ditching

Generational Stereotypes. (pp.84-85). John Wiley & Sons.

Law, K. K., Chan, A., & Ozer, M. (2017). Towards an integrated framework of intrinsic

motivators, extrinsic motivators and knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management,

21(6), 1486-1502. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org.ep.bib.mdh.se/10.1108/JKM-03-2016-

0119

Long, S. (2017). Exploring Which Leadership Styles are Effective with Millennial Employees.

(Walden dissertation and doctoral studies). Walden University, Minnesota Retrieved from:

https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5332&context=dissertations

Miner, J. (2007). Organizational behavior 4: From theory to practice (p. 48). M.E. Sharpe.

Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Motivation: New directions for theory, research, and practice. Academy of

Management.the Academy of Management Review (Pre-1986), 7(000001), 80. Retrieved

from: http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/229994030?accountid=12245

More, H., Miller, L., & Braswell, M. (2017). Effective police supervision (8th ed., p. 143).

Routledge.

Myers, K., & Sadaghiani, K. (2010). Millennials in the Workplace: A Communication Perspective

on Millennials’ Organizational Relationships and Performance. Journal Of Business And

Psychology, 25(2), 225-238. Retrieved from doi: 10.1007/s10869-010-9172-7

Okros, A. (2019). Harnessing the Potential of Digital Post-Millennials in the Future Workplace

(pp. 26, 35-38). Springer.

50

Onukwuba, H. O. (2020). Managing millennials in the african workplace: What the millennials

need. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 20(2), 139-158. Retrieved from:

http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/2434860408?accountid=12245.

Portugal, E., & Yukl, G. (1994). Perspectives on environmental leadership. The Leadership

Quarterly, 5(3-4), 271-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(94)90017-5

Prawitasari, G. (2018). The Influence of Generations on Career Choice (Social Cognitive Career

Theory). Konselor, 7(1): pp. 15-20, Retrieved from DOI: 10.24036/02018718464-0-00

Ruthankoon, R., & Ogunlana, S. O. (2003). Testing Herzberg's two-factor theory in the Thai

construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10(5), 333-

341. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09699980310502946

Sage Publishing. (2020). About — SAGE Publishing. SAGE Publishing. Retrieved 23 November

2020, from https://group.sagepub.com/about.

Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (p. 446). Academic

Press.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research methods for business students. (pp.

391 & 394). Pearson Education.

Shell, R. (2003). Management of professionals (2nd ed., p. 172). Marcel Dekker.

Silva, A. (2016). What is Leadership? Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 8(1), 1-5. Retrieved

from: http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/1831706711?accountid=12245

Simms, T. (2019). Exploring the Effects of Workplace Preferences on Millennial Job Tenure: A

Quantitative Study (Order No. 13902956). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses

Global. Retrieved from: http://ep.bib.mdh.se/login?url=https://www-proquest-

com.ep.bib.mdh.se/docview/2278105258?accountid=12245

Smith, J. (1972). The development of a motivational needs inventory. (Doctoral dissertation).

Retrieved 11 November 2020, from

https://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/AA/00/06/20/22/00001/AA00062022_00001.pdf

51

Springer Publishing Company. (2020). About Springer Publishing. Springerpub.com. Retrieved

23 November 2020, from https://www.springerpub.com/about-us.

Statista. (2020). Global employment by 2020, by generation. Statista. Retrieved 27 October 2020,

from https://www.statista.com/statistics/829705/global-employment-by-generation/

Stewart, J., Oliver, E., Cravens, K., & Oishi, S. (2017). Managing millennials: Embracing

generational differences. Business Horizons, 60(1), 45-54. Retrieved from doi:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.08.011

Tampu, L. D. (2015). Impact of human motivation on employee performance. Internal Auditing

& Risk Management, 1(37), 43-53 Retrieved from:

https://ideas.repec.org/a/ath/journl/v37y2015i1p43-54.html

Thomas, K. (2002). Intrinsic motivation at work (p. 119). Berrett-Koehler.

Vijver, G., Vijver, G., & Geerardyn, F. (2002). The pre-psychoanalytic writings of Sigmund (pp.1-

5). Freud. Karnac.

Volckmann, R. (2012) Integral Leadership and Diversity—Definitions, Distinctions and

Implications. Integral Leadership Review. Retrieved

from http://integralleadershipreview.com/7046-integral-leadership-and-diversity-definitions-

distinctions-and-implications/

Watson, T. (2003). Sociology, work and industry (4th ed., p. 26). Routledge.

Weber, J. (2017). Discovering the Millennials' Personal Values Orientation: A Comparison to

Two Managerial Populations: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(3), 517-529.

http://dx.doi.org.ep.bib.mdh.se/10.1007/s10551-015-2803-1

Wiedmer, T. L. (2015). Generations Do Differ: Best Practices in Leading Traditionalists,

Boomers, and Generations X, Y, and Z . The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 82, 51-58.

Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/docview/1770514324?pq-

origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true

Wu, J., & Lu, X. (2013). Effects of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivators on Using Utilitarian,

Hedonic, and Dual-Purposed Information Systems: A Meta-Analysis. Journal Of The

52

Association For Information Systems, 14(3), 153-191. Retrieved from:

https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00325