Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final

AU/ACSC/2011
AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE
DISTANCE LEARNING
AIR UNIVERSITY
MILLENNIALS:
THE NEXT GREATEST GENERATION
OF THE GOVERNMENT WORK FORCE
by
Peter E. Mask, Captain, USAF
A Research Report Submitted to the Faculty
In Partial Fulfillment of the Graduation Requirements
Instructor: Dr. Richard Smith, Colonel, USAF (ret.)
Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama
October 2011

ii
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this academic research paper are those of the author(s) and do not
reflect the official policy or position of the US government or the Department of Defense. In
accordance with Air Force Instruction 51-303, it is not copyrighted, but is the property of the
United States government.

iii
Table of Contents
Disclaimer........................................................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents...............................................................................................................iii
List of Illustrations............................................................................................................. iv
List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... v
Preface................................................................................................................................. v
Abstract............................................................................................................................. vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: GENERATIONAL THEORIES & GENERATIONS DEFINED .............. 4
Maturational Theory ........................................................................................................... 4
Generational Theory ........................................................................................................... 4
Life Course Theory............................................................................................................. 5
Group and Age Norm Theory............................................................................................. 6
Generations Defined: Traditionalists................................................................................. 7
The Baby Boomers ............................................................................................................. 7
Generation X....................................................................................................................... 8
The Millennials................................................................................................................... 9
The iGeneration ................................................................................................................ 10
Cohort Trends ................................................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 3: THE DILEMMA ...................................................................................... 13
Aging/Retirement Eligible Workforce.............................................................................. 13
Budget Crisis, Hiring Freezes, Reduction in Force, Federal Pay & Benefits................... 16
Generational Differences in the Workplace...................................................................... 17
Recruitment and Retention Rates of Personnel ................................................................ 18
CHAPTER 4: POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES & APPROACHES.............................. 21
Corporate & Government Strategies................................................................................. 21
Potential Approaches ........................................................................................................ 22
Millennial Orientations, Managerial Competencies, Generational Rapport Inventory
Graph................................................................................................................................. 23
Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Competency ........................................................ 29
Full-Range of Leadership Model (FRLM) ....................................................................... 32
CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION........................................... 34
Unlocking the Millennial Potential................................................................................... 34
Professional Development in the Three Areas.................................................................. 34
Overcoming the “Traditional” Management Approach/Negative Perceptions ................ 35
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 35
APPENDIX A: Comparison of Four Generations .......................................................... 38
APPENDIX B: Full-Range of Leadership Model ........................................................... 40
Endnotes............................................................................................................................ 43
Bibliography ..................................................................................................................... 50

iv
List of Illustrations
Figure 1.0 U.S. Population of Generations During Their Youth……………………...............1
Figure 2.0 Active Duty Age Distribution by Service………………………………….............14
Figure 3.0 Appropriation Funded & Non-Appropriation Funded Civilian Age Distribution
by Agency…………………..........................................................................................................14
Figure 4.0 Generational Rapport Inventory Graph (GRI)…………………………………..28
Figure 5.0 Full-Range of Leadership (FRLM) Model………………………………………..32

v
List of Tables
Table 1.0 Top Ten Reasons of Separation for Active Duty Members Who Separated Within
the First Five Years of Service by Generational Cohort……………………..........................19
Table 2.0 Orientation, Intrinsic Values, and Competencies…………………………………24
Table 3.0 Millennial Orientations and Managerial Competencies Defined...........................27

vi
Preface
My fascination began with generational differences during my three years as a Flight
Commander in the Air Force Honor Guard. As a Flight Commander, I noticed that the
leadership cadre of each flight did not understand the motivations, values, or thought processes
in the decisions our young Airmen were making before, during, or after they were being
disciplined. Our Chief Master Sergeant helped us understand that the source of the problems
came from generational differences, need for leadership/mentorship, and emotional intelligence
when dealing with the “quintessentially bad 10%”. This fact, coupled with my own upbringing
and exposure to generational conflict through the Acquisitions workforce, furthered my interest
and commitment to help others not make the same mistakes we had made and to better
understand and lead their people, despite career field or generational differences.
I would like to thank the following people: my girlfriend for supporting me through all
the late research sessions; the instructors in the Air Command and Staff Online Master’s
Leadership Program for broadening my mind and leadership prospective; Chris Walker from the
ACSC-OLMP staff for his help, support, and guidance behind the scenes; the staff of the
Acquisitions Leadership Program Challenge – Level I for helping me correlate my research to
empirical data; Major Dale Kearns – my Squadron Officer School (SOS) instructor for
encouragement/venting/help with Emotional Intelligence information; Dr. Chip Espinoza,
Managing Millennials, co-author, for letting me use their Generational Rappaport Inventory
model and tables; Paul Bernhard, Analyst with Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) for his
help in my tables, figures, and data; and finally, Dr. Paul Moscarelli for getting me through
Research Electives – 1 and Dr. Richard Smith for his mentorship, availability, and guidance in
the drafting of my research thesis and potential future research.

vii
Abstract
Although generational experts, sociologists, corporations, and academic studies have
been performed on the Millennials, the issue is that leaders still may not understand key
differences of the combined multi-generational workforce and therefore may not fully
comprehend the criticality of managing and leading people differently in order to optimize the
force and minimize attrition.1
The Millennial Generation has been called, the "Next Greatest Generation" by much of
the media during the 90s. The Millennial generation of professionals is the military and civilian
leaders of tomorrow. With the rapidly aging federal workforce, the government should seek
ways to understand the multi-generational dynamics of the workforce, characteristics of
Millennials, and leadership strategies to ensure the passing of corporate knowledge from their
predecessors to provide competent government employees and leaders. Regardless of current
initiatives, solutions, or courses of action, a major paradigm shift will need to be sustained to
ensure maximum retention of this unique group of future government leaders.
Due to the topic and the need to understand the significance and complexities of the
different generations in the workforce, the methodology of this study is the problem/solution
method. Relying on empirical data, existing studies, presentations, articles and books pertaining
to both government and corporate research, the results of this study are intended to assist anyone
who leads or will lead Millennials in the federal workforce. Additionally, the results can be used
to further leadership training, stimulate further study on the Millennials, or to influence policy in
human relations, recruitment, retention or professional development.

1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
“Attracting, developing, and retaining Generation Y is a challenge worth investing in.
We believe no employer is better positioned to do so than the Federal Government.”
-Deloitte, Touche, Tohmatsu “Millennial Model: An approach to
Gen Y Readiness”
Nov 30, 2010
There is a dangerous mix of personnel reductions on both the military and civilian
workforce due to fiscal constraints. (i.e. Program Budget Decision 720, reduction in force –
civilian and military, civilian hiring freeze, etc.) Additionally, a 2009 Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) report states that, “…the federal government is approaching 40 percent for
retirement eligible positions by 2015”.2
Figure 1.0, illustrates a snapshot of each generational
cohort during their youth (18-29 years of age), this is considered the “critical period” or youth
for learning about the larger society.3
The aging workforce, combined with these initiatives to
Figure 1.0 Population of Generations during their youth4
45.8
40.6 41.9
24.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Millennials
(2009)
Generation X
(1995)
Boomers
(1978)
Silent
(1963)
Numbers in Millions
Population When They Were Young
18‐29

2
control costs and reduce fiscal limitations on the national budget, indicates an alarming trend if
the retirement eligible segment of the federal workforce retires or is separated without
transferring corporate knowledge or prepared replacements. The federal workforce is
considerably older than their industry partners. Data from the Partnership for Public Service,
indicates that 25 percent of the corporate workforce is under the age of 30, while the federal
government has 74 percent of its workers over the age of 40.5
Not only does the older federal
workforce pose a problem, but according to Deloitte, Touche, Tohmatsu, an international
consulting firm to the government, many government agencies are “…behind the curve in
cultivating a work culture that will entice a new generation of employees. To become a choice
employer among the emerging [Millennial] workforce, the public sector must appeal to a
population insistent upon a sociable, flexible, purposeful, and technologically savvy work
environment”.6
Adding to this dilemma, Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch posit in, Managing the
Millennials, that, “One of the biggest challenges facing organizations over the next 10 years will
be employee procurement…Wall Street, Detroit, and the medical industry have feared
competition from the federal government but the real competition with the feds will be for young
talent”.7
This competitive environment for “young talent” combined with factors such as a
rapidly aging, retirement eligible “Boomer” force and downsizing due to fiscal constraints set the
stage for the Millennials to revolutionize the government workplace.
According to generational experts, there are four generations (Traditionalists, Baby
Boomers, Generation X, Millennials) with a fifth generation (iGeneration) just arriving into the
workforce with different values, characteristics, and ideals. The Millennials pose a significant
challenge to the Baby Boomer leadership of the current federal workforce. Fritzson, Howell, and
Zakheim highlight this in Military of Millennials through the following:

3
“…the military’s greatest human capital need may be the structures
and leadership techniques with which to leverage the inherent
strengths of its new generation of people…the military leadership
can ensure that those in positions of command at all levels are
trained and stress-tested to maintain a delicate balance – the
balance between empowering Gen Y troops and providing them
with direction, discipline, and cohesion. Indeed, balanced
leadership is the only way to empower a millennial-dominated
military to think and act creatively, responsibly, and with the right
sense of mission.”8
By understanding the multi-generational dynamics of the workforce, Millennial attributes, and
leadership strategies to address this unique cohort, the government will ensure the passing of
corporate knowledge from the other cohorts to provide competent, government employees and
future leaders.
This paper will address the thesis by: 1) analyzing the theories and definitions of
generations, 2) look at the current challenges of the federal workforce, 3) potential alternatives
and approaches, and 4) recommend courses of action to lead and retain this group of future
leaders.

4
CHAPTER 2: GENERATIONAL THEORIES & GENERATIONS DEFINED
“Society persists despite the morality of its individual members, through process of
demographic metabolism and particularly the annual infusion of birth cohorts. These
may pose a threat to stability, but they also provide the opportunity for societal
transformation.”9
- Norman Ryder
“An ancient circle is at work: Generations are created young by history, and later go on
to create history in their turn.”10
-Neil Howe & William Strauss
Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation
There are many theories that illustrate the need to lead and motivate Millennials. To
understand this group, the following theories should be reviewed: Maturational, Generational,
Life Course, Collective Memories, and Group and Age Norm Theory. Furthermore, the common
characteristics, traits, and trends will provide comparisons and contrasts between the cohorts to
understand how each will naturally interact with the Millennials and why they are so unique.
Maturational Theory
It is the traditional belief that people change, mature, and develop their values, attitudes,
and preferences as a function of age. Arnold Gesell established the concept of developmental
norms in his quest to understand by what age a certain attitude or behavior should generally be
observable.11
This equates to actions that were done during childhood may not be acceptable
during adolescence or adulthood (i.e. telling a “white lie” or “fibbing”). Gesell viewed
biological development as the major determinant to behavior.12
Generational Theory
Karl Mannheim, a German sociologist, is credited with establishing generational theory.
He sought to explain how attitudes and values are shaped in both individuals and groups.
Additionally, he believed that the generation a person belongs to determines, to a certain extent,

5
his or her thoughts, feelings, and even behaviors. A generation is defined as a group that shares
birth years and significant life events at critical developmental stages.13
Youth is the key period
in which social generations are formed.14
The major events experienced during the time of
formation are what shape the major outlook on the world exhibited by that generation. Another
term for Mannheim’s generation is age cohort. In sociology literature, the terms generation and
cohort are often used interchangeably.15
With this set of criteria, it is easily and very apparent of
the differences between the generations or cohorts.
Life Course Theory
Life Course Theory is a multidisciplinary human development theory that is
complemented by generational theory. In Life Course Theory, demographers, historians,
developmental psychologists, and sociologists look for cohort effects.16
People who experience
a sociological context at a similar age are likely to forge a perspective or mind-set that stays with
them throughout their entire life.17
Simply put, these events are “social markers” that trigger
cohort effects, frame life experiences, and shape the perceptions, values, beliefs and attitudes of
the different cohorts.
Although not a theory, “collective memories” play a role in shaping Life Course Theory
through memories of a shared past, retained by members of a group, no matter the size. Again,
many of the sociological experts believe that the “critical period” for this is during adolescence
and early adulthood, leaving a greater impact or influence in one’s life. “Cohort flow,” or the
interplay between individual age and social change, illustrates that the process of aging from
birth to death is not entirely fixed by biology, but by changing structures and roles in society.18

6
Group and Age Norm Theory
Group and Age Norm Theory is defined as the following: “As each age cohort’s self-
identity is strengthened, it makes comparisons of itself to other generations. Social comparison
exaggerates the difference between groups but strengthens in-group similarity and cohesion. As
individuals find similarity within the group and compare themselves favorably to members of
other groups, group cohesion and group identity are strengthened.”19
This illustrates that each generation experiences “sense making” where individuals jointly define
and create collective accounts or narratives of their environment from which they derive
meaning from organizational events20
. The Age Norm Theory are the ages viewed in standard or
typical for a given role or status by the dominant group within a social group. The most things in
common are the following: expectation, sanction, and a group.21
Looking at this from a
contextual perspective, Baby Boomers have set all the rules for today’s work expectations, just
as their predecessors dictated the rules of the workplace for the Boomers.
In addition to the theories, an analysis of the different groups of generations or cohorts is
required to understand the following: make up of each cohort, what commonalities they share,
and what molded them to become the generational group seen today. These cohorts are
illustrated in Appendix A, from Air Force Lt. Col. Kay Smith’s thesis, “Gaining the Edge:
Connecting with Millennials” where she cites Lancaster and Stillman’s book, “When
Generations Collide”.22
Inserting content from “Managing Millennials” the table provides a
brief, comprehensive snapshot of what generational experts consider the many characteristics
and factors that make each group unique.23
The red text indicates additions to Lancaster and
Stillman’s proposed generational characteristics. As “Managing Millennials” posits, current
trends indicate that this cohort will be smaller than the current Millennial cohort. Current

7
research is being conducted on the iGeneration. Like all generational cohorts, the iGeneration
will gain attention in the workplace and media Like the Millennials, with time, further
observation, and research the iGeneration will be further defined as a cohort.
Leading experts in the field of Generational Studies, Howe and Strauss, state that, “One
way to define a generation’s location in history is to think of a turning point in the national
memory that is earliest birth cohorts just missed.” Additionally, they define the cohort’s location
in history as, “…every rising generation defines itself against a backdrop of contemporary trends
and events.”24
Although there is some slight disagreement among the generational experts on
birth years, the variance is slight and not significant.
Generations Defined: Traditionalists (1925-1945)
Also known as the “Builders”, “G.I. Generation”, or “Silent Generation”, they number at
56 million and make up 5-10% of the current workforce25
. Common experiences during this
time include the following: The Great Depression, World War I & II, New Deal, and the G.I.
Bill. Authority was important as was hard work, honor, and delayed gratification. People were
willing to work 30 years or more before they got their gold watch and could retire. It was not
uncommon to spend one’s entire career at one company.26
Traditionalists were influenced by
their parents and characterized as the following: Patriotic, loyal, faith in institutions, “waste not,
want not” mentality, focus on family values with a military top-down approach.27
Many
members of this cohort are retiring, becoming more involved with the upbringing of their
Millennial great-grandchildren, and some are simply passing away.
The Baby Boomers (1946-1964)
This is the largest group of the five generations with 80 million and 46-55% of the
workforce. 28
They are the current senior leaders and definers of the workplace environment

8
today. Key events that took place during their lifetime include: the Vietnam War, the Cold War,
the Civil Rights Movement, the Women’s Liberation Movement, television, and rock and roll.
The John and Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations took their innocence,
while the moon landing gave them hope that they could achieve anything. Common values
among this group include: personal identity, health and wellness, material wealth, and a forever-
young mentality. Additional characteristics of “Boomers” include the following: very position,
pay, and recognition oriented, focused on individual growth, teams, political awareness and
lifestyle. This demographic wanted free drugs in the 1960s and now they want free drugs from
Medicare.29
Additionally, they leverage technology to do more work-not less.30
Of the cohorts,
the Boomers share similar traits and characteristics to the Millennials, although their upbringing
and outlooks are distinctly different.
Generation X (1965-1979)
Also called “latch key kids”, Gen Xers have 46 million in their cohort and make up 35-
45% of the current workforce.31
Key events and characteristics during their lifetime include:
AIDS, the Challenger explosion, Persian Gulf War, corporate downsizing, tripling of the divorce
rate, both parents working (making them the “latchkey kids”), video games, MTV, computers.
Gen Xers are often considered the “pessimistic generation”, “forgotten ones” or “beyond hope”
as teenagers.32
They were mostly ignored as a group.33
Deanna Beppu, in Millennials Rising,
states this well, “…If we Gen Xers probably share one common memory, it’s how the adults in
the world just forgot about us in terms of education, structure, values, and family support….it
does seem ironic and cruel that now the new kids are getting all the attention because suddenly
the adults woke up and realized that we Gen Xers didn’t turn out right.”34
Due to their
“loner”/broken family upbringing, they value mobility and autonomy and strive to have work-

9
life balance in their lives. Gen Xers were often seen as hindrances during a time their parents
were rediscovering themselves.35
There has been some consideration that, “…the “Generation
Y“ label may indeed serve a purpose – to refer to these last-wave Xers who have anticipated
some of the changes that would mark the generation coming next.”36
The separation of
Generation X, Generation Y, Millennials and iGeneration is being researched and will be defined
under future studies/research.
The Millennials (1980 – 1996)
Often called the following: “trophy kids”, “entitlement generation”, “Xbox generation”,
the Millennials are the second largest cohort with 78 million members that make up 25 percent of
this country’s population and 5-10% of the current workforce.37
Key events during their lifetime
include: the Spice Girls, Dixie Chicks, Columbine, 9/11 and terrorism, cell phones, text
messaging, social networking and a strong sense of social responsibility.38
They have grown up
with technology from an early age and view it as a tool for work and play; its use has become
second nature to them. Despite the troublesome upbringing of their Gen Xer parents by their
“Silent Great-Grandparents” and “Boomer Grandparents”, Traditionalists, Gen Xers, and
Boomers are working to be more involved in the upbringing of the Millennials.39
The Boomer
and Gen Xer “helicopter parents” raised them with a focus on nurturing over training. Their life
has involved a myriad of structure and planned activities through their over involved parents.
Compared to past cohorts, parents know exactly where their children are at all times, due to the
multi-task nature of their lives. These praise-based families are the reason why feedback and
positive reinforcement is important to them. They have grown up working in teams and enjoy
diversity (ethnically, religion, cultures, etc.).40
Echoing and reinforcing these traits, Howe and

10
Strauss list seven descriptions of Millennials: special, sheltered, confident, team-oriented,
achieving, pressured, and conventional.41
The iGeneration (1997-today)
Also known as the “O Generation”, “Z Generation” or “Homeland Generation”, their
cohort name is still to be determined. Although there has not been significant research on this
group to date, the generation following the Millennials is being discussed by leading researchers
due to their behaviors, interests, and traits as being very different from their Millennial
counterparts. Comprising less than 5 percent of the workforce and consisting of newborns to 19
year olds, this group will be significant for future study as the Millennials take over the
workplace.42
Current projections have their numbers being less than the Millennial cohort. Key
events during their lifetime is still to be determined, but include: Hannah Montana, Mortgage
Crisis, Corporate Bailouts, US Airways Flight 1549, Obama Election and Presidency, “Captain
Phillips” and the Somalian pirates, and the death of Osama bin Laden.43
Cohort Trends
According to Howe and Strauss, the patters of earlier generations offer clues on what can
be expected with the Millennial “revolution”:
 The public discovery of a new generation typically occurs fifteen to
twenty years after its first birth year. For Boomers, this happened in the
late 50’s. For Gen Xers, the late 70’s. For Millennials, the schedule
should be the late 90’s – and, in fact, the first discover year for Millennials
was 1997.44
Should the trend stay consistent, the iGeneration should be
defined in the late 2010-2020 era.

11
 The new generation’s full possession of the youth culture occurs twenty to
twenty-five years after its first birth year. For Boomers, this happened in
the mid-60’s. For Gen Xers, the mid-80’s. For Millennials, it should
happen around the middle Oh-Ohs.45
 The new generation’s complete breakout, when it attracts maximum social
attention, occurs twenty-five to thirty years after the first birth year. For
Boomers, this happened in the late ‘60s. For Gen Xers, the early ‘90s.
For Millennials, it should happen around 2010.46
From the current trends,
article, and news stories, the Millennial focus started as early as 2001, but
gained maximum attention from 2006-2011.
 The ebbing of public interest, when the generation’s identity becomes a
tired subject, occurs thirty to thirty-five years after its first birth year. For
Boomers, this happened in the mid-‘70s. For Gen Xers, the mid-‘90s. For
Millennials, it should happen I the Oh-Teens.47
Due to their graduating
college and entering the workplace, the Millennials have not reached this
point yet. Should Howe and Strauss’ predictions hold, Millennials should
become a “tired subject” around 2020, respectively. 48
In addition to these general observations/predictions, Howe and Strauss claim,
Millennials will reveal themselves as the answer to the central
problem facing Xers, the prior youth generation. They will show
what can be done about over-the-top free agency, social splintering,
cultural exhaustion, and civic decay in an era where Americans are
increasingly yearning for community. The Millennial solution will
be to set high standards, get organized, team up, and do civic
deeds.49
Furthermore, Millennials will also correct for what today’s
teens [and young adults] perceive are the excesses of the middle-
aged Boomers – the narcissism, impatience, iconoclasm, and

12
constant focus on talk over action….Millennials will grow up to be
de-X’d anti-Boomers.50
This rebellion of newer generations answering the dilemmas and shortcomings of the previous
cohorts has not changed. Howe and Strauss also argue that, “...the rebellion of every new youth
generation serves an invaluable function: curbing the excesses and complementing the strengths
of the older generation – who may not be getting the kids they expect, but who usually get the
kids they need.”51
Whether a “rebellion” or “revolution” the Millennials represent a unique
cohort that current trends points towards them being a, “hero generation” or the “Next Greatest
Generation”. 52

13
CHAPTER 3: THE DILEMMA
“As baby boomer reach retirement age, the federal government could lose up to 60
percent of its workforce during the next decade.”
- Brittany Ballenstedt & Alyssa Rosenburg
Government Executive, July 2008
Aging/Retirement Eligible Workforce
Since 1993, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has investigated the “Aging
Workforce” in the federal government. Their findings not only indicated the dilemma of a
“demographic swing” in national and federal workforces, but the smaller size of the Gen Xer
labor force, and the need for programs to extend older workers’ careers while providing younger
persons the opportunity for employment and advancement opportunities.53
Interestingly enough,
when GAO discussed their draft report with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), “they
agreed that the federal government should address older-worker issues. However, they felt that
with the efforts to reduce federal employment levels, including incentives for older workers to
retire, now was not the time to give priority to developing an older-worker employment
strategy.”54
Sixteen years later, in a 2009 GAO report on older workers, the problem is addressed
again through the analysis of four government agencies: the Agency for International
Development (USAID), the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Small
Business Administration, and the Department of Transportation.55
As reflected in the 2009 study,
“…[the current and] past hiring freezes have prevented midlevel staff to help pass down
knowledge and skills to less experienced employees….they have difficulty attracting qualified
staff with specialized skills. To address these challenges, the three agencies rely on older
workers in different ways.56
Figure 2.0 & Figure 3.0 provides a snapshot of the current military
and civilian workforce according to the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC).

14
Figure 2.0 Active Duty Age Distribution by Service57
These figures illustrate the growing percentage of Millennials and Gen Xers comprising
more of the workplace, while the Baby Boomers and Traditionalists are moving on to retirement.
Also illustrated in Figure 2.0, is the large number of Millennials on Active Duty. The vast
majority of this group is comprised of the enlisted force and entry-level officer corps. As
discussed in Chapter 2, Generation X is the smallest cohort with 46 million. With this large
onslaught of Millennials on Active duty and the small amounts of Generation X managers,
generational differences between the cohorts can and may factor into the execution of military
missions to the development and retention of personnel. Figure 3.0 illustrates a very different
paradigm with the Millennials only comprising 22.5% of the total Civilian population. This age
parody is due to the hiring tendencies of the Department of Defense. The requirements for
employment (i.e. bachelor’s degree, prior military service, etc.) and target demographic (22 year
olds for bachelor’s degree and 26+ for military service due to service commitment) are reasons
ARMY NAVY
MARINE
CORPS
AIR FORCE
COAST
GUARD
DOD TOTAL
iGeneration 1.1 0.8 2.6 0.7 0.3 1.1
Millennials 62.7 64.1 78.6 61.2 56.2 64.9
Generation X 33.7 32.4 17.9 35.9 39.2 31.7
Baby Boomers 2.5 2.7 0.8 2.2 4.3 2.3
Traditionalists 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Percentage Active Duty Age Distribution by Service

15
why the amount of Gen Xers makes up 33.5% and Millennials comprise a lower percentage at
22.5%.
Figure 3.0 Appropriation Funded and Non-Appropriation Funded Civilian Age
Distribution by Agency58
Whether an agency decides to assign the aging workforce to specific tasks and projects,
or moves their senior people to training programs, these initiatives are futile unless the current
economy, positions, and lessons learned from past programs and dilemmas are considered and
applied. Without a proper professional development strategy and “plan of succession”, the
government positions left vacant from this “mass exodus” of Boomer employees will leave the
government vulnerable and in disarray. Current trends of reductions in force, hiring freezes or
slow hiring systems, and doubt of future benefits, plague the federal government and further
present barriers of entry and deterrence from attracting and retaining potential Millennial talent.
ARMY NAVY
MARINE
CORPS
AIR FORCE
DEPARTME
NT OF
DEFENSE
TOTAL
iGeneration 0.1 0.1 0 0.2 0 0.1
Millennials 13.6 13.6 10.2 13.3 10.8 13.1
Generation X 35.5 31.6 34.4 34.3 29.7 33.5
Baby Boomers 48.1 51.8 53.1 49.8 56.2 50.6
Traditionalists 2.7 2.8 2.3 2.4 3.3 2.7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Percentage
APF and Non-APF Civilian Age Distribution by Agency

16
Budget Crisis, Hiring Freezes, Reduction in Force, Federal Pay & Benefits
Although not new to the federal government, the challenges of the national deficit and
limited resources will offer less incentives and benefits to attract and retain the Millennials in the
government sector. With an increasing national deficit (crossing the $14 trillion mark in Jan
2010 and currently approaching $15 trillion and the government almost coming to a government
shutdown in the summer of 2010, the economic landscape of the United States (US) is pretty
bleak.59
Since January of 2011, initiatives throughout the DoD are being implemented by the
different Joint Services to reduce their military and personnel costs. Former Secretary of State
Gates testified on DoD wide savings and mentioned that the, “…government-wide freeze on
civilian salaries – has yielded about $54 billion in additional savings…that include, with some
very limited exceptions, a DoD-wide freeze on the number of civilian positions.60
To meet their
end strength goals, the Air Force is looking to cut or perform a reduction in force of their junior
officers. According to Air Force News Service, “Due primarily to a 16-year high in retention,
the Air Force ended fiscal 2010 approximately 2,300 officers above authorized end strength.”61
In addition to the budget crisis, a majority of the incentives of the federal government (i.e.
civilian salaries, military end strength numbers, federal pay and benefits) were discussed during
the summer of 2011 to be considered for reduction. In an article by Government Executive on
July 26, 2011, they state that the “Federal pay and benefits [are] spared—for now”.62
Also
illustrating this is the National Treasury Employees’ Union President Collen Kelley’s statement,
“…neither of the two latest proposals addressing the debt ceiling and fiscal deficit calls for
immediate federal retirement cuts”63
; this illustrates the beginning of a war to retain federal pay
and benefits. CBS news illustrates this point, “[Defense Secretary Panetta] was asked about
news reports that the Pentagon is considering reducing military retirement benefits, which along

17
with military health costs, have ballooned in recent years…the economic and debt crises have
put those issues squarely in the crosshairs…though the report is not complete and it is non-
binding at any rate, the board recommends the system be scrapped and replaced with a 401-K
type defined contribution plan, grandfathering in the disabled and retirees. “It’s the kind of think
you have to consider,” Panetta said. He quickly added that it must have a grandfather clause so
the government does not “break faith” with the military force.64
Regardless of what cuts will be
made, there are tough decisions and sacrifices ahead for the federal government. These problems
present an excellent challenge as the Millennials arrive on the scene. As Howe and Strauss point
out, “They [Millennials] represent an opportunity that, once fully understood and appreciated,
must be acted on by people of all ages.”65
Generational Differences in the Workplace
Generational experts all agree that there are generational differences in the workplace.
Most commonly noted differences stem from preconceived notions/faulty perceptions, bias from
experience, age discrimination, and time to work with and understand the other generational
cohorts. Howe and Strauss identify this through the following statement:
“…the biggest obstacle now blocking a better adult perception of
Millennials is one that today’s adult generations did not face in their
own youth. It is the obstacle that derives from straight-line
thinking, from a near-universal adult consensus that, since the last
two generations have defined a negative youth trend, the next
American generation must necessarily follow in that path. If history
always moved in straight lines, this sort of benign exaggeration
might be excusable, or at least harmless. But history does not move
in straight lines, and Millennials are not going in the same direction
as the line from Boomers to Gen Xers.”66
Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch iterate these differences from a managerial context,
“More than 60 percent of employers say that they are experiencing
tension between employees from different generations – more than
70 percent of older employees are dismissive of younger workers’

18
abilities. If this were not bad enough, 50 percent of younger
employees are dismissive of the abilities of their older
coworkers.”67
The “lived experience” or “bias from experience” is
the inability to suspend the bias of one’s experience preventing
self-reflection or learning.68
Although more commonly described with the “older” segment, age discrimination is another
factor for generational differences in the workplace. Youth can lend to positive perceptions of
the Millennials (i.e. flexibility, willingness to change and try new things), however, there are
negative stereotypes to youth such as pay scale, promotion, and benefits.69
Some managers may
also refuse to hire Millennials due to their age. Lastly, Millennials are just arriving onto the
work scene. Simply put, “Builders, Baby Boomers, and Gen X(ers) have been working long
enough to “get” each other and therefore are more likely to understand where management is
coming from even if they disagree. Millennials do not have enough experience to have
developed that understanding yet.”70
Being the new cohort, they are also the most “unknown”
mystery or enigma to many of the other generations.
Recruitment and Retention Rates of Personnel
The federal government may be facing three considerations: human capital policies and
practices, antiquated/confusing hiring processes, and career model that is still structured toward
the expectations of the mature and retiring workforce.71
Deloitte highlights this through the
following statements, “…federal human capital policies and practices [that] lag behind what is
needed to attract Millennials.”72
Additionally, “…the antiquated and sometimes confusing
federal hiring process makes it hard for new college graduates to find, apply for and be hired into
entry-level positions in the public sector. The results of these problems are reflected through the
6 percent conversion rate of interns to permanent government employee positions, compared to
that of the 50 percent in the private sector.”73
The government should focus on crafting

19
incentives that appeal to the Millennials to overcome the barriers to entry and address career
model/incentives suitable to retain the Millennials. According to Deloitte, they value the
following: growth potential, quality of life, and meaningful work.74
Similar values appeal to
active duty personnel. According to DMDC, the following ten items illustrated in Table 1.0 are
the “top ten” reasons for active duty military personnel separating from government service by
generational cohort.
Table 1.0 Top Ten Reasons of Separation for Active Duty Members Who Separated Within
the First Five Years of Service by Generational Cohort75
As illustrated in the table, the ten reasons listed are the most common throughout the
generations. Where there is variance of more than 1%, the data could indicate a potential
generational trait, value or behavior trend for the military to monitor in relation to separations in
the military. Note that areas such as expiration of term of service and immediate reenlistment
REASON OF SEPARATION MILLENIALS GEN-XERS BOOMERS TRADITIONALISTS TOTAL
EXPIRATION OF TERM OF SERVICE 33.5% 29.9% 33.5% 46.5% 31.8%
IMMEDIATE REENLISTMENT 6.2% 18.9% 24.8% 19.4% 19.7%
UNQUALIFIED FOR ACTIVE DUTY, OTHER 8.3% 3.6% 1.5% 0.8% 3.3%
EARLY RELEASE, OTHER, INCLUDING RIF,
VSI, AND SSB 1.6% 4.8% 4.3% 1.3% 4.2%
ENTRY LEV PERFORM AND CONDUCT 4.9% 4.8% 3.6% 1.0% 4.3%
DRUGS 5.7% 2.8% 2.6% 1.0% 3.1%
GOOD OF THE SERVICE (DISCHARGE IN
LIEU OF COURT-MARTIAL) 2.5% 1.8% 2.3% 1.3% 2.1%
DISCREDITABLE INCIDENTS, CIVILIAN OR
MILITARY 3.1% 1.9% 1.7% 0.2% 2.0%
CHARACTER OR BEHAVIOR DISORDER 3.1% 2.8% 1.0% 0.4% 2.1%
COMMISSION OF A SERIOUS OFFENSE 3.1% 1.9% 0.4% 0.1% 1.5%
OTHER REASONS NOT LISTED 27.9% 26.8% 24.4% 28.0% 26.0%

20
could pertain to the “common trends and events” discussed for each cohort in Chapter 2. (i.e.
World War II for Traditionalists, Vietnam for Boomers, Gulf War for Gen Xers, and
Iraq/Afghanistan Wars for Millennials) Categories such as early release, other, including RIF
(Reduction in Force), VSI (Voluntary Separation Incentive), and SSB (Special Separation
Benefit) encompass a data set illustrating those incentivized to separate through monetary
incentive or involuntary separated and offered a severance package (i.e. sixty days of medical
benefits and percentage of annual pay). This category is lower in the Millennials due to the time
elapsed in the Gen Xers and Boomers demographic. With time, the data in that category should
increase in percentage and reflect the effects of the Great Depression of 2008 and 2009.
Interestingly enough, drugs, good of the service, discreditable incidents, civilian or military,
character or behavior disorder, and commission of a serious offense, are in some cases,
drastically or notably higher than other generational cohorts despite time of data collected.
Understanding the motivating factors behind this data is key to identify possible generational
trends, differences, and values as the government faces resource and manpower challenges.

21
CHAPTER 4: POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES & APPROACHES
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication”
- Leonardo da Vinci
Corporate & Government Strategies
Corporate American and industry has been actively studying generational differences and
personnel levels in advance of the government due to market research needed to analyze the
cohorts and understand the demographic traits needed to sell, distribute, and market products.
Howe and Strauss support this, “Most generational experts are, in fact youth marketers. But
there is far more to generations than the consumer habits of people in different age brackets.”76
Corporations have seen this impending, “graying of the workforce” and have responded through
programs and initiatives to attract and retain their Millennial talent. Xerox, for example, released
a recruitment campaign targeting Millennials through an online ad implying, “you can be you
and we affirm you.”77
Deloitte claims that, “The nation’s top private employers have heeded the
call, and are already transforming their human capital practices to identify and recruit the “best
and brightest” young minds.”78
From a government perspective, they state that, “…no other
employer is better positioned to do so than the Federal Government to offer Generation Y
[Millennials] the employment experience [they] crave.”79
Additionally, they recommend that the
goal of the government should be to not only back-fill the retiring workforce, but to “recruit the
best and brightest Gen Y employees in the marketplace.”80
Addressing the recruitment and
retention rates of Chapter 3, Deloitte’s research indicates that the government can address the
needs of Gen Y [Millennials] (i.e. mentorship, providing them with meaningful roles and
responsibilities) and reap the benefits of increased knowledge transfer, employee engagement,
improved productivity/performance, and their “natural ability to work collaboratively and break
down organizational silos…[to] inevitably transform the government into a networked

22
workforce, adept at solving problems that require information-sharing, resource sharing, and
collaboration.”81
Progress towards Deloitte’s recommendations to the government can be seen
through actions on December 27, 2010, when President Obama signed the Executive Order –
Recruiting and Hiring Students and Recent Graduates into law. This created the Pathways
Program with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as the agency responsible for the
successful execution of the program.82
OPM Director John Berry stated, “…regulations commit
the federal government to two key goals…they require pathways to federal service to be clear
and accessible for students and recent graduates….they press us to create a culture where agency
leadership is actively engaged in recruiting, training, and managing top talent.”83
Although not
specifically mentioning Millennials, the timing inherently indicates that Millennials are the target
demographic. With the right implementation and execution, this government strategy could
work to attract and retain the “top” Millennial talent needed to resolve the problems addressed in
Chapter 2.
Potential Approaches
In analyzing the problem, the unique attributes of the Millennials require something other
than status-quo approaches and techniques. Through research, three potential approaches appear
to be viable candidates to attracting and keeping the Millennials in the federal workforce. Chip
Espinoza, Mick Ukleja, and Craig Rusch’s Perceived [Millennial] Orientation, Millennial
Intrinsic Values, and Managerial Competencies offer the first potential approach. Through their
study and book, they analyze and explore the corporate and small business arenas to provide
solutions to the old management training of “…getting workers to do what you want them to do.
The relationship between the manager and the follower is seen as negotiated by structure and
positional authority.”84

23
Daniel Goleman’s Emotional Intelligence offers potential solutions for both the military
and civilian workforces. Although often misinterpreted due to the verbiage of “emotion”,
Emotional Intelligence or EI is far from a “touchy-feely-sounding” concept.85
As Latour and
Hosmer posit, “EI’s value to military leaders is to better know/understand and manage others, the
more likely they are to get the results they want.”86
The last approach involves the Full-Range of Leadership model providing a situational
leadership model with historic military examples of each category, illustrated in Appendix B.
This model offers a leader/manager the ability to be “self aware” or conscious of the
approach/strategy to manipulate the decisions they make in relationship to the expected outcome
with each leadership style.
Millennial Orientations, Managerial Competencies, Generational Rapport Inventory Graph
As discussed in Chapter 2 (Generational Differences), preconceived notions/perceptions,
the bias of experience, and age discrimination are issues that plague interactions between leaders
and their subordinates. Highlighted in Table 2.0, are what the managers in their focus groups
Perceived Orientation of the Millennials, Millennials Intrinsic Value (values of the Millennials in
relation to the workplace), and what Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch recommend as management
approaches to overcome leader bias while addressing Millennial Intrinsic Values. They discuss
specific methodologies and stories from their survey/focus group/research results to help
managers/leaders succeed at working with, incentivizing and developing Millennials. Each row
illustrates the connection between each trait horizontally starting with addressing the negative
perception (Perceived Orientation) while satisfying the Millennial trait (Millennial Intrinsic
Value) with the appropriate manager competency.87

24
Table 2.0 Orientation, Intrinsic Values, and Competencies88
Table 3.0 further illustrates in great detail, the nine Perceived Orientations of Millennials paired
to their derived solution from the research by Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch, in Managing the
Millennials. Although not applicable to all situations or a panacea for all problems encountered
with Millennials, they do recommend solutions that can be applied to the Millennials or any age
group displaying “Millennial tendencies” or “Perceived Orientations”. Through research, focus
groups and questionnaires, they developed the Nine Competencies as the “building blocks” to
address the three behavioral categories of Millennials: Adapting, Communicating,
Envisioning.89
These competencies address the perceived orientations of the Millennial cohort,
while considering their intrinsic values and offering a solution to address disconnects among the
perceived orientation to the Millennial intrinsic value.
Perceived Orientation Millennial Intrinsic Value Required Managerial Competency
Autonomous Work-Life Balance Flexing
Entitled Reward Incenting
Imaginative Self-Expression Cultivating
Self-Absorbed Attention Engaging
Defensive Achievement Disarming
Abrasive Informality Self-Differentiating
Myopic Simplicity Broadening
Unfocused Multitasking Directing
Indifferent Meaning Motivating

25
Perceived Orientations of Millennials Generational Rapport Competencies
Autonomous Flexing
Millennials express a desire to do what they
want when they want, have the schedule they
want, and not worry about someone micro-
managing them. They don’t feel they should
have to conform to office processes as long as
they complete their work.
The ability to modify workplace expectations
and behavior. It requires empathic listening
and the willingness to adapt to different ways
of doing things.
Entitled Incenting
The attitude expressed by Millennials that
they deserve to be recognized and rewarded.
They want to move up the ladder quickly but
not always on managements’ terms. They
want a guarantee for their performance, not
just the opportunity to perform.
Incenting involves recognizing the reward
expectations of Millennials and designing a
path that reconciles it with performance
expectations. It requires identifying Millennial
values and aligning recognition and reward
with those values. It calls for informing
employees about advancement opportunities
and frequent appraisal of their development.
Imaginative Cultivating
Millennials are recognized for having a great
“imagination” and can offer a fresh
perspective and unique insight into a myriad
of situations. Their imagination can distract
them from participating in an ordered or
mechanistic process.
It is the ability to identify and encourage
creativity in others. It requires the capacity to
create and facilitate environments in which
people can release their imagination at work
and have fun.
Self-Absorbed Engaging
Millennials are perceived to be primarily
concerned with how they are treated rather
than how they treat others. Tasks are seen as a
means to their ends. Millennials are often
preoccupied by their own personal need for
trust, encouragement, and praise.
The ability to reach out and relationally
connect with direct reports. It requires taking
an interest in the employee as a person and
finding points of connection.

26
Defensive Disarming
Millennials often experience anger,
guardedness, offense, resentment, and shift
responsibility in response to critique and
evaluation. They want to be told when they
are doing well but not when they are doing
poorly.
A proactive response to conflict. It involves
de-escalating intense interactions, listening,
being fair, and embracing resistance.
Abrasive Self-Differentiating
Perhaps due to technology, Millennial
communication style can be experienced as
curt. They are perceived to be inattentive to
social courtesies like knowing when to say
thank you and please. Whether intentional or
not, their behavior is interpreted as
disrespectful or usurping authority.
It is the ability to self-regulate and “not take
personally” the comments, gestures, or actions
of others. It is being aware of the “trigger”
events that make you reactionary rather than
responsive.
Myopic Broadening
Millennials struggle with cause and effect
relationships. The struggle is perceived as a
narrow sightedness guided by internal
interests without an understanding of how
others and the organization are impacted.
The ability to help Millennials connect the
dots between everyday tasks and big picture
objectives. Emphasis is placed on teaching
employees how to recognize numerous
options and potential consequences. It
involves teaching organizational awareness.
Unfocused Directing
Millennials, as a cohort, are recognized for
their intellectual ability but are often
perceived to struggle with a lack of attention
to detail. They have a hard time staying
focused on tasks for which they have no
interest.
The ability to clearly communicate what is
expected. It entails avoiding ambiguity and
not assuming you have been understood. It
requires both questioning and listening to
ascertain the employee’s readiness level for a
task or goal.

27
Indifferent Motivating
Millennials are perceived as careless,
apathetic, or lacking commitment.
The ability to inspire Millennials to find
meaning in the everyday work they do and to
see how their contribution matters.
Table 3.0 Millennial Orientations and Managerial Competencies Defined90
The combination of the three Millennial Behavior areas, nine Perceived Orientations, and
nine Generational Rapport Competencies form the Generational Rapport Inventory (GRI) Graph
illustrated below in Figure 4.0. Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch also developed an online GRI
composite report to assess a leader’s efficacy in relation to the nine Perceived Orientations,
Millennial Intrinsic Values, and nine Generational Rapport Competencies. According to Dr.
Espinoza, the colors of the graph indicate the following:
Red = Critical Need (It means immediate attention because it is probably
undermining effectiveness in other areas)
Yellow = Challenge (Better than red, but room for improvement)
Green = Strength (It means the leader demonstrates effectiveness in the
competency)
He states, “It is easier to move from Yellow to Green than from Red to Yellow. A Red usually
means someone needs to change their perspective.”91
Successful results from applying this
methodology can be demonstrated through their example of a Millennial intern’s idea for Peter
Gruber’s film, Gorillas in the Mist:
It was during an emergency meeting that a young intern asked,
“What if you let the gorillas write the story? What if you sent a
really good cinematographer into the jungle with a ton of film to
shoot the gorillas? Then you could write a story around what the
gorillas did on film.” Everyone laughed and wondered what the
intern was doing in a meeting with experienced filmmakers. But
ultimately they did exactly what she suggested, and the
cinematographer “came back with phenomenal footage that
practically wrote the story for us.” Gruber says, “We shot the film

28
for $20 million, half of the original budget.”92
The moral: The
woman’s inexperience enabled her to see opportunities where
others saw problems.93
Through the cinematographers “suspending their bias”, they were able to find a viable solution
for their filming obstacles. Although not specific to the government, these practices can be
applied to the military and civilian workforce to utilize this unique and talented generational
cohort.
Figure 4. 0 Generational Rapport Inventory Graph (GRI)94
In addition to this example, the authors also suggest that through their research, the nine
competencies are key to “building a Millennial-friendly culture”.95
They also found three things:

29
“…that all of the managers were doing one thing right, many were not sure about what they were
doing right or wrong, and that the competencies are not based on personality; they can be
learned…the true power of the model ….the competencies are measurable!”96
Their model
provides not only a way for managers to improve on their current skills, but a method to identify
what they are doing right, what they are doing wrong and the ability to measure improvement in
leadership through a model that can be learned and consistently improved upon.
Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Competency
In addition to the recommendations made by Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rusch in Managing
Millennials, Emotional Intelligence is an emerging field that is applicable to attracting and
maintaining Millennials through Emotional Competency or Emotional Intelligence (EI). The
field has been thoroughly researched 1930’s and 1940’s as “non-intellective” and “intellective,”
as well as “social intelligence” categories. Researchers sought to define “total intelligence”, or
the combination of both the intellective and non-intellective factors to intelligent behavior.97
Salovey and Mayer coined the term “Emotional Intelligence” in 1990, but it was Daniel
Goleman, a science writer for the New York Times, who catapulted the concept, “…to become
one of the hottest buzzwords in Corporate America”98
and to “…attract a higher percentage of
readers than any other article published in that periodical [Harvard Business Review] on the
topic.”99
During a presentation given to the Annual Meeting for the Society of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology in New Orleans, Louisiana on April 15, 2000, Cary Cherniss
discusses the background on Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Competency,
Some of the research came from personality and social psychology,
and some came from the burgeoning field of
neuropsychology…emotional intelligence has as much to do with
knowing when and how to express emotion as it does controlling
it…Both Goleman and Mayer, Salovey, & Caruso have argued that
by itself emotional intelligence probably is not a strong predictor of

30
job performance. Rather, it provides the bedrock for competencies
that are. Goleman has tried to represent this idea by making a
distinction between emotional intelligence and emotional
competence. Emotional competence refers to the personal and social
skills that lead to superior performance in the world of work.100
Looking at emotional intelligence and emotional competence, the older generational cohorts can
increase their effectiveness in dealing with the Millennials through understanding their own
emotions and ability to empathize. Cherniss supports this viewpoint through his thought,
“Empathy is a particularly important aspect of emotional intelligence, and researchers have
known for years that it contributes to occupational success.”101
He goes on to correlate the
linkage between emotional intelligence and emotional competence through Gowing’s words in
the press, “The emotional competencies are linked to and based on emotional intelligence. A
certain level of emotional intelligence is necessary to learn the emotional competencies.”102
Cherniss discusses emotional competency and the potential results through the following
example:
“For instance, the ability to recognize accurately what another
person is feeling enables one to develop a specific competency
such as influence. Similarly, people who are better able to regulate
their emotions will find it easier to develop a competency such as
initiative or achievement drive. Ultimately it is these social and
emotional competencies that we need to identify and measure if we
want to be able to predict performance.”103
Goleman identifies the following six leadership styles, Latour and Hosmer provide the EI
competencies and their definitions to accompany the leadership styles in the list below:
 Visionary: Occurs when change requires a new vision or
clear direction
EI competencies: self-confidence, empathy, catalyst for
change
 Coaching: Helps employees improve performance by
building long-term capabilities
EI competencies: developing others, empathy, self-awareness

31
 Affiliative: Helps heal team rifts, motivates during
stressful times
EI competencies: empathy, building relationships,
communication
 Democratic: Builds consensus, solicits employee inputs
EI competencies: collaboration, team leadership,
communication
 Pacesetting: Elicits high-quality results from motivated
team
EI competencies: conscientiousness, achievement, initiative
 Commanding: Provides a kick-start turnaround in a crisis,
deals with problem employees
EI competencies: achievement, initiative, self-control
Emotional intelligence and emotional competencies illustrate that “IQ by itself is not a
very good predictor of job performance.”104
IQ, emotional intelligence, nor emotional
competency by themselves is a cure-all solution for attracting, working with, or leading
Millennials. It is the application of these principles, understanding the Millennial values, and the
application of situational leadership that will determine a positive or negative outcome. The
Full-Range of Leadership Model (FRLM) allows for a model with different methodologies to
allow for situational leadership while considering Emotional Intelligence and Competency.

32
Full-Range of Leadership Model (FRLM)
Figure 5.0 Full-Range of Leadership (FRLM) Model105
Taught at Squadron Officer’s School in Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, the Full-
Range of Leadership Model is not just a leadership tool for mid-grade military officers and
civilians, it is a situational awareness tool that can be utilized in dealing with all the different
generational cohorts. Although not as comprehensive as Appendix B, Figure 5.0 illustrates a
simplified version of the FRLM concept and the categories that make the model adaptive and
flexible to address various situations. The concept of the Full-Range of Leadership Model arose
from the multiple theories (i.e. trait theory, contingency theory, path-goal theory, leader-member
exchange, etc.) on the nature of leadership. The beginnings of the idea of transformational
leadership started with James McGregor Burns in 1978 and were further developed by Bernard
M. Bass in the 80’s and on. He defined the four dimensions of transformational leadership:
charisma or idealized influence (i.e. acting as a role model and gaining respect and trust from
followers by communicating a vision), inspirational motivation (i.e. communicating a vision with
enthusiasm thereby generating enthusiasm and optimism among followers), intellectual
stimulation (i.e. encouraging followers to look at problems in innovative ways), and
individualized consideration (i.e. providing personal attention for all followers).106
Bass goes on

33
to explain that Management by Exception is when, “A leader who engages in management-by-
exception only takes action when there is a problem to be solved or when basic standards are not
met.”107
The two preferred leadership styles are the Transactional and Transformational with
Laissez-Faire being the “anti-thesis” or void of leadership. Management-by-exception can also
be viewed as active and passive. Laissez-fair management, “…is considered the most ineffective
form of leadership, and refers to a complete lack of transition between the leader and the
follower.”108
He also calls this style, “passive-avoidant leadership”.109
The Full-Range of Leadership Model provides a leader with the ability to exercise
situational leadership, depending on the circumstances for an optimal solution. With an ever-
changing environment, limited resources and manpower, leaders and Millennials will have to be
willing to adapt to the rapidly evolving government climate while meeting the expectations of
society.

34
CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION
“It is no longer what you do that sets you apart from others, but how you do what you
do.”110
- Dov Seidman, in his book, How
Unlocking the Millennial Potential
A paradigm shift is inevitable with the onslaught of interns, civilians, and next generation
of military enlistees and officers. The Millennials have the potential to be the “Next Greatest
Generation” or “hero” generation to solve the problems of society and give back to the
community. Their propensity to be the heroes of tomorrow has already been demonstrated by
their recent accomplishments on the fields of Iraq and Afghanistan. Of the three most recently
awarded recipients of the Congressional Medal of Honor: Marine Sgt. Dakota Meyer is from the
Millennial cohort. Understanding the core competencies for managing the Millennial workforce,
techniques in situational leadership, and mastering Emotional Intelligence/Competencies are
vital in the government replacing the 60 percent of the workforce due to retire in the next decade
and key to unlocking the potential that comes from the Millennial cohort.
Professional Development in the Three Areas
As pointed out through my research, the three areas: Managing Millennials Perceived
Orientation/Intrinsic Values/Core Competencies; Emotional/Intelligence & Competencies; and
Full-Range Leadership Model, provide the tools for leaders to address the needs of their people
and accomplish their goals. Although taught in various courses throughout the military and
some civilian professional development courses, programs teaching Emotional Intelligence &
Competency, Full-Range Leadership Model and Acquisition Leadership Challenge, should be
expanded to develop the different cohorts in the beginning, middle, and senior portion of each
military and civilian’s career. Doing so earlier in a person’s career will guarantee the full

35
utilization, understanding, development and retention of the Millennial cohort and the older
generations that will manage and develop them.
Overcoming the “Traditional” Management Approach/Negative Perceptions
Despite these efforts, the government must not only overcome the traditional
management program’s emphasis on, “How can managers get their followers to do what they
want them to do?”, but must also change, “…the image of the public sector as a slow-moving,
bureaucratic monolith, juxtaposed against a fast-moving, anti-bureaucratic Gen Y.111 112
There is
evidence of a shift in training with concepts such as Emotional Intelligence, Self-Leadership, and
Systems Thinking.113
The consequences of not overcoming the “traditional” management
approaches can be correlated through the data in Table 1.0. The separation of active duty
military due to Entry Level Performance has a high probability of misunderstanding the
Millennial mindset and use of the “traditional” management approaches. Further study into
reasons for separation and correlations to leadership/management approaches and/or generational
differences is warranted to diagnose the root cause of the dramatic increases in separations by the
Millennials.
Conclusion
The federal government is uniquely positioned to attract and retain the Millennial cohort of
workers in comparison to Corporate America.114
As Cathleen Benko and Anne Weisberg
recommend, organizations need to move to a “corporate lattice”.115
With all of the
organizations, and challenges, the government is uniquely positioned to give Millennials the
sense of advancement and progression that they need. Although the research presented
illustrates resources available to the Air Force and corporations, training in situational leadership
(i.e. Full-Range of Leadership Model), Emotional Intelligence/Emotional Competencies, and the

36
Perceived orientation/Millennial Intrinsic Values and Millennial Competencies are available to
the government, military, and public as a whole. By analyzing the theories and definitions of
generations; looking at the current challenges of the federal workforce; the potential alternatives,
approaches and, courses of action, we can understand that we are “more alike than we realize.”116
Additionally, we can capitalize on those synergies, leverage the differences, and work to fill the
manpower gap while developing future leaders. According to John Crum, acting director of the
Merit Systems Protection Board’s Office of Policy and Evaluation, “…through becoming
accustomed to working together, the “perceived differences” [and negative perceptions] of the
Boomers and World War II generation have fallen by the wayside as those generations became
accustomed to working together.”117
Working through these perceptions, increasing
communication, and training opportunities is vital in developing the current and future leadership
to meet challenges such as resources, funding, and threats while meeting the needs of our people.
Reiterating statements from Chapter 4 on Deloitte’s research, they summarize specific benefits
for the government in working to understand and utilizing the Millennials (Gen Y):
Our research suggests that Gen Y is a globalized, tech-savvy and
networked workforce that is naturally at ease with sharing
information, functioning collaboratively, and nimbly adjusting to
emerging challenges – all priorities that the government has
struggled to pursue in the last decade…Gen Y can do more than just
fill the impending talent gap. It can reenergize government and be
the catalyst to help transform it into a high performing twenty-first
century organization with modern workforce practices…by
addressing Gen Y’s need for mentorship, agencies will have the
opportunity to increase rates of knowledge transfer while improving
employee engagement…by providing Gen Y employees with
meaningful roles and responsibilities and improved on boarding
processes, agencies will reap the benefits of improved productivity
and performance. As their level of representation in the federal
workforce increases, Gen Y employees will shift existing agencies
into a more collaborative mindset. The natural ability of Gen Y to
work collaboratively and break down organizational silos will
inevitably transform the government into a networked workforce,

37
adept at solving problems that require information-sharing,
resource-sharing, and collaboration.118
The Millennials have the potential to be better than the previous cohorts. Their unique
talents and abilities poise them to address the old saying, “…do more with less.” However, if the
government does not address the needs of this demographic, they also have the ability to provide
their talent and solutions to industry. Should this happen, the government will be forced to
outsource functions to these companies at a premium. With the dwindling resources and budget
crisis, the government cannot afford to neglect this pool of talent. Program Pathways offers a
potential solution to the federal hiring and benefit freeze, but does not specifically address the
management of the Millennial cohort. The government echoes Espinoza, Ukleja, and Rush’s
sentiment, “…the people with the most responsibility have to adapt first. It may sound cliché, but
by setting the example, managers will create an environment in which the less mature will
adapt.”119
Should the government seek to maximize the potential of this program along with the
current professional development programs, there is hope. Execution of this will require a
paradigm shift in the government’s culture and policies. Only through institutionalizing these
initiatives will change occur over time. As Sun Tzu has said, “Knowing others and knowing
oneself, in one hundred battles, no danger. Not knowing the other and knowing oneself, one
victory for one loss. Not knowing the other and not knowing oneself, in every battle certain
defeat.”120
Sometimes, the hardest enemy to overcome is not our enemy, but the enemy,
“within”. To meet the ever-growing resource and leadership challenges of the future, we must
look amongst ourselves to change the culture and find the optimal solution. The Millennials’
natural traits and tendencies are the key to solving the problems of previous generations and in
becoming the “heroes” that they have and are destined to be. They only need us to lead and
guide them along the way.

38
APPENDIX A: Comparison of Four Generations121 122
Baby Boomers, Gen Xers, Millennials, iGeneration123
Baby Boomers Gen Xers Millennials iGeneration
Length of generation 1946-1964 1965-1979 1980-1996 1996-2011
Population Size 80 million (huge) 46 million (small) 76 million ??
Set point (growing up
environment,
economy, parental
views, societal issues)
Booming economy,
promise of good
education, parents’
dream children will
do better
No real heroes (all
getting in trouble);
divorce rate tripled;
cocaine, AIDS, child
molesters, drunk
drivers; mom’s
worked
Raised by high
communicative,
participation-
oriented parents;
included in major
family decisions;
used to sticking up
for themselves;
“over programmed”
childhood activities
Raised by the younger
Baby Boomers & Gen
Xer parents; similar to
the Millennials in
upbringing with an "over
programmed" childhood
activities
Critical innovation TV Personal Computer Portable
Technology
IPhone/tablets/?
Powerful Influences:
People
MLK, Nixon, JFK,
Cleavers, Rosa
Parks, Osmonds,
Beatles, Partridge
family
Clinton/Lewinsky,
Bundy, Clarence
Thomas, OJ, Dilbert,
Dennis Rodman,
supermodels,
Madonna, and
Michael Jordan
Barney, Britney,
Backstreet Boys,
Sammy Sosa, Venus
and Serena
Williams
Hannah Montana,
Captain Philips & the
Somalian Pirates, Obama
Election & Presidency,
death of Steve Jobs
Places
Watergate, Hanoi,
Kent State,
Woodstock, suburbs,
boardroom, divorce
ct
USSR, Somalia,
Chernobyl, Lockerbie
(Scotland), Starbucks,
Intl Space Station,
and Internet
Chat rooms,
cyberspace, outer
space, Columbine
HS
"Flash mobs", Tsunami
& Earthquake: Japan,
Earthquake: Haiti
Things
Bell bottoms, mood
rings, Rolex
watches, junk food,
LSD
Explosion of 24 hr
media, cell phones,
cable/digital/satellite
TV, microwaves
Info superhighway,
information
overload, gang
violence
"Sexting", fully-electric
car, Skype, smartphones
Mindset developed Questioned parents
ideals (protested
status quo in civil
rights, women’s
rights, birth control);
convinced they can
fix societal issues
Distrust of
permanence of
institutional and
personal
relationships; the
world isn’t safe; no
loyalty to company—
switch careers often
Appreciation for
diversity; want
workplace safety;
have some loyalty
to institutions; some
optimism to make
things happen
although some
skepticism as well
TBD

39
Baby Boomers Gen Xers Millennials iGeneration
Natural bias: Overall outlook Optimistic/Idealist
(Depression is
over)
Skeptical
(every
American
institution
questioned)
Empowered
(take action
when things go
wrong)
TBD
Natural bias: Common traits Competitive:
large numbers of
boomers
competed for
best college,
jobs, etc.
Extremely
resourceful and
independent
(self-starter);
counted on
friends and not
institutions to
shield from
reality
Smart,
practical, multi-
task oriented,
confident,
techno- savvy –
the next great
generation?
TBD
Workplace ethos Shake it up
management
style; “change of
command” vs.
“chain of
command” of
previous
generation
“Show me the
money”;
inventors and
entrepreneurs;
(“self-
command”);
create own
career path
“Don’t
command,
collaborate”;
fun at work;
power of each
individual to
make a
difference
TBD
Career goals “Build a stellar
career”
“Build a
portable
career”
"Build parallel
careers"
TBD

40
APPENDIX B: Full-Range of Leadership Model124
The Full-Range Leadership Model
Notes from the Lecture (Updated 27 May 2010)
Leadership
Behaviors
Laissez-
Faire
Transactional Transformational
Explanation
and
Examples
from Lecture
Leadership is
absent. Examples
include:
 A commander
who is out
playing golf
instead of
leading forces
 A supervisor
who is focused
only on career
goals, not the
mission or
people
Charles I
Based on task-orientated communication.
Examples include:
 When a supervisor explains that higher
performers make more pay
 When a coach tells the team which play to
run and they are rewarded by winning the
game
 When the General explains his strategy to
his troops and they are rewarded by
winning the battle
Napoleon Bonaparte
Based on emotional, charismatic, inspirational or visionary leadership. Examples
include:
 A leader inspiring followers to out-perform expectations or circumstances to achieve
higher-purpose goals.
 A leader who through word and/or deed appeals to selfless qualities and values in
followers to motivate them to success
Henry V

41
Leadership
Traits
Hands-Off
Leadership
Management by
Exception
Contingent Reward Individual
Consideration
Caring
Intellectual
Simulation
Thinking
Inspirational
Motivation
Charming
Idealized
Influence
Influencing
Explanation
and
Examples
from Lecture
Leadership is
absent
Saddam Hussein
Leaders set and
monitor deviations
from set standards
Lt John Chard
Leaders provide
rewards in return for
performance
Shaka Zulu
Leaders assess,
value and provide
for subordinates’
needs
Attila the Hun
Leaders challenge
norms and
encourage
innovation.
George Kenney
Leaders inspire
through words and
symbols, sharing
their vision and
expectations.
Henry V
Leaders inspire
through their
actions.
Marshal Michel
Ney
Leadership
Traits
Hands-Off
Leadership
Management by
Exception
Contingent Reward Individual
Consideration
Caring
Intellectual Simulation
Thinking
Inspirational
Motivation
Charming
Idealized Influence
Influencing
Leaders’
Descriptive
Behaviors
Leaders:
 Avoid taking
stands on issues
 Leaders do not
emphasize results
 Leaders refrain
from intervening
when issues arise
 Leaders are
unaware of
followers’
performance
Leaders:
 Monitor performance
and take corrective
action as necessary
 Focus attention on
irregularities,
mistakes, exceptions
and deviations from
standards
 Direct attention
toward failures to
meet standards
 Don’t interfere until
problems become
serious
 Embody an “If-it-
ain’t-broke- don’t-
fix-it” philosophy
Leaders:
 Focus on exchange of
resources
 Provide
tangible/intangible
support and resource
to followers in
exchange for efforts
and performance
 Example: Leaders
explaining a sales
force how much more
money they could
make by having more
sales
Leaders:
 Recognize the
unique growth and
development needs
of followers
 Coach followers
 Consult with
followers
 “Leadership is
getting people to
follow you because
they are curious” –
Colin Powell
Leaders:
 Challenge
organizational norms
 Encourage divergent
thinking,
 Push followers to
develop innovative
strategies
Leaders:
 Build confidence and
inspire using
symbolic elements
and persuasive
language
 Have a strong vision
for the future based
on values and ideals
Leaders:
 Have high
standards of moral
and ethical
conduct,
 Are held in high
personal regard
 Engender loyalty
from followers

42
Ways to
Improve
 Avoid this style
of leadership!
 Warn teams as they
approach specific
performance limits
 Do not hesitate to
bring mistakes to the
attention of your
followers
 Set criteria level
 Make sure followers
know who is in
charge of each action
 Discuss in specific
terms who is
responsible for
achieving
performance targets
 Express satisfaction
when others meet
expectations
 Recognize
individual
accomplishments
 Provide individual
support
 Spend time teaching
and coaching
 Consider an
individual as having
different needs,
abilities, and
aspiration from
others
 Practice
“management by
walking around” to
get to know people
and their needs
 Get to know people
as “whole people,”
not just subordinates
or employees
 Question
assumptions, reframe
problems, and
approach old
problems in new
ways
 Get others to look at
problems from many
different angles
 Suggest new ways of
looking at how to
complete
assignments
 Ask teammates for
suggestions
 Ask teammates to
look for new ways of
doing their job
 Update strategies as
necessary
 Do not criticize
approaches that are
new and/or different
 Articulate a
compelling vision of
the future
 Have a powerful,
confident, and
dynamic interaction
style by:
 Shaking hands,
 Alternating
between sitting
and walking
between
participants
 Making eye
contact
 Using hand
gestures for
emphasis while
speaking
 Displaying
animated facial
expressions
 Express confidence
that goals will be
achieved
 Do the right thing
 Emphasize Shared
values and collective
mission
 Display in actions and
words a strong sense of
purpose and integrity
 Consider the moral and
ethical consequences of
decisions
Additional
Notes
 Leaders avoid
getting involved
when important
issues arise
 May be active or
passive
o Active: Leaders
direct attention
toward failures to
meet standards
o Passive: Leaders
take no action
until
complaints/failure
s are detected
 May be less
effective than
contingent reward
approach
 Reasonably effective
 Leaders assign or
obtain follower
agreement on what
needs to be done,
exchanging rewards
when performance
goals are achieved
 Leaders make clear
what subordinates can
expect to receive
 Style is Transactional
when reward is
material, but
transformational if
reward is
psychological
 Leaders attend to
others’ needs for
achievement and
growth and coach-
mentor others to
help them achieve
their goals
 Leadership response
is tailored to
individual needs
 New ideas and
creative problem
solutions are
solicited from
followers who are
included in the
problem-solving
process
 Leaders support
suggestions and
those who make
them
 Leaders provide
meaning and
challenge to their
follower’s work.
 Leaders encourage
followers’
involvement in their
vision for the future,
communicating
expectations and
demonstrating
personal
commitment to goals
 Role models for
followers, demonstrating
impeccable standards of
ethical and moral
conduct
 Leaders willing to take
risks, but are consistent
in their behaviors
 Leaders can be relied
upon to “do the right
thing”

43
Endnotes
1
Amy L. Caruthers, Maj, USAF, Managing Generations: What the Air Force Can Learn
from the Private Sector, 2008. Vii.
2
“Career Patterns: A 21st
Century Approach to Attracting Talent”, United States Office of
Personnel Management, June 2006. pp 1-62.
3
Chip Espinoza, Mick Uleja, and Craig Rusch. Managing the Millennials: Discover the
Core Competencies for Managing Today’s Workforce (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
2010), 17.
4
Pew Research Center, March Current Population Surveys (1963, 1978, 1995, and 2009) for
the civilian and non0-instiutional population from the Integrated Public Use Microdata Series
(IPUMS), www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/interactive-graphic-demographic-portrait-of-
four-generations/, accessed October 14, 2011.
5
“Annual Report 2008.” http://ourpublicservice.org Partnership for Public Service. 2009
6
“The Graying Government Workforce”, Deloitte, Touche, Tohmatsu, Public Sector – Aging
Snapshot #1. 2007. 1-2.
7
2010), 53.
8
Art Fritzson, Lloyd W. Howell, Dov S. Zakheim, Military of Millennials Strategy+Business
Magazine. Booz & Company Inc. March 10, 2008.
9
2010), 13.
10
Neil Howe and William Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, 2000. 33.
11
Neil Howe and William Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, 2000. 14..
12
Ester Thelen and Karen E. Adolph, Arnold L. Gesell, Developmental Psychology, 28 (3)
1992: 368-380
13
2010), 14-15.
14
Jane Pilcher, “Mannheim’s Sociology of Generations: An Undervalued Legacy,” British
Journal of Sociology 45 (3) 1994, 481-494.
15
2010), 16.
16
2010), 16.
17
Richard A. Settersten and Karl Ulrich Mayer, “The Measurement of Age, Age Structuring,
and the Life Course,” Annual Review of Sociology, 30 (6) 1965, 843-861.
18
Matilda W. Riley, “On the Significance of Age in Sociology,” American Sociological
Review, 52 (1), 1987. 1-14.

44
19
2010), 18.
20
2010), 18.19.
21
2010), 19-20.
22
Kay A. Smith, Lt. Col. USAF, “Gaining the Edge: Connecting with the Millennials”,
December 1, 2008. Air War College Thesis
23
2010), 7.
24
2010), 46.
25
Acquisition Leadership Program – Level I, PowerPoint slides, research from Rosen/Strauss
& Howe, Stillman/Lancaster, “Cohorts” - slide 3.
26
2010), 5.
27
28
& Howe, Stillman/Lancaster, “Cohorts” , slide 3.
29
2010), 6.
30
& Howe, Stillman/Lancaster, “Cohorts” – slide 6.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
2010), 7-8.
39

45
40
2010), 7.
41
Neil Howe and Williams Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, 2000.
43-44.
42
43
2010), 7.
44
Neil Howe and William Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, 2000. 67-
68.
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Government Accountability Office Report to Congress (GAO/GGD-93-138) Employment
Policy Challenges Created by an Aging Workforce. 2.
54
Government Accountability Office Report to Congress (GAO/GGD-93-138) Employment
Policy Challenges Created by an Aging Workforce. 16.
55
Government Accountability Office Report to Congress (GAO-09-206) Enhanced
Communication among Federal Agencies Could Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining
Experienced Workers, February 2009. 2.
56
Government Accountability Office Report to Congress (GAO-09-206) Enhanced
Communication among Federal Agencies Could Improve Strategies for Hiring and Retaining
Experienced Workers, February 2009. 2.
57
Defense Management Data Center (DMDC), APF and Civilian Edit. Data as of June 30,
2011. Provided on September 29, 2011.
58
Defense Management Data Center (DMDC), APF and Civilian Edit. Data as of June 30,
2011. Provided on September 29, 2011.
59
The New York Times, Times Topics, Subjects, F, Federal Budget (US),
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/federal_budget_us/index.html,
accessed 30 Sept 11.
60
Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Statement on Department Budget and Efficiencies,
January 7, 2011. http://www.emilitary.org/article.php?aid=15573 accessed on Sept 30, 2011.
61
Air Force News Service, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas, March 10, 2011 accessed on
Sept 30, 2011.
62
Kellie Lunney, Government Executive,
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=48345&dcn=todaysnews, July 26, 2011,
accessed on Sept 30, 2011.

46
63
Kellie Lunney, Government Executive,
http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=48345&dcn=todaysnews, July 26, 2011,
accessed on Sept 30, 2011.
64
CBS News/Associated Press. Panetta keeps up fight against more defense cuts.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/08/16/politics/main20093015.shtml, Aug 16, 2011.
Accessed on Sept 30, 2011.
65
66
Neil Howe and William Strauss, Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation, 2000. 25,
27.
67
Lee Hecht Harrison Survey (2006).
68
2010), 25.
69
2010), 38-39.
70
2010), 6-37.
71
Eden Schiffmann, Neil Tambe, Michael Gelles, Rachel Azaroff, Eric Goldfarb and Henry
Siemon, Deloitte Millennial Model: An Approach to Gen Y Readiness, November 2010, 2-3.
72
Siemon, Deloitte Millennial Model: An Approach to Gen Y Readiness, November 2010, 2-3.
73
“Leaving Talent on the Table.” Partnership for Public Service, 2009.
74
Siemon, Deloitte Millennial Model: An Approach to Gen Y Readiness, November 2010, 3.
75
Defense Management Data Center (DMDC), Active Duty Losses/Gains Transaction Files
2010 to 2011. Data as of July 2011. Provided on October 12, 2011.
76
77
78
79
80
81
Deloitte Development, “Generation Y: Inspiring change in the federal government and the
creation of a networked workforce.” 2010.
82
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. Executive Order – Recruiting and Hiring
Student and Recent Graduates, December 27, 2010. accessed October 7, 2011.
83
The Washington Post (online), “OPM proposes new pathways to employment”. August 4,
2011. accessed October 07, 2011.
84
2010), 112.

47
85
Lt Col Sharon M. Latour, USAF and Lt Gen Bradley C. Hosmer, USAF, ret., Emotional
Intelligence: Implications for All United States Air Force Leaders, Air and Space Power
Journal, Winter 2002. 28.
86
Lt Col Sharon M. Latour, USAF and Lt Gen Bradley C. Hosmer, USAF, ret., Emotional
Intelligence: Implications for All United States Air Force Leaders, Air and Space Power
Journal, Winter 2002. 28.
87
2010), 31-37.
88
2010), 34.
89
2010), 33-37.
90
2010), 35-36.
91
Dr. Chip Espinoza, co-author “Managing Millennials”, e-mail communication dated
October 8, 2011.
92
2010), 74.
93
Peter Gruber, quoted in A. Muoio, ed, “My greatest lesson.” Fast Company.
94
2010), 160.
95
2010), 159.
96
2010), 159
97
Cary Cherniss, Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA, April 15, 2000. Transcripts, 3.
98
99
100
Organizational Psychology, New Orleans, LA, April 15, 2000. Transcripts, 7-8.
101
102

Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final

Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final

Similar to Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final (20)

Millennials_The Next Greatest Generation of the Government Work Force_final