Available October 16, 2025

It’s 9 47 a.m. on a Tuesday. The 24-year-old analyst is packing up her laptop in her office. Her manager confused ask where she’s going home. She says I finished my deliverables for the week. But it’s Tuesday morning. The manager responds. You’re supposed to be here until Friday at 5 p.m. Why? She asked genuinely. You wanted these reports done. They’re done and they are done well.

What am I supposed to do for the next three days? Pretend to look busy? The manager stands there speechless, not because he doesn’t have an answer, but because he realizes he doesn’t have a good answer. This is the moment traditional workplace psychology breaks down. I’m Kevin Novak, CEO of 2040 Digital, professor at the University of Maryland and author of the book, The Truth About Transformation and the Ideas and Innovations Weekly newsletter.

Welcome to the Human Factor Podcast, the show that explores the intersection of humanity, technology, and transformation and the psychology behind transformation success. Today, we are exploring why everything we thought we knew about motivation, loyalty, and performance is currently being rewritten by 40 % of the workforce. Here’s a statistic that should terrify every executive.

Companies are losing $1 trillion annually to employee turnover. And the highest turnover rates are among the most educated, most capable, most digitally native employees we’ve ever hired. But here’s what’s fascinating. This isn’t a generational problem. It’s a psychological evolution. Over the past two years, through my consulting work, I’ve been inside organizations where five different generations work together daily. I’ve observed something quite remarkable.

Gen Z isn’t just different, they’re psychologically optimized for a world that older generations are still learning to navigate. The problem isn’t that they don’t understand traditional workplace psychology. The problem is that traditional workplace psychology doesn’t understand them. Today, we’re diving deep into why Gen Z’s approach to loyalty is actually more psychologically mature than previous generations.

What are the three psychological drivers that motivate next generation performance? Why command and control management triggers psychological resistance in digital natives and how to redesign workplace psychology for a generation that thinks differently about work, meaning and success. But first, let me share a story about generational workplace dynamics. Six months ago,

I was consulting with an organization struggling with Gen Z retention. The CEO of Boomer was frustrated. These kids have no loyalty, he told me. They leave after 18 months, right when we’ve invested the most in them. My generation stayed at companies for decades. I asked him to describe his most loyal Gen Z employee. He immediately mentioned Sarah, 26 years old, who’d been there three years. Tell me about Sarah, I said.

She’s incredible, innovative, hardworking, always questioning processes to make them better. She has saved us millions with her efficiency improvements. Sounds pretty loyal to me, I observed. Well, yes, but, and I said, but what? She told me last week that if we don’t implement flexible work arrangements, she’s leaving. And there it was, the loyalty paradox. Sarah wasn’t disloyal. She was loyal to different values.

She was deeply committed to the organization’s success, but only if that success aligned with her personal and societal values. Her loyalty was conditional, transparent, and negotiated. The CEO’s generation showed loyalty through longevity and compliance. Sarah’s generation showed loyalty through investment and advocacy, but only when the relationship is mutually beneficial and values are aligned. This isn’t less loyalty, it’s loyalty to 2.0

And once you understand the psychology behind it, really everything changes. To understand Gen Z workplace psychology, we need to understand what I call pragmatic loyalty, a fundamentally different psychological contract with work. Let me first define traditional loyalty psychology. Traditional loyalty equals tenure plus compliance. Security comes from institutional attachment. Success means climbing the organizational ladder.

Value is demonstrated through sacrifice and endurance. Now, let me define pragmatic loyalty psychology. Pragmatic loyalty equals mutual value creation plus value alignment. Security comes from skill development and network building. Success means meaningful impact and personal growth. Value is demonstrated through contribution and innovation. Here’s an insight.

Gen Z’s approach to loyalty is actually more psychologically healthy than previous generations. Their approach is also completely contrasted with prior generations and how those generations define and emulate loyalty. Traditional workplace psychology taught us that unconditional loyalty was mature, expected, and conditional loyalty was quite selfish. Mature loyalty and commitment ensures we would work upwards, getting promotions, recognition, as well as respect.

Ensuring the paycheck as a reward for that version of loyalty and commitment seems pretty normal, right? Well, the psychological research tells us quite the opposite. Healthy relationships, personal or professional, are built on mutual benefit, clear communication, and aligned values. Relationships where one party gives unconditionally while the other party takes without reciprocating are psychological patterns of dysfunction, not maturity.

Gen Z figured this out intuitively. They approach work relationships the way psychologists recommend approaching all relationships, with clear boundaries, mutual respect, and honest communication about needs and expectations. Perhaps their parents can take some credit for teaching them how to have healthy relationships. Through my research and experience consulting with organizations, I’ve identified three pillars of pragmatic loyalty.

The first pillar, values alignment. Gen Z needs to see clear connection between their personal values and organizational actions. This isn’t about having a corporate social responsibility page on your website. It’s about demonstrating values through daily decisions. Here’s an example. The Gen Z marketing coordinator quits a well-paying job because the organization claims to value sustainability, but continues using environmentally harmful packaging.

She believes personally that sustainability is important for her present and her future. Her expectation is that the employer she commits her time and energy to should exemplify the same beliefs and values. The psychological disconnect between stated and demonstrated values for her created a cognitive dissonance that became unbearable. Pillar two, growth investment.

Gen Z views jobs as skill-building platforms, not lifetime destinations. They’re loyal to organizations that invest in their development, but only as long as the growth curve continues. Here’s an example. A Gen Z software developer stayed at a startup for four years. Unusual for his generation, because every six months he learned new technologies and took on new responsibilities. When the learning seemed to plateau, he left within 30 days. Pillar three, impact visibility. Gen Z needs to see how their work connects to meaningful outcomes. They’re psychologically motivated by the contributions they can make, not just the compensation. Here’s an example. A Gen Z analyst doubled her productivity when her manager started showing her how financial models directly influenced strategic decisions that affected thousands of jobs. Same work, different psychological framing.

Completely different feeling of ongoing engagement. Why does this trigger a threat to older generations? One might assume it is threatening because of generational prejudice. We often look to the younger generation and think or say, they know so little, they need to live a little, then they’ll change. But the reality of the threat is that it is deeper and often defensive. It is really psychological projection.

Many older workers built their identities around organizational loyalty, often sacrificing personal needs for organizational needs. When they see Gen Z negotiating boundaries and prioritizing values alignment, it triggers uncomfortable questions about their own choices. If they can demand work-life balance, was I wrong to sacrifice mine? If they can leave for better opportunities, should I have done the same?

 

If they can negotiate for their values, why didn’t I? This isn’t always consciously considered, but it surely is always percolating with some defensiveness or even anxiety about former decisions being right or wrong, and perhaps what’s been lost in transition over time. Maybe paths not taken, experiences not had, taking on the wrong or less fulfilling responsibilities. The psychological projection can explain why seemingly rational conversations about Gen Z and the workplace often become emotional arguments where what they ask for, want or seek are described as entitlements and lack of commitment.

Understanding the psychological frame of projection as well as pragmatic loyalty is crucial for creating workplaces where multiple generations can thrive together. Here’s where it gets really interesting. The motivation tactics that worked for previous generations don’t just fail with Gen Z, they actively trigger psychological resistance. Traditional management psychology is built on external command and control, set clear expectations, monitor compliance, reward performance, punish deviation. This worked when job security was scarce and organizational power was concentrated, particularly in an industrial age mindset. What was majorly overlooked, even dismissed, is that each individual brings something to the table. They think.

They have ideas and they want to have purpose and feel they are contributing value. The situational and environmental differences are that Gen Z grew up with unlimited information access, social media influence, and global connectivity. They’re psychologically conditioned to question authority, seek multiple perspectives, and maintain personal agency. This may also emulate in challenging ways where they are reluctant to make decisions that are not first crowdsourced.

When managers try to control Gen Z behavior through traditional tactics, it triggers what psychologists call reactance, the psychological drive to restore freedom when it feels threatened. Here’s an example. A manager tells a Gen Z employee they must be in the office nine to five because that’s organizational policy. Remember the story I started with today. The employee’s immediate psychological response isn’t compliance.

It’s the question why this policy even exists, whether it serves any real purpose, which it often doesn’t, and whether the manager has legitimate authority to enforce what are seen as arbitrary rules. The manager interprets this questioning as disrespect. The employee interprets the lack of explanation as illegitimate authority, both, of course, psychologically correct from their specific generational frameworks. Gen Z has a psychological need to understand the why behind every request. This isn’t defiance, it’s how their brain processes information and generates motivation. Most would believe that knowing the why is important, but often leaders and managers themselves aren’t quite sure what the why is. Perhaps it’s a long-embraced work process, a direction from elsewhere in the organization, or a requirement of a misaligned technology system. But the why doesn’t ever seem to matter to them.

The reaction of traditional management says, do this because I said so. But the better approach with Gen Z and their psychological defaults requires management to say, do this because it creates this outcome, which connects to this larger purpose and aligns with these values. I worked with a client where older workers were frustrated with their Gen Z associates. They were constantly asking, why, why do the, why do we do certain things? One worker complained.

In my day, we just did what we were told. Why don’t they just do the same? The Gen Z associates were indeed asking questions, but not the challenge authority. They were trying to understand the logic behind what they were being asked to do so they could optimize and improve. Once the workers started explaining the reasoning behind procedures, two things happened. One, the associates stopped asking why questions because they understood the framework.

Two, they started suggesting improvements because they understood the objectives. The resistance wasn’t to work, it was to arbitrary authority. Traditional workplace psychology assumes that hierarchical position equals expertise and decision-making authority. But let’s be real, we all know that some are in a position of authority don’t have the expertise or even the skill to be in those positions.

They do, however, have organizational decision-making authority. I’m sure most listening today would agree that the expertise and authority are often considered separate things. We may overlook, dismiss, or even ignore that they are because we are simply at work and following orders. But Gen Z psychology recognizes expertise and authority as separate, contextual qualities. They do not ignore the reality. The 25-year-old digital marketing specialist may know more about TikTok strategy than their 50 year old CMO counterpart. Gen Z expects expertise to drive decisions in that context, regardless of hierarchy. Consider what I represented in the last episode about asking questions. Everyone should be able to ask and learn, even one in authority. The situation creates psychological friction when hierarchical authority overrides functional expertise. Gen Z doesn’t reject hierarchy. They reject when hierarchy blocks optimal outcomes.

Here are three mistakes often made when interacting with Gen Z. Mistake one, using fear-based motivation. You should be grateful to have a job. This triggers psychological reactance in a generation that knows their skills are in high demand. Mistake two, treating loyalty as one directional. We expect commitment from you. Gen Z expects mutual commitment, organizational investment in their growth and exchange for their investment and organizational success.

Mistake three, substituting control for trust. Excessive monitoring, arbitrary rules, and micromanagement signal that the organization doesn’t trust their judgment, which triggers the psychological need to prove their autonomy. One might dismiss that as rebellion, the fault of youth, that would be a huge mistake. So if traditional motivation tactics don’t work with Gen Z, what does? Through my research and direct observation,

I’ve identified five psychological principles that consistently drive high performance across generational lines but are also especially crucial for engaging digital natives. The first principle, purpose connection. Gen Z needs to see how their individual tasks connect to larger outcomes. But this isn’t about having a mission statement. It’s about creating visible impact trails. Here’s an example. Instead of saying process these invoices,

Say, process these invoices so we can pay our vendors on time, which maintains the relationship that keeps our supply chain stable, which ensures we can deliver for customers who depend on our product. Same task, completely different psychological context. Principle two, learning investment. Gen Z views skills development as currency. They’ll work harder for growth opportunities than for marginal salary increases. Here’s an example.

A tech startup couldn’t compete with large organization salary offers. Instead, they offered what can be considered learning credits. Every Gen Z employee could spend a percentage of their time learning new technologies to develop marketable skills. The result, they attracted top Gen Z talent and had higher retention than companies paying 30 % more. Principle three, autonomy with accountability. Gen Z wants to own outcomes not just follow processes. They respond to what and why but resist micromanagement around the how.

So what’s the framework for autonomy with accountability? Define clear objectives and success metrics. Provide necessary resources. Get out of the way. Check in on progress and outcomes, not the rigidity of the process. This framework creates psychological ownership and results in driving much higher performance than compliance-based management. Principle four, values authenticity. Gen Z is highly sensitive authenticity detectors. They can spot value statements that aren’t backed by action from miles away. Once they detect inauthenticity, trust is nearly impossible to rebuild. Here’s an example. An organization promoted work-life balance while consistently scheduling mandatory meetings during evenings and weekends.

Gen Z employees didn’t just ignore the rhetoric, they actively shared their negative experiences on employer review sites, completely damaging the organization’s ability to recruit their peers. Principle five, feedback integration. Gen Z doesn’t just want feedback; they want evidence that their feedback influences outcomes. They need to see their input valued and implemented. How can you implement this?

Create formal feedback loops where employee suggestions are reviewed, responded to, and when appropriate, implemented with clear attribution. That’s not rocket science. When Gen Z employees see that their ideas improve processes or outcomes, their psychological investment in the organization increases dramatically. Note here that I didn’t say anything about a promotion, salary increase, or even additional benefits. Just simple recognition.

So here’s what’s remarkable. When you align management practices with these psychological principles, Gen Z’s employees do not just perform better, they become force multipliers for organizational success. It’s really an outcome that is critically needed in a hyper-changing dynamic marketplace simply filled with more and more competitors by the day. Their digital native foundation, their global perspective, and questioning mindset becomes advantages instead of challenges. They identify inefficiencies that older employees accept as how things have always been done. They spot opportunities that experience-based thinking simply might miss. They connect with customers and markets in ways that traditional approaches can’t reach. But only when there are psychological needs for purpose, growth, autonomy, authenticity and influence are met. The goal isn’t to choose between generational approaches. It’s to create workplace psychology that works for everyone. Through my consulting work, I’ve encapsulated my recommendations into what I call the generational bridge framework. Component one, differentiated communication. Different generations process information and motivation very differently.

Instead of one size fits all communication, use generational specific psychological approaches. For boomers and Gen X, lead with experience, tradition, and institutional knowledge. Here’s what we’ve learned over 20 years of doing this. For millennials, lead with collaboration and team impact. Here’s how your work connects to what your teammates are doing. For Gen Z, lead with purpose and optimization. Here’s why this matters and how we could potentially do it better. Same message, different psychological framing. Component two, mentorship psychology. Create intentional relationships where generational strengths complement each other. You can use reverse mentoring. Gen Z teaches digital skills, global perspectives, and efficiency optimization. And you can also use more traditional mentoring. Older generations teach relationship management, institutional knowledge, and long-term thinking. Both sides learn and both sides contribute. The psychological dynamic shifts from old versus new to complementary expertise. Remember my earlier comment about those in authority being open to learning what they don’t know.

We all should be open to learning to better understand, to be better decision makers, and ultimately to be better leaders. Component three, values integration. Instead of competing value systems, create integrated value frameworks that honor different generational priorities. Here’s an example. An organization integrated stability of boomer value with growth, a Gen X value, collaboration, a millennial value, and authenticity, a Gen Z value, into a unified cultural statement. We build stable growth through authentic collaboration. Everyone then can see their psychological needs reflected in the organizational identity.

Component four, flexible structures. Create systems that provide security for generations that need it while providing autonomy for generations that require it. Here’s an example. Flexible work arrangements where boomers can choose traditional office schedules. Gen X can blend home and office. Millennials can coordinate team schedules. And Gen Z can optimize for productivity regardless of location. Seems crazy, Perhaps, but in each instance, you’re actually meeting each generational need while improving performance across each generation. Different flexibility, different psychological comfort zones resulting in improved performance, alignment, and more often than not, improved collaboration and learning.

Organizations that successfully integrate generational psychology don’t try to make everyone the same. They create systems where generational differences become competitive advantages. Gen Z’s questioning improves processes. Gen X’s efficiency optimizes operations. Millennials’ collaboration builds teams, and boomers’ experience provides wisdom. When each generation’s psychological strengths are valued and utilized, the whole organization becomes more capable than any single generational approach could achieve alone. Let’s get practical. Here are four specific actions you can take to improve generational workplace psychology. Your first action, conduct a motivation audit. List your current leadership and management practices. For each one, ask, is this built on command-and-control psychology or purpose and autonomy psychology?

Adjust the ones that rely on external control. Action two, implement purpose connection. For every task you assign this week and next, include the larger context. Do this because it creates this outcome, which serves this purpose. Watch how engagement changes when people understand the why. Action three, create feedback integration systems. Establish regular opportunities for employees to suggest process improvements and commit to reviewing and responding to every suggestion within one week. When you implement their ideas, publicly acknowledge their contributions. When you don’t, explain why.

Action four, design generational bridge experiences. Pair employees from different generations on projects where each can teach the other. Structure it so knowledge flows in both directions. Share your expectations for that collaboration.

Before making major changes to your workplace culture and management approach, assess your organization’s readiness for multi-generational collaboration. Explore the resources at humanfactormethod.com. Again, humanfactormethod.com, all one word. Understanding the psychological dynamics across age groups will help you design systems that work for everyone. The key simply isn’t changing the generations. It’s changing the management approach.

Here’s what I want you to remember. Gen Z isn’t a problem to be solved. They’re a psychological evolution to be understood and leveraged. Their approach to loyalty, motivation and performance isn’t wrong and it’s not entitled. It’s optimized for a world where information is unlimited, opportunities are global and change is constant. The organizations that thrive in the next decade will be those that understand generational psychology and create workplace cultures where different approaches to work, loyalty, and success can coexist and amplify each other. This isn’t about lowering standards or accommodating entitlements. It’s about raising standards by tapping into the psychological drivers that actually motivate high performance across all generations. Next week, I’ll be joined by my consulting partner, Elizabeth Stewart, that I’m very excited about.

We will be diving deep into the psychology of bias and leadership. Why smart people consistently fall into the same cognitive traps and most importantly, how to recognize and overcome them. If this episode was helpful, please subscribe to the human factor podcast and leave a rating. And if you’re dealing with generational workplace challenges, share this episode with your team. These insights work better when everyone understands the psychology at play.

For more resources on building successful multi-generational teams, visit humanfactormethod.com and subscribe to my ideas and innovations newsletter on Substack. Until next week, remember, different generations aren’t obstacles, they’re opportunities. Design accordingly. Thank you.

🎵

Upcoming: Available October  23, 2025

Why Smart People Make Bad Decisions: The Psychology of Bias in Leadership

Learn about the cognitive traps that appear in leadership regardless of industry, education level, or experience. Elizabeth Stewart co-hosts this episode.

More Episodes Coming Soon

View Main Podcast Page →