Generation Z participants of intellectual olympiads: labour market behavioral attitudes
Research Article
Acknowledgments
The publication was prepared within the framework of a state assignment on the topic: «Components, social standards and indicators of the level and quality of life of the population in modern Russia: qualitative identification and quantitative assessment in conditions of socio-economic inequality» (No. 0137-2019-0032)
How to Cite
Veredyuk O.V., Chernykh E.A. Generation Z participants of intellectual olympiads: labour market behavioral attitudes. Living Standards of the Population in the Regions of Russia. 2022. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 79-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/lsprr.2022.18.1.7 (in Russ.).
Abstract
One of the processes actively transforming the labour market is the entry of new generations with their own values and requirements for the quality of working life. The article aims to identify the distinctive features of values, which will determine behavior in the labour market, as well as attitudes towards the conditions and content of labour among participants in the olympiads – intellectual competitions for schoolchildren – as representatives of generation Z. The empirical basis of the study was the results of a Google-form survey of the olympiad movement participants in Russia. It was revealed that having the behavioral attitudes typical for Generation Z, the olympiads’ participants have a number of them more pronounced. For instance, when choosing a place of work the following determinants are more significant: the prospect of going abroad and the company's commitment to corporate social responsibility. Among less significant determinants, there are comfortable office space; distance from the office to the home; the possibility of upskilling within the company. Relatively more likely factors for the olympiads’ participants to quit the job are lack of opportunities for professional development and career growth; unfriendly corporate culture and unethical business practices; lack of opportunities to offer and implement own ideas. In terms of behavioral values in the labour market, differences between the olympiads’ participants and Generation Z as a whole are more significant than between subgroups of the olympiads’ participants. Despite a number of methodological limitations of this exploratory study, the results allow us to conclude that this area of within-generation research is promising for further analysis aimed at identifying cause-effect relationships to underpin HR decisions about recruitment and motivation as well as public policy decisions about the formation and support of talented youth.
Keywords:
Generation Z, behavioral values, quality of working life, labour market, talents, All-Russian Olympiad of Schoolchildren
References
1. Bogacheva N., Sivak E. Myths of Generation Z. Sovremennaâ analitika obrazovaniâ. 2019. No. 1. 64 p. (In Russ.).
2. Glotov M. Generation as a category of sociology. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2004. No. 10. P. 42-48. (In Russ.).
3. Gordeeva T., Osin E., Kuzmenko N., Leontiev D., Ryzhova O. The effectiveness of the olympiad system for recruiting applicants to universities (on the example of chemical universities). Russian Chemical Journal. 2011. Vol. 55. No. 5-6. P. 68-76. (In Russ.).
4. Gordeeva T.O., Kuzmenko N.E., Leontyev D.A., Osin E.N., Ryzhova O.N., Demidova E.D. Individual'no-psihologicheskie osobennosti i problemy adaptacii studentov: otlichayutsya li pobediteli olimpiad ot ostal'nyh? [Individual psychological characteristics and problems of adaptation of students: are the winners of the Olympiads different from the rest?] // Modern trends in the development of natural science education: fundamental university education. Moscow: MSU Publishing House. 2010. P. 92-101. (In Russ.).
5. Gordeeva T.O., Osin E.N. Features of achievement motivation and educational motivation of students demonstrating different types of academic achievements (USE, victories in olympiads, academic performance) Psychological research. 2012. Vol. 5. No. 24. P. 4-21. (In Russ.).
6. Goshin M.E., Pinskaya M.A., Grigoryev D.S. Forms of Parental Participation in Education in Different Types of Schools. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2021. No. 5. P. 70-83 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250012685-6 (In Russ.).
7. Gurova I.M., Evdokimova S.Sh. Theory of generations as a tool for analysis, formation and development of labour potential. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2016. No. 3 (27). P. 150-159. (In Russ.).
8. Kondratyev M.D. Social concepts about the success of teenagers with different intragroup status and different levels of intellectual success. Social Psychology and Society. 2017. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 116-130. 10.17759/sps.2017080208 (In Russ.).
9. Levada Yu.A., Shanin T.M. et al. Otcy i deti: pokolencheskij analiz sovremennoj Rossii [Fathers and Sons: Generational Analysis of Modern Russia]. Moscow: New Literary Review, 2005. 328 р. (In Russ.).
10. Ozhiganova E.M. Straus Howe generational theory. Opportunities of practical application. Business education in the knowledge economy. 2015. No. 1 (1). P. 94-97. (In Russ.).
11. Peresetskiy A.A., Davtyan M.A. Efficiency of the Unified State Exam and Olympiads as a Tool for Selecting Applicants. Applied Econometrics. 2011. No. 3 (23). P. 41-56. (In Russ.).
12. Petrushikhina E.B., Solodnikova I.V., Solodnikov V.V., Sedova O.L., Zagorulko A.V., Dorozhevets A.N., Smirnova T.Yu. Generational approach in the humanities RGGU Bulletin: “Psychology. Pedagogics. Education” Series. 2016. No. 4 (6). Р. 139-150. (In Russ.).
13. Radaev V. The Divide among the Millennial Generation: Historical and Empirical Justifications. (Part one). Sociological Journal. 2020. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 30-63. DOI: 10.19181/socjour.2020.26.3.7395 (In Russ.).
14. Radaev V. The divide among the Millennial Generation: Historical and Empirical Justifications. (Part two). Sociological Journal. 2020. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 31-60. DOI: 10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7641 (In Russ.).
15. Semenova V.V. Modern conceptual and empirical approaches to the concept of «generation». Russia Reforming. 2003. No. 3. P. 213-237. (In Russ.).
16. Sibirev V.A., Golovin N.A. Intergenerational Differences in Life Satisfaction and Feelings of Happiness in Russia (Based on the Materials of the European Social Research). Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. 2020. No. 1. P. 296-315. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.12 (In Russ.).
17. Tvenge D.M. Pokolenie I. RIPOL klassik, 2019. 523 s.(In Russ.).
18. Howe N., Strauss W. Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. N.Y.: William Morrow & Company. 1991. 538 р.
19. Krieger J. UnfairTwenge J.M. iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood. [Russ. ed. Pokolenie I]. Transl. from Eng. by A. Tolmachev. RIPOL classic, 2019. 523 p.ly Labeled: How Your Workplace Can Benefit From Ditching Generational Stereotypes. Wiley. 2016. 256 р.
20. Prensky M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon. 2001. Vol. 9. No. 5. P. 1-6.
21. Raymer M., Reed M., Spiegel M., Purvanova R. An Examination of Generational Stereotypes as a Path Towards Reverse Ageism. The Psychologist-Manager Journal. 2017. Vol. 20. P. 148-175.
22. Seemiller C., Grace M. Generation Z Goes to College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2015. 320 р.
2. Glotov M. Generation as a category of sociology. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2004. No. 10. P. 42-48. (In Russ.).
3. Gordeeva T., Osin E., Kuzmenko N., Leontiev D., Ryzhova O. The effectiveness of the olympiad system for recruiting applicants to universities (on the example of chemical universities). Russian Chemical Journal. 2011. Vol. 55. No. 5-6. P. 68-76. (In Russ.).
4. Gordeeva T.O., Kuzmenko N.E., Leontyev D.A., Osin E.N., Ryzhova O.N., Demidova E.D. Individual'no-psihologicheskie osobennosti i problemy adaptacii studentov: otlichayutsya li pobediteli olimpiad ot ostal'nyh? [Individual psychological characteristics and problems of adaptation of students: are the winners of the Olympiads different from the rest?] // Modern trends in the development of natural science education: fundamental university education. Moscow: MSU Publishing House. 2010. P. 92-101. (In Russ.).
5. Gordeeva T.O., Osin E.N. Features of achievement motivation and educational motivation of students demonstrating different types of academic achievements (USE, victories in olympiads, academic performance) Psychological research. 2012. Vol. 5. No. 24. P. 4-21. (In Russ.).
6. Goshin M.E., Pinskaya M.A., Grigoryev D.S. Forms of Parental Participation in Education in Different Types of Schools. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya. 2021. No. 5. P. 70-83 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250012685-6 (In Russ.).
7. Gurova I.M., Evdokimova S.Sh. Theory of generations as a tool for analysis, formation and development of labour potential. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2016. No. 3 (27). P. 150-159. (In Russ.).
8. Kondratyev M.D. Social concepts about the success of teenagers with different intragroup status and different levels of intellectual success. Social Psychology and Society. 2017. Vol. 8. No. 2. P. 116-130. 10.17759/sps.2017080208 (In Russ.).
9. Levada Yu.A., Shanin T.M. et al. Otcy i deti: pokolencheskij analiz sovremennoj Rossii [Fathers and Sons: Generational Analysis of Modern Russia]. Moscow: New Literary Review, 2005. 328 р. (In Russ.).
10. Ozhiganova E.M. Straus Howe generational theory. Opportunities of practical application. Business education in the knowledge economy. 2015. No. 1 (1). P. 94-97. (In Russ.).
11. Peresetskiy A.A., Davtyan M.A. Efficiency of the Unified State Exam and Olympiads as a Tool for Selecting Applicants. Applied Econometrics. 2011. No. 3 (23). P. 41-56. (In Russ.).
12. Petrushikhina E.B., Solodnikova I.V., Solodnikov V.V., Sedova O.L., Zagorulko A.V., Dorozhevets A.N., Smirnova T.Yu. Generational approach in the humanities RGGU Bulletin: “Psychology. Pedagogics. Education” Series. 2016. No. 4 (6). Р. 139-150. (In Russ.).
13. Radaev V. The Divide among the Millennial Generation: Historical and Empirical Justifications. (Part one). Sociological Journal. 2020. Vol. 26. No. 3. P. 30-63. DOI: 10.19181/socjour.2020.26.3.7395 (In Russ.).
14. Radaev V. The divide among the Millennial Generation: Historical and Empirical Justifications. (Part two). Sociological Journal. 2020. Vol. 26. No. 4. P. 31-60. DOI: 10.19181/socjour.2020.26.4.7641 (In Russ.).
15. Semenova V.V. Modern conceptual and empirical approaches to the concept of «generation». Russia Reforming. 2003. No. 3. P. 213-237. (In Russ.).
16. Sibirev V.A., Golovin N.A. Intergenerational Differences in Life Satisfaction and Feelings of Happiness in Russia (Based on the Materials of the European Social Research). Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. 2020. No. 1. P. 296-315. DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.12 (In Russ.).
17. Tvenge D.M. Pokolenie I. RIPOL klassik, 2019. 523 s.(In Russ.).
18. Howe N., Strauss W. Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. N.Y.: William Morrow & Company. 1991. 538 р.
19. Krieger J. UnfairTwenge J.M. iGen: Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood. [Russ. ed. Pokolenie I]. Transl. from Eng. by A. Tolmachev. RIPOL classic, 2019. 523 p.ly Labeled: How Your Workplace Can Benefit From Ditching Generational Stereotypes. Wiley. 2016. 256 р.
20. Prensky M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon. 2001. Vol. 9. No. 5. P. 1-6.
21. Raymer M., Reed M., Spiegel M., Purvanova R. An Examination of Generational Stereotypes as a Path Towards Reverse Ageism. The Psychologist-Manager Journal. 2017. Vol. 20. P. 148-175.
22. Seemiller C., Grace M. Generation Z Goes to College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 2015. 320 р.
Article
Received: 02.11.2021
Accepted: 20.01.2022
Citation Formats
Other cite formats:
APA
Veredyuk, O. V., & Chernykh, E. A. (2022). Generation Z participants of intellectual olympiads: labour market behavioral attitudes. Living Standards of the Population in the Regions of Russia, 18(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.19181/lsprr.2022.18.1.7
Issue
Section
ECONOMIC RESEARCH
