Moving jobs isn't a generational issue – it's about meaning and recognition, academic says
Younger workers are often labeled as job hoppers, but David Zweig, vice-dean of recruitment, enrolment and student success at the University of Toronto Scarborough, doesn’t buy into that narrative.
Research from the National Institute on Retirement Security shows that younger employees are not switching jobs any more than previous generations at the same career stage, a finding that aligns with Zweig’s perspective.
The report shows that in 1983, Baby Boomers aged 25 to 34 had a median job tenure of three years, while in 2024, Millennials and Gen Zs in the same age group averaged 2.7 years – only a few months shorter.
Challenging myths about generational job hopping
Zweig explains that while generations may differ in how they define meaningful work or the type of recognition they value, the fundamentals are consistent: people want work that matters, to see the impact and to feel acknowledged – whether through praise, recognition or other forms beyond money or promotions.
The persistence of the stereotype around younger generations being restless in the workplace puzzles him, since the reasons people change jobs haven’t really changed: when work lacks meaning or recognition is missing, employees look elsewhere, especially if the labour market offers better opportunities.
“We want to be doing work that is meaningful, important, and we can see the impact that it has. And those are the kinds of things that keep people engaged, involved and reduce job hopping,” he says.
He adds that while situational factors such as shifts in the labour market might drive mobility at certain points, the underlying drivers don’t differ across generations. In fact, he argues that now people are holding onto their positions longer because jobs are becoming scarcer.
What does differ, Zweig points out, is how recognition and meaning are experienced depending on where an employee is in their career.
“Younger people in the workforce might want to see that recognition and meaning differently than someone who’s been in the workforce for a longer time, but that’s the challenge of leadership. You can’t be the same for everyone,” he says.
Leadership rooted in meaning and recognition
This variability doesn’t mean that organizations should abandon their values. Instead, Zweig argues, leaders should root their approach in shared principles and adapt around the edges.
“Obviously younger people are going to be looking for experiences that expand their skills and increase the variety in the work that they’re doing, so they gain more experience,” he says. “Older workers might want a different set of tools or ways of being recognized for their efforts and given more challenge in terms of having roles that are more meaningful in what they do.”
This makes employee listening a central skill for leaders. Zweig stresses that recognition strategies cannot succeed without it.
“It’s always important to listen to your employees and understand what they’re looking for, what they need and adapt your behavior accordingly. There is no one best way to lead, and certainly an effective leader is able to help their employees achieve their goals,” he says.
Making the business case for investment in employee meaning and recognition, however, remains a challenge. Zweig notes that while it’s difficult to measure, leaders who understand and support their employees’ needs clearly see improvements in both engagement and performance.
For Zweig, the issue is not about generational divides or stereotypes but about leadership’s ability to foster meaning, deliver recognition, and respond to what employees need at different points in their careers.
The data backs him up, but the burden still falls on HR leaders and executives to move the conversation away from generational myths and toward the fundamentals of human motivation.
